Re: Fwd: Do ethnic Germans have the right to racial and cultural strength? - was Re: At a Berlin church, Muslim refugees converting in droves.
On 9/11/15, Nathan wrote:
WTF? I've read this *twice* and I *still* don't get it..... Is this an argument against multiculturalism?
From their perspective, they are doing what is required to protect
That's not the question - the question is, does each individual human of a nation have the right to protect their current, existing culture? Or at least to have a say, i.e. a vote about it? Some nations, through their power structures, go to extraordinary lengths to protect their rights to cultural and racial strength, Japan for example. Is this the right of the Japanese? Or are they doing the wrong thing? their rights, to self determination as a people, a tribe, a race. It appears that the rights of individuals are determined (in practice) by those in power, and not by those who are directly affected by the decision makers (the people themselves). Is keeping such decisions in the hands of a few "educated elected" an elitist approach? If democracy be the will of the people manifested, then ought the people of any nation be asked directly (nation wide vote) on such questions as cultural dilution due to immigration and or asylum? Or is it appropriate for an "elected" few to impose their personal preference on a nation? Regards Zenaan
Dnia piątek, 11 września 2015 01:27:34 Zenaan Harkness pisze:
On 9/11/15, Nathan wrote:
WTF? I've read this *twice* and I *still* don't get it..... Is this an argument against multiculturalism?
That's not the question - the question is, does each individual human of a nation have the right to protect their current, existing culture?
Of course I can defend my culture. But there are two crucial questions here: - from what can I defend my culture; - with what means can I defend my culture. Can I defend my culture verbally from somebody talking shit about it? Sure. Can I defend my culture with force from an armed aggressor? Sure. Can I "defend my culture" from people who had to leave their homes due to war? How would I even "defend my culture" in such a scenario? Deport them all for certain death? Imprison them?.. Asking the "can one defend their culture" question without asking the other two is really underhanded and disingenuous. It's akin to asking "can one defend themselves" in the context of a Police officer killing an unarmed 13-year-old kid with a watergun. Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat? [1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat?
[1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens
First a joke: "statistician tried to cross a river of average depth 0.5m and got drowned". May I ask what percentage of the EU are street policeman (not counting burocrats) to "protect" the sheeple? And how comes the above policeman allowed the refugees to cross the border? It is the extrema that matters, not the average value. ...And what if half of the 0.03% were armed turrorists?
Dnia piątek, 11 września 2015 15:52:39 piszesz:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat?
[1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens
First a joke:
"statistician tried to cross a river of average depth 0.5m and got drowned".
May I ask what percentage of the EU are street policeman (not counting burocrats) to "protect" the sheeple?
Protect from what, exactly?
...And what if half of the 0.03% were armed turrorists?
Seriously, are we going in that direction now? Okay, how about this: what if exactly 2 of these immigrants were armed turrists? You can pull numbers from your ass, so can I. When you want to get back to a more serious discussion, do tell. -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:55:58PM +0200, rysiek wrote:
You can pull numbers from your ass, so can I. When you want to get back to a more serious discussion, do tell.
Lol, maybe I will troll you better when the time comes (and sheeple being collateral political damage). To get part of the big picture search for EU refugees crisis in a search engine of your choice, filtering results to last day/week if possible.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:55:58PM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Dnia piątek, 11 września 2015 15:52:39 piszesz:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat?
[1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens
First a joke:
"statistician tried to cross a river of average depth 0.5m and got drowned".
May I ask what percentage of the EU are street policeman (not counting burocrats) to "protect" the sheeple?
Protect from what, exactly?
...And what if half of the 0.03% were armed turrorists?
Seriously, are we going in that direction now? Okay, how about this: what if exactly 2 of these immigrants were armed turrists?
You can pull numbers from your ass, so can I. When you want to get back to a more serious discussion, do tell.
From my ass, confirmed by journos.
Over meeelion migrants, according to some meeeelions: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911 Your ass is off by a factor of about 10 AFAICT.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 05:18:47PM +0200, Georgi Guninski wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:55:58PM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Dnia piątek, 11 września 2015 15:52:39 piszesz:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote: [...] Protect from what, exactly?
...And what if half of the 0.03% were armed turrorists?
Seriously, are we going in that direction now? Okay, how about this: what if exactly 2 of these immigrants were armed turrists?
You can pull numbers from your ass, so can I. When you want to get back to a more serious discussion, do tell.
From my ass, confirmed by journos.
Over meeelion migrants, according to some meeeelions:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911
Your ass is off by a factor of about 10 AFAICT.
Both your asses are wrong. Here is what my brain says: given that vast majority of current wave are lone males, I expect their families are going to join them in short time - or ASAP?, because they sit in refugee camps out of Europe and the camps are sometimes (often?) underfunded (funds ran out?). So the target is going to be few millions, plus minus few more. Depends how big families are, on average. If we assume 1 (lone male) +1 (mother) +(2+n) children +(0+x) (close relatives we cannot leave behind) then the number starts from 3 millions and there is not too many ways I can think of to make it smaller. Then, if they all are successfully accomodated, expect another wave. Actually, expect it anyway. All those new people might be a problem or may be not. At the moment it seems that so called institutions are caught with their pants down, so any problem gets exacerbated. For example, is there any kind of preparation in advance to give few millions kids decent education once they get here? Otherwise, in twenty years there will be few millions of undereducated very angry young ready for anything baaad baaad jobless illiterate aliens. As of possible furrorists, they are already here so it is too late to close the doors. Actually, it seems that furrorists are recruited from EU-born youth, so defending doors is going to be a bit futile, like few decades too late futile. Now, sure this is offtopic, so more to the subject. I need some help from you guys. I need to do me a cypherpunk hairdo. So, should I stick some Intel chips into my red mohawk? How many? Is it ok to use old cheap Pentiums or should I only go with Core 2? Or maybe I should stick a bunch of resistors into the mohawk, or maybe even some nixie lamps - but I wouldn't like to look too old, so maybe ARM chips will be this year's chic? Is it ok to decorate one of my cheeks with Enigma-encoded text? How about AES? And another problem: I would like to cut off about 4cm of ethernet cord, with a plug and stick it into my nose so that plug shows up from the hole. But I would also like to glue BT dongle to my other cheek. And I feel that if I do both I will be looked down even by cypherpunks. So what should I choose? I am so undecided... No need to hurry up with advice, however. I need to grow some hairs to make mohawk from it. Or maybe I will be ok staying with my current crew cut and sticking some microSDs on it, plug ends up, usb hub glued to my forehead, rot13 in perl on my cheeks? Please help. Now, ok. I was joking. In fact if I ever have red mohawk, I will probably glue single board computer (not Arduino, they are too nice for me) with some leds, 2000mAh AA, blinking random numbers based on GPS pos, time, temp and noise. So I do not really seek for advice on my future c-punk hairdo, but of course constructive thoughts are welcome. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola@bigfoot.com **
Dnia środa, 13 stycznia 2016 17:18:47 piszesz:
May I ask what percentage of the EU are street policeman (not counting burocrats) to "protect" the sheeple?
Protect from what, exactly?
...And what if half of the 0.03% were armed turrorists?
Seriously, are we going in that direction now? Okay, how about this: what if exactly 2 of these immigrants were armed turrists?
You can pull numbers from your ass, so can I. When you want to get back to a more serious discussion, do tell.
From my ass, confirmed by journos. Over meeelion migrants, according to some meeeelions: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911
Your ass is off by a factor of about 10 AFAICT.
I still don't see any confirmation of the actual number I referred to as being pulled out of your ass, which was -- please try to focus here -- "half of the 0.03% of them are terrorists". Keep trying, though. :) -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
On 9/11/15, rysiek
Dnia piątek, 11 września 2015 01:27:34 Zenaan Harkness pisze:
On 9/11/15, Nathan wrote:
WTF? I've read this *twice* and I *still* don't get it..... Is this an argument against multiculturalism?
That's not the question - the question is, does each individual human of a nation have the right to protect their current, existing culture?
Of course I can defend my culture. But there are two crucial questions here: - from what can I defend my culture; - with what means can I defend my culture.
Can I defend my culture verbally from somebody talking shit about it? Sure. Can I defend my culture with force from an armed aggressor? Sure.
Can I "defend my culture" from people who had to leave their homes due to war? How would I even "defend my culture" in such a scenario? Deport them all for certain death? Imprison them?..
Asking the "can one defend their culture" question without asking the other two is really underhanded and disingenuous.
Or simply seeking the insights of your now asked two questions as above and struggling (perhaps ironically) to come to such insights by myself - no underhanded or disingenuous intention need be ascribed. The thoughtful part of your reply is really appreciated. Thank you for your patience going forward. I consider the first ground to be that of individual/ collective right. Even getting beyond this first ground is a challenge for many - you're the first person in my (humble, inadequate, deficient...) attempts over the last year or two, who actually got past "do we have the right". Your next two questions are not easy. I have no immediate answer. A temporary brain dump of things which may arise and perhaps ought be contemplated to arrive at any sane answer to your last two questions: - reciprocal legislation on a per-country basis - if we can't build churches in your country, you can't build mosques in ours; if we can't buy property in yours, you can't buy in ours - "tipping points" for 'cultural crisis' due to immigration by refugees or otherwise - Christians being executed in various countries today - the Christian crusades of 100s years ago - are we humans beyond barbarians to any real extent - what about those of us in golden middle-class cages, are we barbarians in disguise - to what extent is it our "western" governments (and or military industrial companies) causing the turmoil/ wars from which the genuine refugees flee from - should we citizens suffer the fallout from the evil activities of our governments and military industrial companies bombing brown people and or poor people - is it possible to stop our governments/ companies from doing so - is maintenance of local/ per-country cultural homogeneity worth pursuing at all, or is that somehow fundamentally at odds with the majority of humans on the planet being "below the poverty line" and therefore with their "right to a share" of my (relatively) wealthy middle class existence (even for example for those on government assistance/ welfare) I feel as though we are being sold out by our western governments driven by the military industrial companies, and that we are being caused to suffer the consequences of this. And I feel powerless to stop this evil, to stop the (unlawful, but hey) killing of people on an industrial scale. I feel that there is so much profit from war, that there is intention to war and for war, and that this is out of control. Courtesy the internet we know this turmoil has been perpetrated continuously since WWII by USAGov (CIA) and its "allies", lackies, lapdogs - coup after coup, regime change after regime change. There's so much that's not ok by me and I struggle to find clear and simple foundations which can approach shared consensus understanding and agreement on what is wrong, let alone how if at all possible to fix it. Thanks for suffering my totally inadequate and rambling attempts at something resembling communication, but I am sincere in my desire for a better world - for everyone in it. Zenaan
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat?
[1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens
Dude, trolling with numbers borders with numerology {AKA "number theory" ;) }. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11863246/Refugee-crisis-... --- Refugee crisis: Europe's borders unravelling as Austria and Slovakia impose frontier controls Germany's vice chancellor Sigmar Gabriel warns the country could receive up to one million people seeking refugee status. Follow latest developments here --- UP TO ONE MEEELLION :P
Dnia wtorek, 15 września 2015 13:23:32 piszesz:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat?
[1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens
Dude, trolling with numbers borders with numerology {AKA "number theory" ;) }. (...) UP TO ONE MEEELLION :P
Sure. That's less than 0,20%, or less than 2-tenths of a percent. My point about how weak some perceive "their culture" to be still stands. -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:22:59AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
Are we really to say that our culture is so weak, so vulnerable, so hard to defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three- hundredths of a percent!)[1] of the whole population of the EU is suddenly a real threat?
[1] estimated 160 000 immigrants, estimated 508 million EU citizens
These might help you realize what the answer to your question is: http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/sep/15/refugee-crisis-hungary-lau... Refugee crisis: Hungary rejects all asylum requests made at border – as it happened http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/9/15/serbia-urges-hungary-to-open... The tough new laws make it a criminal offense, punishable with several years of prison time, to cross into Hungary without permission or to damage the 103-mile, 13-foot-high fence along the border with Serbian that was completed on Monday evening.
defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three-
Does 3000 case per 10M prevalance of ebola warrant response? Is not religion [viewed as] infectious highly incurable / offensive disease? What is the burden on social bootstrap / welfare systems? These are some of the contexts in which they are thinking. In addition to their fanatical control freakery and head in sand of closed borders. You probably can rightfully protect yourself as a soverign, so long as your walls don't prevent those within from leaving. [spent: 1 non cypher posting credit]
The governing party in Germany is called the Christian Democrats. If Religion is some sort of nasty contagion that needs to be stamped out, Germany's got bigger problems than some desperate immigrants. Religion isn't a nasty contagion, btw. Assholes are, and they're all over the place, religion or no. Just look at the bullshit racism in this thread; anyone see religious inspiration to that? Not so far from me, just regular ole' secular race/religion hate. Nothing new there. Maybe, just maybe, "National Identity"/"Racial and Cultural Strength" is a load of bullshit, and far more of a threat to human flourishing than believing in usually-benevolent Sky Gods. On 17/09/15 05:59, grarpamp wrote:
defend that an influx of immigrants that amounts to 0,03% (yes, three-
Does 3000 case per 10M prevalance of ebola warrant response? Is not religion [viewed as] infectious highly incurable / offensive disease? What is the burden on social bootstrap / welfare systems? These are some of the contexts in which they are thinking. In addition to their fanatical control freakery and head in sand of closed borders. You probably can rightfully protect yourself as a soverign, so long as your walls don't prevent those within from leaving.
[spent: 1 non cypher posting credit]
-- Scientific Director, IndieBio EU Programme Now running in Cork, Ireland May->July Learn more at indie.bio and follow along! Twitter: @onetruecathal Phone: +353876363185 miniLock: JjmYYngs7akLZUjkvFkuYdsZ3PyPHSZRBKNm6qTYKZfAM peerio.com: cathalgarvey
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Cathal Garvey
Maybe, just maybe, "National Identity"/"Racial and Cultural Strength" is a load of bullshit, and far more of a threat to human flourishing than believing in usually-benevolent Sky Gods.
It's all bs and all a threat, definitely including believers in sky gods. Except for maybe the FSM.
participants (6)
-
Cathal Garvey -
Georgi Guninski -
grarpamp -
rysiek -
Tomasz Rola -
Zenaan Harkness