Ashley Madison

The new inclusive, pragmatic, empathetic European "far right"

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,696
21
38
When you ignore the legitimate concerns of citizens, they have to turn to those that will protect them.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...effective-rebranding-of-europes-new-far-right

Some good quotes:

"Brexit was just the start. Europe’s new far right is poised to transform the continent’s political landscape – either by winning elections or simply by pulling a besieged political centre so far in its direction that its ideas become the new normal. And when that happens, groups that would never have contemplated voting for a far-right party 10 years ago – the young, gay people, Jews, feminists – may join the working-class voters who have already abandoned parties of the left to become the new backbone of the populist right."


"Finkielkraut, a 67-year-old Jewish liberal, is not an admirer of the Front National, but Marine Le Pen’s deliberate appeals to Jews and gay people have given political expression to an argument that he first made more than a decade ago – that the left, with its indulgence of Islam, poses a greater threat to France than the far right. After Chirac “saved” the republic from Jean-Marie Le Pen in 2002, Finkielkraut watched the celebrations in the streets and warned that the victors were the real danger: “The future of hate is in their camp and not in the camp of those nostalgic for Vichy,” he wrote, “ … in the camp of the multicultural society and not that of the ethnic nation – in the camp of respect, not that of rejection.”

Fourteen years later, after the terrorist attacks on Charlie Hebdo, the Bataclan and Nice, Finkielkraut is even more certain he was correct. “Anti-racism today frequently serves as a pretext for not seeing the true danger that threatens us,” he told me when we met in his Paris apartment this summer. While he is still no fan of the FN, he believes it has changed and argues that it “should be resisted, but for what it is today and not what it was in the past, and not in the name of anti-fascism”. The French must, he insisted, “avoid simplistic analogies with the 1930s. We must not mistake what era we live in. Europe doesn’t only have demons; it also has enemies, and it needs to know how to fight those enemies.”

"Idealism has been bureaucratised,” argues the journalist Bas Heijne, who writes a column in the liberal daily newspaper NRC Handelsblad. “And when the establishment enforces universalism, you react against it.” That’s why there is such a strong anti-PC tone to the Dutch right: do not tell us what to say, what to celebrate and who we must live next to."

"These days it is not only anti-migration activists pushing back against the bureaucratised consensus. There are also many disappointed progressives – the people who saw the cultural victories of the 1960s and 1970s as major battles that had long since been won, making sexual freedom, feminism and gay rights an unquestioned part of Dutch society. Suddenly those old victories seem tenuous. "

------------------------

So long as people like Fuji run the political system to impose their backward elitist views on the population, the counter reaction will grow. As sure as you're standing, what we see happening in the political arena in the US and across Europe will also happen right here in Canada. Just give it time. Unless the hacks wake up and begin listening to and addressing those that they govern. But more then likely these hacks will keep regurgitating the narrative that the kkk and David duke are somehow relevant (which everybody who isn't a disconnected elite idiot knows is not) and more of a threat to citizens than hordes of illegal immigrants, theological radicals, and the byproduct of growing poverty and loss of future job prospects, and high lifelong debt levels.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,283
6,963
113
...

So long as people like Fuji run the political system...
I was going to post a rational response to the points in the article but after comments like this I'll just let you go on justifying groups like the Klan.
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,696
21
38
I was going to post a rational response to the points in the article but after comments like this I'll just let you go on justifying groups like the Klan.
It's better for you to tell the truth. You have no rational response. The klan? Lol

Your non response is precisely the type of attitude that the article addresses. You're too smart for your own good. People like you are the catalyst to the new political movements we see in the west.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,283
6,963
113
It's better for you to tell the truth. You have no rational response.

Your non response is precisely the type of behaviour that the article addresses. You're too smart for your own good.
Okay. I'll take the time to go off on you for saying governments should be listening to the bullshit racists who are afraid of immigrants as opposed to standing up for what is right.


p.s. An article about one Jewish European who is more afraid of radical Muslims than European supremacists is hardly a glowing endorsement.

p.p.s. I'd rather be too smart than whatever the Front Nationale represents.
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,696
21
38
If that's your conclusion after reading the article I feel sorry for you.

The "one Jewish European". Your numbers are as way off as your perspective.

It's interesting to know that so many new "racists" can be created out of thin air with such efficiency.

You didn't see Trump coming from a million miles away, and you can't see what else is coming closer to home either.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,140
5,235
113
Okay. I'll take the time to go off on you for saying governments should be listening to the bullshit racists who are afraid of immigrants as opposed to standing up for what is right.


p.s. An article about one Jewish European who is more afraid of radical Muslims than European supremacists is hardly a glowing endorsement.

p.p.s. I'd rather be too smart than whatever the Front Nationale represents.
The problem is you dismiss concerns of others. That change must come NOW! Without considering how societal changes can cause worse upheavals if not done gradually.

And you also you bullying tactics, shaming tactics, fake outrage, and other attacks to pen moderates in with extremists. And then complain when they say OK, I'm going to push back now.

People love to throw around terms like....the Walmart crowd and things like that. Buts that a simplification. And using the same tactics racists use. Label, dehumanize, and ignore.

And so you end up with Trump. Because the powers that be wouldn't listen. And the only who says he is is Trump.
 

SkyRider

Banned
Mar 31, 2009
17,572
2
0
I expect any moment the usual suspect on the Board will burst into the room and demand that the OP be deported from Canada (and be replaced with Muslims).
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,283
6,963
113
If that's your conclusion after reading the article I feel sorry for you.

The "one Jewish European". Your numbers are as way off as your perspective.

It's interesting to know that so many new "racists" can be created out of thin air with such efficiency.

You didn't see Trump coming from a million miles away, and you can't see what else is coming closer to home either.
The racists aren't new. They are just becoming more comfortable being open about it.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,283
6,963
113
The problem is you dismiss concerns of others.....
When the "concerns of others" are racist perceptions about immigrants, I won't dismiss them; I'll condemn them. Yes, people are angry because the American Dream they have sold themselves hasn't come about. Sadly instead of examining what needs to change about their lives, that anger falls to racism against the 'other' who isn't doing any better than them.

The most incorrect thing about your post is your views on the needed change. The far right are in fact interested in preventing change. In fact the whole movement is based on turning the world into a romanticized version of the past. The people who buy their trash are sadly convinced that somehow their lives will be made better if only people different from them didn't exist.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,140
5,235
113
When the "concerns of others" are racist perceptions about immigrants, I won't dismiss them; I'll condemn them. Yes, people are angry because the American Dream they have sold themselves hasn't come about. Sadly instead of examining what needs to change about their lives, that anger falls to racism against the 'other' who isn't doing any better than them.

The most incorrect thing about your post is your views on the needed change. The far right are in fact interested in preventing change. In fact the whole movement is based on turning the world into a romanticized version of the past. The people who buy their trash are sadly convinced that somehow their lives will be made better if only people different from them didn't exist.
Again you are simplifying the positions of what, 100 million people? Are they all racist to want a slow down of immigration? To want to re examine trade deals?

I don't think so. What's most amusing to me is Canada actually has a pretty strict point based immigration system. We saw slow steady good growth with it. We also after the 80's refugees issues have a good system there(introduced by Chretien I give credit when due) and should stay the same.

In fact other nations are looking into ours because it works so well over the long term, both in getting good people and assimilation. I believe it's because we limit as well, allowing time for societal adjustment.

Trump essentially singled out two groups. Believe it or not we do similar things as well. Where in the world you are coming from is part of the point system. And the vetting process would include religion and the like. When we took in Syrians all of them had been in camps for three years, we didn't take fresh ones. And no North Africans either.

Just like Brexit, I think what many are asking for is a slowdown of globalization. A take a breath and let the workforce, neighbourhoods, cities, nations take a breather and adjust time. Personally I see the benefit of a relook at policy and not just assuming it works by dint of righteousness. The road of good intentions and all that.

Address things in that light, and not in the "we are right and we are better people" way. Don't label those who wish a gradualist approach with a tiny minority of idiots. They can be called out.

Just don't lump in a majority who prefer things a bit slower.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
94,437
23,795
113
Again you are simplifying the positions of what, 100 million people? Are they all racist to want a slow down of immigration? To want to re examine trade deals?

I don't think so. What's most amusing to me is Canada actually has a pretty strict point based immigration system. We saw slow steady good growth with it. We also after the 80's refugees issues have a good system there(introduced by Chretien I give credit when due) and should stay the same.

In fact other nations are looking into ours because it works so well over the long term, both in getting good people and assimilation. I believe it's because we limit as well, allowing time for societal adjustment.

Trump essentially singled out two groups. Believe it or not we do similar things as well. Where in the world you are coming from is part of the point system. And the vetting process would include religion and the like. When we took in Syrians all of them had been in camps for three years, we didn't take fresh ones. And no North Africans either.

Just like Brexit, I think what many are asking for is a slowdown of globalization. A take a breath and let the workforce, neighbourhoods, cities, nations take a breather and adjust time. Personally I see the benefit of a relook at policy and not just assuming it works by dint of righteousness. The road of good intentions and all that.

Address things in that light, and not in the "we are right and we are better people" way. Don't label those who wish a gradualist approach with a tiny minority of idiots. They can be called out.

Just don't lump in a majority who prefer things a bit slower.
The numbers for refugees tend to be pretty similar regardless of who is in power.
Here in Canada (and also in the US) we have demographic issues because Canadian's are having enough kids to breed enough tax payers to fund government services including pensions. So we need immigration.

The history of this country is also noted by the waves of different groups, depending on which country is in turmoil. Potato famine, wars, Portuguese despot..lots of reasons for people coming here. Right now there are millions of Muslims trying to escape American interventions in the middle east. So that's what we get right now.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,140
5,235
113
The numbers for refugees tend to be pretty similar regardless of who is in power.
Here in Canada (and also in the US) we have demographic issues because Canadian's are having enough kids to breed enough tax payers to fund government services including pensions. So we need immigration.

The history of this country is also noted by the waves of different groups, depending on which country is in turmoil. Potato famine, wars, Portuguese despot..lots of reasons for people coming here. Right now there are millions of Muslims trying to escape American interventions in the middle east. So that's what we get right now.
True. Once the new policies came into effect in 95 they worked well we averaged between 11-14 thousand per yer split evenly between gov't sponsored and private adoption.

Btw Trudeau really hasn't bumped it. He just front loaded it in the first two months to look good then shut it down after.

But Hillary was talking about I think 650,000 per year. The states didn't like it because they would be responsible for the welfare payments. And settling them.

Meanwhile people think we spent a few trillion to bring democracy only to have it all fucked up so bad they now have to bring them to the states.

I think the nation is tired of being the world's policeman on the one hand and having that power abused on the other. In some ways all the flak the police are getting down there is a microcosm of the nation as a whole. Most wanting to be good guys and some fucking things up with their actions.

I don't blame them for wanting some time to re assess.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
94,437
23,795
113
True. Once the new policies came into effect in 95 they worked well we averaged between 11-14 thousand per yer split evenly between gov't sponsored and private adoption.

Btw Trudeau really hasn't bumped it. He just front loaded it in the first two months to look good then shut it down after.

But Hillary was talking about I think 650,000 per year. The states didn't like it because they would be responsible for the welfare payments. And settling them.

Meanwhile people think we spent a few trillion to bring democracy only to have it all fucked up so bad they now have to bring them to the states.

I think the nation is tired of being the world's policeman on the one hand and having that power abused on the other. In some ways all the flak the police are getting down there is a microcosm of the nation as a whole. Most wanting to be good guys and some fucking things up with their actions.

I don't blame them for wanting some time to re assess.
I do agree that interventionism has been the biggest fuck up for the world in a long time.
And Clinton will continue to fuck it up as well.

Trump is a wild card, on the one hand he claims he'll pull out and the next minute he claims he'll bomb ISIS. And a man that sends out insults through twitter at 3am over slights isn't really a man stable enough to be running a country or trying to make good calls. Witness his total disregard of US intelligence briefings about the Russian hacks he's been using for his own political benefit.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,283
6,963
113
Again you are simplifying the positions of what, 100 million people? ....
I'm explaining the position of the people discussed in the article. And yes, numerous studies have shown that conservative values reflect an unwillingness to accept change. As for Canada, our point system isn't designed to keep immigrants out but rather to select immigrants that will be most successful.

What you seem to ignore in all of your rationalizations is that the alt-right movement has rejection of multiculturalism as one of its core tenets. That clearly shows that it is not a movement based on 'cautious social adjustment' but rather a movement opposing any changes to the white-male dominated society we have. They flat out reject the concept of people just being people and consistently ascribe nefarious motives to groups who are different to them.

There may be some on the alt-right that view that are focused on social policy but not race but based on everything out there, they don't represent the majority.

p.s.
Trump essentially singled out two groups. Believe it or not we do similar things as well. Where in the world you are coming from is part of the point system. And the vetting process would include religion and the like. When we took in Syrians all of them had been in camps for three years, we didn't take fresh ones.
Ha. Trump has vowed to ban Muslims. We don't do anything even close to that.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,140
5,235
113
I'm explaining the position of the people discussed in the article. And yes, numerous studies have shown that conservative values reflect an unwillingness to accept change. As for Canada, our point system isn't designed to keep immigrants out but rather to select immigrants that will be most successful.

What you seem to ignore in all of your rationalizations is that the alt-right movement has rejection of multiculturalism as one of its core tenets. That clearly shows that it is not a movement based on 'cautious social adjustment' but rather a movement opposing any changes to the white-male dominated society we have. They flat out reject the concept of people just being people and consistently ascribe nefarious motives to groups who are different to them.

There may be some on the alt-right that view that are focused on social policy but not race but based on everything out there, they don't represent the majority.

p.s.


Ha. Trump has vowed to ban Muslims. We don't do anything even close to that.
Point being again by taking a slower approach you don't rile up the people so much they turn to demogogues. That incremental keeps a lid on things.

And Trump has called for temp ban under, as he put it, we can figure out what the hell is going on. We figured out that if they sit in a refugee camp for three years and then call to see who wants to come you tend to get people interested. And you won't get Trojan horses and eliminate the worst who would use that as an excuse not to take them in.

Perhaps it isn't the most humanitarian thing, but neither is bombing the shit out of them helping to create the crisis in the first place.
 

SkyRider

Banned
Mar 31, 2009
17,572
2
0
The states didn't like it because they would be responsible for the welfare payments. And settling them.
The political elites in Washington don't have to live with the consequences of their actions like the good people of St. Cloud have to.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,283
6,963
113
Point being again by taking a slower approach you don't rile up the people so much they turn to demogogues....
How much slower do you want things? The official acceptance of multiculturalism has been a western concept for decades upon decades yet during all that time the xenophobic anger hasn't decreased. All it has done is change targets. The waves of Irish immigrants during the Famine and they were treated like crap by the English and Scots in Canada. Chinese Canadians in BC had things go so slow that they weren't given the right to vote until after WWII. After WWII, they complained that too many Eastern Europeans were coming in.

For many that are angry about immigrants, anything above zero is too slow.


Perhaps it isn't the most humanitarian thing, but neither is bombing the shit out of them helping to create the crisis in the first place.
And not only are you justifying the anti-immigrant views of Trump's base, you are now claiming that it was US bombing that created the Syrian refugee crisis? Wow.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,925
7,900
113
Point being again by taking a slower approach you don't rile up the people so much they turn to demogogues. That incremental keeps a lid on things.

And Trump has called for temp ban under, as he put it, we can figure out what the hell is going on. We figured out that if they sit in a refugee camp for three years and then call to see who wants to come you tend to get people interested. And you won't get Trojan horses and eliminate the worst who would use that as an excuse not to take them in.

Perhaps it isn't the most humanitarian thing, but neither is bombing the shit out of them helping to create the crisis in the first place.
If Trump cannot "Figure out What the Hell is going on", it is not surprising as he is dumb as a politician.

Actually, he mentioned that he "would bomb the Shit out" of goodness who. So maybe you should tell him and Putin and Assad to stop bombing the innocent Syrian civilians. The Syrians are the biggest victims in the world presently. Most of the country is in ruins. Trump will never "figure out what the hell is going on", so that these people will continue to be bombed and at best will be in refugee camps, thanks to "leaders" like Trumpty Dumpty.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,140
5,235
113
If Trump cannot "Figure out What the Hell is going on", it is not surprising as he is dumb as a politician.

Actually, he mentioned that he "would bomb the Shit out" of goodness who. So maybe you should tell him and Putin and Assad to stop bombing the innocent Syrian civilians. The Syrians are the biggest victims in the world presently. Most of the country is in ruins. Trump will never "figure out what the hell is going on", so that these people will continue to be bombed and at best will be in refugee camps, thanks to "leaders" like Trumpty Dumpty.
Actually the region is. Add in Iraq as well. I would throw Libya in as well as on the brink. And the Russians and the USA share equal responsibility with other foreign nations for the de stabilization. All are at fault.

And Hillary led the charge on Syria and Libya, and voted for Iraq.

Trump is an ass. But better IMO to not further damage the region. Hillary has already stated she will escalate things and turn up the heat on Russia as well. Would she start a war over her no fly zone?

That's again what people aren't getting. The USA is war weary. Many feel they have done enough. Many want a foreign policy reset. Many want to reexamine what they have been told by the gov't because they have been found to be liars. And the lies results in too many deaths.

I don't know about you. But if I went to war and found out it was all I lie I'd be pissed too. Pissed enough to not want anyone who was a part of the decision to stay in office. Or be elected to it.

Pissed enough not to want anyone who wants to contine to do the same thing.

Pissed enough to want to stop cowtowing to PC if the ones responsible appear to be happy to twist it to their purposes. And to not trust they aren't lying again.

I think that many have had enough of a political class lying to them. And are so desperate they will put in someone like Trump. Go ahead and say he is a bigger lair. Anything else. It doesn't matter. Because he hasn't lied and killed people.

And for many that's enough.
 
Toronto Escorts