|
CommieGIR posted:Not saying there is a cure to Greece. But Austerity ain't it either. We can still here all we want and wishy washy back and forth about one of the least effective, if effective at all, methods for solving economic crises, or we can accept that its also another dead end. If you say there's no cure, you don't really have any capital to reject austerity since you are basically saying "it's not a good solution, but it's as good as any other solution"
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:47 |
|
|
punakone posted:Following the EU gun ban process, yes, absolutely this will be used, just like the arrests days before we're used. The whole process has been locked due to opposition by countries like Finland and others, and the compromise suggested by the chairman country Netherlands was to ban something, anything, just decide on what to ban, nothing that is based on facts or actual research, just fear and feelings. Besides that, the Finnish constitutional court has already declared earlier when we had our school shootings which led to tightening of gun laws here, that there is no need to tighten them further. And I am just going to laugh at your remark of a small militia, maybe do some research first, or do you consider an army of 230 000 active reservists plus non-active and second tier conscripts to be small? I do not look for a chance to relive Winter War, it is about deterring it, hth. Jeez, maybe you are really too unhinged to have a weapon?:
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
double nine posted:Piss off. Your guns suck, your hobby sucks, your concerns suck, ergo you suck. If all gun nut "hobbyists" need to melt down their weaponry and that gets us peace and harmony and all that kumbaya poo poo then that's a sacrifice you'll have to swallow. lol i called that guy unstable for being so obsessed with weapons you spaz
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Friendly Humour posted:That didn't backfire at all. The comments section is precious "I guess you could say tourism is booming."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
punakone posted:I dont understand, the directive is already in the EU parliament, I posted about it in the thread before. Nobody cares about your dumb toys and about your weekend soldiers club.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Rifles are not a credible defence force against cruise missiles and fighter jets, hth. E: Heh, I didn't know this replacement.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Friendly Humour posted:Afghanistan. So the country will be occupied in a couple of weeks and then the local population will throw away lives in suicide attacks until the other country gets distracted by domestic problems and leaves? Friendly Humour posted:Which worked out really well for both of them in the end. None of us think we could hold out a week against Russia, which is precisely why we train every single eligible man (and every volunteerin woman) to shoot a rifle and live in the forest. That accomplishes one thing: Get every man shot for being an enemy combatant.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Well, I guess you fellas have pluck or something. Friendly Humour posted:Yeah uh, as monstrous as the Russians might seem to you my friend, I don't think they're gonna go hitler on us just to have our loving bogs. Or to word it more likely terms: Get more men killed because they were trying to play heroes and put their useless training into practice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
Baxta posted:Fuuuuck shut up shut up shut up. No one wants Finland. NO ONE EVER WANTS FINLAND. Finland has nothing to do with anything just shut up with your stupid derail. Unfortunately it's in Europe 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Collect stamps instead of collecting murder machines like a sociopath.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:Finland has large amount of hunters and the reserve training does require guns but this argument is probably wasted on you since you clearly don't care about actual facts when you can just go for shrieking hyperboles. Clearly to be a hunter you need to have a museum-level collection of machine guns Also I lust for Finn blood.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:For this to be true the people (who want to) live in social housing would have to have the means to live in regular housing, with roughly the same size flats, as long as they have no access to social housing, which is probably not the case, as that would mean they can afford to live in regular housing and there would be no need for them to be allowed to get subsidized social housing. Therefore, if you increase the available social housing, the effect on the regular demand is not especially large, while the effect on the supply side is substantial, as you reduce the potentially available building space for regular housing. Well, this is assuming there would be no change in rules for approving public housing applications.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Illegal immigration in Spain looks like this: Are they there to collect lost balls?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Greatbacon posted:It's hard to pick up the pieces of your country after the Belgians cut off your hands and feet for not harvesting enough rubber. I know you mean well, but this sort of rhetoric revitalizes the image of Africans as helpless children, foreverially paralysed by their past and dependent on Europe just to survive; they can do quite well on their own, and they can also be the cause of their own problems like anybody else, on account of being human.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
computer parts posted:They're Mestizo.. So Europeans participating on cultural as well as ethnic genocide of the natives, with a drop of native blood in them, no doubt gained through means made inherently violent due to the power differential. Please apologize for even bringing up that imperialist filth. E: Like, I'm sorry your ancestors were greedy rapists, murderers and pillagers, but you don't have to turn your shame against us whose families were happy to chill in their serf hovels instead of crossing the ocean in hopes of subjugating the savages and taking their gold and women. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 09:04 on Apr 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
Humans Among Us posted:For what it's worth, a lot of people are getting sick of the whole issue and i predict black pete will be pretty much gone between now and 10 years. Seems pretty controversial to erase a black cultural icon.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
He said that actually tyranny was the most corrupt form of government, but that it teleologically follows from an unrestricted democracy which has been stripped of all regard for common virtue.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
I think Benjamin Constant's argument that we can't combine the need in direct democracy of a permanent political participation in which the free man can hardly be entitled to private existence or to a protection from the political body, with our concept of liberty that makes us value privacy. In the classical demicracies, the direct rule was sustained by slave ownership and the disenfranchisement of women, it allowed the polis to arbitrarily start wars, execute people for displaying the collective will, ostracize dissenters, and overall it exposed each person in the state to the arbitrary will of the whole. We can hardly implement a system of direct democracy in which people would maintain their insulation from the dangers of politics, and in which they wouldn't be constantly pressured into doing their time to assemblies and political conflict. A direct democracy with no mandatory participation and with a strong division of power would be a legislative rule of random unrepresentative gatherings of people, hardly better than rolling a die to Pick new laws.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
Nermal posted:Yes, a referendum is a more democratic action than a parliamentary vote. Referendums in a liberal democracy are overwhelmingly an arbitrary decision by a minority of polarized voters.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:I disagree with your assessment but in any case we don't lose refuge children en masse. Which seems to be an improvement over the European attempt. Take in a million third world immigrants at once and we'll see what it will do to the notably calm and reasoned American public.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Ligur posted:Hehe. So what prevents the Libyans from putting down their arms, having a democratic vote, and then respect it? What about a fear that the losing party will be purged by the winner, in revenge for actions taken during the war. Regime transitions on a peaceful basis don't work unless all sides can be guaranteed credible immunity from each other.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:If you really don't think europeans are exactly the same as everyone else I don't know what to tell you except maybe read about the world wars. Hm, yes, the noble savages of the world never engaged in warfare, and never utilized industrial forms of warfare once they obtained the means to sustain them. You are kind of racist, man.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Ligur posted:Yes, you exactly proved my point right here. It doesn't mean they don't want democracy (at least a plurality of Libyans, I'd wager), it means the configuration of actors is too charged to permit democracy in practice. Question is, can it be defused by external assistance?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:I don't see how you got this out of what I said, can you walk me through it please? I took it that world wars were a proof of the Europeans being somehow uniquely warlike.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:I don't think you read my posts right. Ha, I missed the "don't" in your post, which kinda flipped the meaning. Apologies. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:France when it was divided into Occitans, Burgundians, Alsatians, Bretons, Provençals: Great continental power. It was the France that was the most belligerent and internally violent country in Europe. Sorry the old forms of political conflict don't conform with 21st century models. E: Also consider, the Habsburg Empire, the great multiethnic project that never worked. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Apr 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Nah, gypsies are still far better off than black people in America. The worst gypsy slum in Romania has nothing on the post-apocalyptic Detroit ghetto hell scape. Also, we don't shoot gypsies and only get a little rough with them if they step out of line. Lol I sincerely hope you are joking.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:Recently for both if I remember correctly. Though only Europeans are forming lynch mobs to attack traveler camps because a girl said she was assaulted by them. I don't think this is really a thing, but you don't need lynch kind to prove your point. Many black people have been able to live normal lives in the US society, and they are undeniably part of American politics and culture, but I don't think there's a European country where the Roma a achieved any sort of integration at all, they are pretty exclusively relegated to second class status, if not entirely cordoned off in tenement ghettos that would make most third world country people cringe.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I'm glad that saying "diversity is strength" is much more inherently offensive to the Eloi who post in this thread than "lack of diversity is strength." Really gets across the inherent sympathy of liberal democracy towards fascism. There's nothing inherently good about diversity for the sake of diversity. Diversity at the cost of compromising universal rights and liberties is, in fact,a weakness.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
E:cell phone double post]
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Actually, only having a single point of view on things is bad and maintaining that happy state of affairs requires unending violence and threats of violence to maintain. I, in accordance to what you and your little friend are doing to me, will assume that you think that this is fine and dandy, and cheer on bloodshed in the name of preventing dangerous diversity levels. Actually pretty much any institution devoted to diversity is simultaneously working on making sure that the "diverse" members conform to its norms, with the goal that so far that as far as the functioning of the institution is concerned, all members are identical. That's because the strength in diversity comes from having a broader body of people introduced and adapted to the established order of what is permissible within the scope of the given context, thus enhancing the influence of these norms. While not any single socializing influence like that may be considered total in its effect on pressurizing the minorities to be more like the majority, in a society there is an infinite number of institutions, each of which hinges its commitment to diversity on compliance with its own set of norms, which means that any person is subject to any number of overlapping sources of social pressure to be, in fact, less diverse, and only the most superficial facets of diversity, like ethnic cuisine, are allowed to persist without being labelled as deviant or anti-social. The idea of any society actually embracing diversity fully and homogeneously is, as far as I can see, a total fiction.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:This post is not in accordance with our social norms so we're gonna take actions to guarantee you conform. Totalitarianism is loving awesome. So you are saying that nobody ever in fact makes any demands on people to act according to prior rules?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Like, what I posted is literally post-structuralist, radical leftist critique of discourse on diversity.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:America has embraced diversity. Where else do you see redheaded Germans with Italian heritage and practicing the Jewish faith? If diversity means that you can tick a box saying "Jewish" on the census ballot, then yes, it's been achieved.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I don't believe I wrote that at any point. I will write that your obsession with labels over contents ("this is a radical leftist critique" etc.) is suggestive that you aren't capable of recognizing that declaring yourself opposed to diversity means you are willing to commit violence against anyone who differs, up to and including killing them, because you can conjure an infinite array of semantic figleaves to hide behind. Nobody has said anything about being against diversity, just that the usual definition is a shallow conceit to the majority rule, increasing overall conformism with the elites, and that one must be critical about what aspects of any potential genuinely diverse (bottom up diverse) society must be protected by restrictions to make it sustainable, to prevent it from self-cannibalization. You brought up that stupid French argument, which opened this can of worms of a society disintegrating into permanent war due to a supposedly "diverse" national make up. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:If you are not willing to use force, the prohibition on being a Goth or Muslim or whatever cannot be enforced. If you can't enforce it, it doesn't exist as a prohibition. That is an incredibly naive view of things. I guess it depends on what you consider to be diversity. Since listening to Joy Division or eating food (which I specificall mentioned!) hardly constitutes a challenge to the ruling structures, those aspects of differentiation will likely not be subject to strict, overlapping social control by them. What I consider diversity, however, is the ability to construct a complete communal political self, and or the ability to abstain from this communal identity and become politically independent without becoming silenced and ostracized. And such forms of social diversity are not currently possible for the vast majority of people who could benefit from them, neither in Europe, nor in America, no matter how much we use diversity as a slogan.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:That was an actual response. I questioned the linkage between the argument that your buddy started with and the one he's promulgating right now. I said that he's either being dishonest or quite simply doesn't understand what the difference is. I then pointed out that his argument is also misrepresenting the actual position, so in conclusion, go drop dead in a shed, Fred. The answer to your question is contained in my posts. A society that values a deliberative form of governance that I implied must be critical not only of the efforts to curb its liberties, but also about the efforts to enhance them in order to safeguard itself from being hijacked by authoritarians. You are right that there's nothing that should lead one to believe diversity as we implicitly understand it within liberal democratic systems is a desirable state of affairs, and I made it abundantly clear in my posts, which you apparently didn't read past their opening sentences, and I also mentioned the main features of the current problems and the basic concept required to overcome them. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 08:42 on Apr 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
In case you got this far, I'll recap: In the current system, functional units of social systems fulfil certain functions, among them is the aggregation of people under their authority and formulation of their needs, as well as paths to achieve these needs. Since the institutions charged with these functions in areas of vital political significance are under state control, the population is by and large required to strip itself of diverse facets in these areas in order to be successful in them. In other words, state-sanctioned organizations decide on the limits of diversity in each social context where power and politics are considered, and these limits are compounded by coexisting with each other in the space a single functioning human must occupy. What we then have is a state of affairs in which individual identities are "uploaded" to the elites, assessed, and given an authoritative agenda of becoming more conformist in order to achieve a political agency of one own. What we should have, however, is something in the shape of deliberative democracy. So instead of the current model of of taking the diverse, aggregating them into a social object for the higher level of social hierarchy to approve and then ruling over them through social institutions til they are integrated according to the elite wishes, we would see a system in which each social subject is preserved with its agency (by making the decision making process a more free-form, less vertically structured collaboration of interest representatives), and governing organizations are created in a pro tempore fashion on a broad, discursive basis and designed to be always open to change based on emerging and transforming identities. However, this deliberative process is by no means an anything-goes sort of affair, it is actually critical that it maintains its critical (ha) faculties and its ability to formulate a legitimate blocking criticism of destabilizing proposals. The difference is that this blocking is achieved through argumentation between peers rather than by adhering to structures with historical legacy of political bias. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 08:47 on Apr 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Oh buddy, this is so much gabble when you could have been concise and boiled it down to, "In MY idealized fantasyland we'll shut down illiberalism without any possibility of force, by 'argumentation between peers'." Your argument sums up to "capitalism and patriarchy are awesome because I can buy kebab" Also I said nothing about enforcement, only about decision making, just as I said nothing about enforcement in a liberal democratic society. Sorry you are in love with the status quo so much, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:47 |
|
|
So, PJ Harvey has released a new album, and it includes political commentary on the refugee crisis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ReW0jJkag8 Her interpretation of it seems to be based on the idea that it is a continuation of a cycle of misery turning round and round in the Balkans: "The enormous refugee crisis in Europe had been news for months. I spent some time on the Greek and Macedonian borders, and in Serbia, before traveling into Kosovo. It was happening in and through territories associated with recent conflicts in Kosovo and the wider Balkans. The idea of cycles, wheels and repetition once again being all too apparent and necessary to make."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2016 01:40
|
|