Is Hitler the only racist left?

[HoreTore]

Link only in Norwegian, sorry (http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/norsk-politikk/artikkel.php?artid=580594)

So, our Crown Prince and hoeCrown Princess has decided to take a trip to Africa, visit some national leaders, look at some african stuff and generally feel more cultured than before. This being 2009 and the age of information, they of course posted this on their facebook fan page. Now the fun begins though. The second leader of the Progress Party in Moss, Roger Madsen, posted a comment on that, saying "Try visiting the orient instead of Africa. From there you only get halfmonkeys."

Honestly. When you consider africans as half monkey, ie. as much animal as human, and generally unable to function in human society because of their genetics, how on earth can this man be anything but racist? According to his party's seniors, this was just an "unfortunate comment" from Madsen. He's not racist, and the Progress Party does not have any racists among their ranks. Madsen also stated that "posting his comment in that place might not have been the best idea, and he would post things like that elsewhere in the future". Yeah.... That's a relief. :dizzy2:

So, is this guy a racist in your opinions? Or his Hitler himself the only one of that kind left?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Racist isn't a description. It's more of a judgement.

[Beefy187]

I think it was tasteless thing to say as man with such an influence.
But in general, I think its only racist if the ones being offended took it seriously.

[Megas Methuselah]

It must be comfortin' to know such an influential man in the government has such interestin' personal opinions on Africans. :dizzy2:


But in general, I think its only racist if the ones being offended took it seriously.

Huh?

[Papewaio]

Actually you have mis-read the comment. He is saying Asians are "only half-monkeys", implying that Africans are "full monkeys".

Easy way to see if this is racist is reverse that comment.

"Try visiting Denmark instead of Norway. From there you only get halfmonkeys." or whatever demeaning term that is sometimes applied to those of Nordic descent.

I would say Roger Madsen would be charged with racial vilification if he was in Australia. I think Asian and Africa and Australia should put an embargo on Norway until he is removed from office and an apology is given out. I for one will start my own avoidance of Norwegian products today. Easy as I prefer Danish Buttercookies.

Have a nice weekend... I'm going home to my 'Half monkey wife and quarter monkey child with the Swedish surname."

Yes the guy is a vile racist.:thumbsdown:

[aimlesswanderer]

Oh dear, not exactly a good look is it? Perhaps he should refrain from, visiting, oh, most of the world, where varieties of monkeys abound. I am not sure if anyone has called me a half monkey before, that is a new one.

[Megas Methuselah]

I hope he comes over here and gives me a banana. :dizzy2:

[Sigurd]

Actually you have mis-read the comment. He is saying Asians are "only half-monkeys", implying that Africans are "full monkeys".

Easy way to see if this is racist is reverse that comment.

"Try visiting Denmark instead of Norway. From there you only get halfmonkeys." or whatever demeaning term that is sometimes applied to those of Nordic descent.

I would say Roger Madsen would be charged with racial vilification if he was in Australia. I think Asian and Africa and Australia should put an embargo on Norway until he is removed from office and an apology is given out. I for one will start my own avoidance of Norwegian products today. Easy as I prefer Danish Buttercookies.

Have a nice weekend... I'm going home to my 'Half monkey wife and quarter monkey child with the Swedish surname."

Yes the guy is a vile racist.:thumbsdown:

I agree that this FRP character is nothing but a racist. But he did not state that Asians are half-monkeys.

His reference were to Africans as Africa is the last word in his first statement:
"Prøv å besøke Østen istedenfor Afrika. Derfra kommer det bare halvaper. De må ha 2-3 generasjoner på å tilpasse seg, og det ser man støtt i media"

"Try visiting the East instead of Africa, where only half-apes resides. They need at least 2-3 generations to be able to adapt, which is shown in the media all the time."

These FRP (progress party) characters are a legacy from the early days of this party, when the party had a rather darker shade of blue. (far right wing). The new generation FRP politicians are more moderate - but still deep blue.
I doubt, should the party get any real power, that characters like Roger Madsen would have any say in how politics, which concerns other cultures, are conducted.

But we can't hide the fact under a bushel, that racist elements flock to FRP when there are very few other parties with certain immigrant views. In fact, it is more or less the only party which have an issue with the current immigrant laws.

[HoreTore]

These FRP (progress party) characters are a legacy from the early days of this party, when the party had a rather darker shade of blue. (far right wing). The new generation FRP politicians are more moderate - but still deep blue.
I doubt, should the party get any real power, that characters like Roger Madsen would have any say in how politics, which concerns other cultures, are conducted.

A nice theory, Sigurd. Unfortunately wrong though.

Roger Madsen isn't a part of the "old guard", he's your "new generation", he's 45 years old and was elected into the city council in Moss for the first time in 2003.

And I sincerely doubt that his views are rare in the progress party. The central leadership confirms that quite well with their reaction, which was "he made a mistake and apologized, business as usual now". They don't care in the slightest that their central members are flamin' racists. That is what has changed in the Progress Party. They haven't become less racist, if anything they've become more.

Remember Vidar Kleppe and Jan Simonsen? Both excluded for similar racism this guy stands for. They got the full exclusion circus. Nothing happens this time.

Also, Moss FRP is one of the party's largest chapters. You saw Ulf Isak Leirstein during the debate as financial spokesman for FRP? Leirstein is the leader of Moss FRP, Madsen is the second leader. Madsen is also chosen as fraction leader in the city council. That means he's on the fast-track to parliament.

[The Stranger]

I think it was tasteless thing to say as man with such an influence.
But in general, I think its only racist if the ones being offended took it seriously.

well actually thats not true, its more the people that it doesnt concern but who are offended by it that label it racism... I find that the people I know would be easier offended if someone called me something rascist than myself. Also they sometimes hesitate to say certain phrases around me while really cant be bothered by it. my closest friends that really know me dont ofcourse but people ive just met do.

the bigger question would be is the problem of an offense in the intent of the offender or is it in the taking insult of the offended?

ps if he had said something like that relating jews and holocaust we would have a total media uproar... or regarding muslims, same thing. had he offended china he wouldve been dead.

[The Stranger]

I agree that this FRP character is nothing but a racist. But he did not state that Asians are half-monkeys.

His reference were to Africans as Africa is the last word in his first statement:
"Prøv å besøke Østen istedenfor Afrika. Derfra kommer det bare halvaper. De må ha 2-3 generasjoner på å tilpasse seg, og det ser man støtt i media"

"Try visiting the East instead of Africa, where only half-apes resides. They need at least 2-3 generations to be able to adapt, which is shown in the media all the time."


implying that what is shown on TV and in the media is therefore true, just and maybe only because it has been on TV. which is a major error a lot of people make, wether it concerns internet, books or TV... if the people that are supposed to lead countries think that way... i think 2012 might not be so much of a joke...

[Furunculus]

I think it was tasteless thing to say as man with such an influence.
But in general, I think its only racist if the ones being offended took it seriously.

that attitude was the most poisonous result of the Macpherson report, the idea that racism is in the eye of the beholder, and i reject it utterly.

[rory_20_uk]

So does British law, to the extent that if someone feels that they have been the subject of a racist incident ipso facto they have been - and can commence discipinary action.

~:smoking:

[Husar]

I agree that this FRP character is nothing but a racist. But he did not state that Asians are half-monkeys.

His reference were to Africans as Africa is the last word in his first statement:
"Prøv å besøke Østen istedenfor Afrika. Derfra kommer det bare halvaper. De må ha 2-3 generasjoner på å tilpasse seg, og det ser man støtt i media"

"Try visiting the East instead of Africa, where only half-apes resides. They need at least 2-3 generations to be able to adapt, which is shown in the media all the time."

Yeah, I get your point, HoreTore should make correct translations, because I thought the same as Papewaio.

There's another mistake HoreTore made because Hitler is not left, he died many years ago unless you believe he fled to the moon or something. ~;)

Either way this guy seems a bit like a racist, yes.

[HoreTore]

Either way this guy seems a bit like a racist, yes.

This is the heart of the issue.

This man says africans are half-apes. And people are for some reason still unable to plainly say that the guy is a racist.

[Fragony]

I would say that remark kinda qualifies

[Andres]

And I sincerely doubt that his views are rare in the progress party. The central leadership confirms that quite well with their reaction, which was "he made a mistake and apologized, business as usual now". They don't care in the slightest that their central members are flamin' racists. That is what has changed in the Progress Party. They haven't become less racist, if anything they've become more.



So they are hypocrit racists. Racists who don't have the balls to just admit that they are racists and to say what they really think.

He didn't make "a mistake", he just showed his real face and it's not a pretty one :thumbsdown:

[Louis VI the Fat]

See, this is what you get when you vote populist. Sure, they usually sound all well and good - Less taxes! Libertarianism! No immigration! National sovereignity! Norway for the Norwegians!

But then you always end up with these sort of people. Some YouTube filth writer, elevated to the position of politician. What a laugh.


I would say that this is just a local small town council member, but populist parties are in many European countries the second or third largest party. I really do blame the internets. Where rightwing populism is huge, and the fleeting nature of debate automatically favours the quick solution, the loudest yellers. And also, where the democratic nature of the digital age has made everybody think that their opinion is as good as any.



@Pape - West European racism is anti-Black and anti-Muslim. Only a fringe is anti-Semitic or anti- East Asians.
Roger Madsen is rather standard in that he looks down on Africa, but admires Asia.

[rory_20_uk]

@Pape - West European racism is anti-Black and anti-Muslim. Only a fringe is anti-Semitic or anti- East Asians.
Roger Madsen is rather standard in that he looks down on Africa, but admires Asia.

Muslims are not a race, it is a religion; anti-semitic is taken to be anti-Jew, but again the race / religion line is blurred as not all Semites are Jews... but then I'm pretty sure you know this.

Looking down on Africa does not make one a Racist. Some might look down equally on any group of countries that manage to have such high levels of corruption, starvation and ethnic violence whilst having such abundant mineral wealth. Many Carribbeans look down on Africa often for these very reasons.

~:smoking:

[Furunculus]

See, this is what you get when you vote populist. Sure, they usually sound all well and good - Less taxes! Libertarianism! No immigration! National sovereignity! Norway for the Norwegians!

But then you always end up with these sort of people. Some YouTube filth writer, elevated to the position of politician. What a laugh.

lol, wanting to be free of government oppression via taxes and laws = closet racist. :laugh4:

[Fragony]

Looking down on Africa does not make one a Racist.

No but calling Africans half-apes is, don't know what else to make of it.

[Beskar]

We share over 99% of our DNA with Monkies. Anyone who thing they are not monkies are in denial. (or the Nile, if they fancied a swim.)

[Beskar]

Looking down on Africa does not make one a Racist. Some might look down equally on any group of countries that manage to have such high levels of corruption, starvation and ethnic violence whilst having such abundant mineral wealth. Many Carribbeans look down on Africa often for these very reasons.

~:smoking:

Go and watch "World's Strictest Parents", they usually have families in America host British children and do a far better job than the parents here.

[Fragony]

We share over 99% of our DNA with Monkies. Anyone who thing they are not monkies are in denial. (or the Nile, if they fancied a swim.)

Well in fact we aren't, we share a common ancestor.

[HoreTore]

lol, wanting to be free of government oppression via taxes and laws = closet racist. :laugh4:

Uhm, I do believe you misunderstood what Louis said there...

Can't quite figure out how you interpreted his statement in that way though.... Or are you denying that this guy is a racist, or do you claim that he does not represent a party who wants less taxes, more nationalism and no brownies?:inquisitive:


Muslims are not a race

No, according to the "immigrationally challenged", Islam is a nationality. Every time they come up with another demographic scare to show how many muslims are in the country, they always use the number of immigrants from countries with a muslim majority, without any regard whatsoever to their personal beliefs. Atheist commies fleeing from Iran are thrown together with Islamists thrown out of Libya, they all count as "muslims" in their minds.

[rory_20_uk]

No but calling Africans half-apes is, don't know what else to make of it.

The Devil's Advocate in me wishes to make the point that Africa has peoples from all over the globe - whites, blacks, Indians and Arabs. If he'd specified "Black" then you'd be on firmer ground.


We share over 99% of our DNA with Monkies. Anyone who thing they are not monkies are in denial. (or the Nile, if they fancied a swim.)

Since a lot of DNA is scaffolding and basic cell function, you need to go quite a long way from Primates before it drops below 70%


Go and watch "World's Strictest Parents", they usually have families in America host British children and do a far better job than the parents here.

Never defended methods here. I think that many parents either fail to have any responsibility or try to be their children's friend. In this African, Caribbean and Indian methods often have a lot in common - stricter, boundries, some corporal punishment and aspirations. When I have my own kids I either need to find a nice ghetto to live in or else emigrate.

~:smoking:

[Ironside]

lol, wanting to be free of government oppression via taxes and laws = closet racist. :laugh4:

You are aware that this is how the right-wing nationalistic populism looks like? Usually with some vague reference of a lost paradise, lost because of the immigrants!

Most right wing parties aren't populist or even nationalistic of course, but oddly enough does the these relativly new right-wing nationalistic populist parties sweeping over Europe follow that description fairly close.
And nationalistic populism has very strong tendency to be racist, due to simplistic solutions on problems and high national pride with a tendency to distrust immigrants. Combine and you get "all your problems are because of the immigrants, poisoning your wells, cursing your cattle and bewitching your womanfolk. Remove them and all your problems will be gone."

Beskar, do you honestly belive that this particular comment had anything to do with genetics?

The only thing I can somewhat agree in is that it takes a few generations to fully assimilate (aka. disappear into the statistic average), longer if they try to keep a subgroup. To adequetly adapt, the main part of integrating, usually take much shorter time though.

[Furunculus]

lol, wanting to be free of government oppression via taxes and laws = closet racist. :laugh4:Uhm, I do believe you misunderstood what Louis said there...
Can't quite figure out how you interpreted his statement in that way though.... Or are you denying that this guy is a racist, or do you claim that he does not represent a party who wants less taxes, more nationalism and no brownies?:inquisitive:

errrmm, let me see:

See, this is what you get when you vote populist. Sure, they usually sound all well and good - Less taxes! Libertarianism! No immigration! National sovereignity! Norway for the Norwegians!

But then you always end up with these sort of people*. Some YouTube filth writer, elevated to the position of politician. What a laugh.

* reference to racist in the first post
yeah, that about covers it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


lol, wanting to be free of government oppression via taxes and laws = closet racist. :laugh4:You are aware that this is how the right-wing nationalistic populism looks like? Usually with some vague reference of a lost paradise, lost because of the immigrants!

Most right wing parties aren't populist or even nationalistic of course, but oddly enough does the these relativly new right-wing nationalistic populist parties sweeping over Europe follow that description fairly close.
And nationalistic populism has very strong tendency to be racist, due to simplistic solutions on problems and high national pride with a tendency to distrust immigrants. Combine and you get "all your problems are because of the immigrants, poisoning your wells, cursing your cattle and bewitching your womanfolk. Remove them and all your problems will be gone."

your perception is your problem, not mine.

louis let fly with a sweeping generalisation, i let fly with a rebuttal. i am happy that my response is valid.

[Ironside]

louis let fly with a sweeping generalisation, i let fly with a rebuttal. i am happy that my response is valid.

Not following you, unless you consider wanting to be free of government oppression via taxes and laws = No immigration! National sovereignity! Norway for the Norwegians!

You know that other essential part Louis mentioned...

Louis: "Those Orange parties are bad."
Furunculus: "Hey don't insult red!"
Everyone else: "Huh? The orange comes from yellow, why they like red we don't know but they do."

[Major Robert Dump]

I don't think he was a racist, as he might have actually been talking about monkeys. It's a well-known fact that monkeys in asia are more liberal and open-minded and prone to race mixing and therefore more diverse, whereas the monkeys in Africa don't believe in "mixing the monkeys" and tend to be more hard-line, secluded and inbred.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Furunculus, not everybody who favours lower taxes is a populist. But all the rightwing populist parties that are currently sweeping over Europe share roughly the same traits that I described, of which lower taxes is a natural part.

Once in an elected office, especially at the lower levels, these populist politicians almost invariably turn out to be such depressingly inept muppets that even their very own voters are thoroughly put off. And they usually don't have very high standards to begin with.

At the top, Europe's populist parties consist of well educated, sharply dressed people with a deliberate aura of some moderation. This top is usually very narrow. Directly below, below the first ten or twenty members of their organisation, there gapes the abyss already. That army of shady businessmen, taxi drivers, outright criminals and other muppets who fill their ranks and run for elected office. In their minds, they are the ones who ought to run the country.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Lecturing Madsen on the specifics of primate genetics or human genotypes found in Africa I think misses the point.

The Devil's Advocate in me wishes to make the point that Africa has peoples from all over the globe - whites, blacks, Indians and Arabs. If he'd specified "Black" then you'd be on firmer ground. ~:smoking:Oh, come on. We all know who he is referring to. He did not mean the whites in Botswana.

[HoreTore]

He did not mean the whites in Botswana.

No he can't have done that; I mean, our Crown Prince may be inbred and all, but he's no monkey...

That description is more fitting of his sister's husband.... And the sister herself, come to think of it...

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

See, this is what you get when you vote populist. Sure, they usually sound all well and good - Less taxes! Libertarianism! No immigration! National sovereignity! Norway for the Norwegians!

But then you always end up with these sort of people. Some YouTube filth writer, elevated to the position of politician. What a laugh.

Great joke! :2thumbsup:



Wait, you were serious? Oh dear...

[Ironside]

I don't think he was a racist, as he might have actually been talking about monkeys. It's a well-known fact that monkeys in asia are more liberal and open-minded and prone to race mixing and therefore more diverse, whereas the monkeys in Africa don't believe in "mixing the monkeys" and tend to be more hard-line, secluded and inbred.

As long as they don't mix together, then some of those asian monkeys start to complain. Chinese example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Jing). Only to note that the western world is not the only place with rascists running around if anyone thought that (and because I've just red about it).

[Louis VI the Fat]

Great joke! :2thumbsup:



Wait, you were serious? Oh dear...I am afraid it is not a laughing matter. Populism is huge in Europe at the moment.



Especially for you and Furunculus: Bulgarian Ivan Krastev, who wrote a very good description of the Populism that threatens liberal democracy in Europe. A quick essay here:
http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2007-09-18-krastev-en.html

I present Krastev to you two because...he is a right-leaning liberal, and the article is a scathing indictment of the EU elites and of Hugo Chavez. Which should appeal to you both. Krastev's genius is that he connects these two with Euro-far right populism.


At heart, the defining feature of populism is the view that society falls into two homogenous and antagonistic groups: "the people as such" and "the corrupt elite". It proceeds to argue that politics is the expression of the general will of the people and that the social change is possible only via the radical change of the elite.

[Louis VI the Fat]

As long as they don't mix together, then some of those asian monkeys start to complain. Chinese example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Jing). Only to note that the western world is not the only place with rascists running around if anyone thought that (and because I've just red about it).I can scarcely think of more racist countries than China and Japan. A majority of Japanese consider all 'gaijin' little more than monkeys.

China semi-officially propagates the idea that the Chinese split of from the rest of humanity 500000 years ago. Chinese are humans, all the others are some sort of Neandertal apes.

[Devastatin Dave]

I need some math help. My childrens' grandmother is Thai. So my wife is half Thai, making my children 1/4 Thai. So, are my kids only 1/8 monkey? :laugh4:

[Ja'chyra]

I need some math help. My childrens' grandmother is Thai. So my wife is half Thai, making my children 1/4 Thai. So, are my kids only 1/8 monkey? :laugh4:

I only read this because you posted here, still funny but you're getting much tamer.

Wasn't that long ago you mentioned my mum and teabagging in the same post, ah, the good old days.

[Furunculus]

Furunculus, not everybody who favours lower taxes is a populist. But all the rightwing populist parties that are currently sweeping over Europe share roughly the same traits that I described, of which lower taxes is a natural part.

Once in an elected office, especially at the lower levels, these populist politicians almost invariably turn out to be such depressingly inept muppets that even their very own voters are thoroughly put off. And they usually don't have very high standards to begin with.

At the top, Europe's populist parties consist of well educated, sharply dressed people with a deliberate aura of some moderation. This top is usually very narrow. Directly below, below the first ten or twenty members of their organisation, there gapes the abyss already. That army of shady businessmen, taxi drivers, outright criminals and other muppets who fill their ranks and run for elected office. In their minds, they are the ones who ought to run the country.

i accept what you say, specifically, that there are a lot of populist, right-wing parties in continental politics that are deeply unpleasant, that wouldn't get the time of day here, and who i wouldn't want to give the time of day too.

i totally reject the the disdain for populism, especially when among those who laud the actions of the EU.

populism is essentially the acquiescence to the will of the electorate, something that is deeply at odds with the way the EU has handled the whole lisbon constitution/treaty, and i will always jump up and down to point out the fact.

to my mind, the disdain for popularism among much of european political commentary is nothing more than a disdain for the failings of the voter, which is really a contempt for representative democracy.

>I< do not worry about demagogues in Britain, though i do appreciate the problem is more realised elsewhere in the less 'perfect' parts of the world.

[HoreTore]

populism is essentially the acquiescence to the will of the electorate

Funny then, that no populist party gets even close to 50% of the votes during an election....

If they actually represented "the will of the people", surely they'd get much more than 50%?

[Furunculus]

nothing you say above diminishes the concept of "populism", and nothing detracts from the truth that euro-enthusiasts decry populism because it works against their pet enthusiasm; ever-deeper-union.


Populism is a political discourse that juxtaposes "the people" with "the elites." Populism may comprise an ideology urging social and political system changes and/or a rhetorical style deployed by members of political or social movements. It is defined by the Cambridge dictionary as "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes"

[HoreTore]

nothing you say above diminishes the concept of "populism", and nothing detracts from the truth that euro-enthusiasts decry populism because it works against their pet enthusiasm; ever-deeper-union.

So.....

"Elites" are 80% of the population, and "the common people" only represent 20% of the populace?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

By the most basic definition - not those of the political flunkies decrying it - populism is precisely as Furunculus defines it. In essence, therefore, populism is the cornerstone of our democracy. Every party does it to an extent, which accounts for HoreTore's post, though some parties more than others. These parties are the ones deemed "no-good uneducated misguided populists" and are thrown aside by the "political class." Ironically, this effectively proves the "populist" argument.

[Furunculus]

So.....

"Elites" are 80% of the population, and "the common people" only represent 20% of the populace?

que?

[HoreTore]

By the most basic definition - not those of the political flunkies decrying it - populism is precisely as Furunculus defines it. In essence, therefore, populism is the cornerstone of our democracy. Every party does it to an extent, which accounts for HoreTore's post, though some parties more than others. These parties are the ones deemed "no-good uneducated misguided populists" and are thrown aside by the "political class." Ironically, this effectively proves the "populist" argument.

Please, do explain why populist parties are at best fringe parties.

If they supposedly hold the views of the majority of the population, the common man, then surely they would have the majority of the votes, right?

Or....Perhaps "the common man" actually favours something else...? Election results says he does.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Please, do explain why populist parties are at best fringe parties.

If they supposedly hold the views of the majority of the population, the common man, then surely they would have the majority of the votes, right?

Or....Perhaps "the common man" actually favours something else...? Election results says he does.

Because mainstream parties try to portray them as dangerous fringe parties, because the people don't think that the populist parties will get elected, and because when the populist parties latch on to a big issue that threatens to displace the top few ruling parties those parties immediately take hold of that issue and begin to half-heartedly use it in their campaigns to prevent the populist parties from taking their votes.

[HoreTore]

Because mainstream parties try to portray them as dangerous fringe parties, because the people don't think that the populist parties will get elected, and because when the populist parties latch on to a big issue that threatens to displace the top few ruling parties those parties immediately take hold of that issue and begin to half-heartedly use it in their campaigns to prevent the populist parties from taking their votes.

So..... It's all an elaborate elitist conspiracy to confuse and betray the common man...?

I'd say that the theory "the populist parties actually don't represent the views of the common man" is a lot easier and makes much more sense.

Time to face the facts; Europe's populist parties only reflect the views of a small portion of the population. Thankfully.

EDIT: Funnily enough, that's the very same conspiracy theory the communist who calls for a dictatorship of the proletariat uses.....

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

So..... It's all an elaborate elitist conspiracy to confuse and betray the common man...?

:inquisitive:

It isn't a conspiracy theory. It's politics. Political parties adopt and push policies they think people want. That's just how the system works, which is why I see populist parties as an important pressure bloc to force major parties to adopt policies that they need to adopt, but not as parties that will realistically gain power, for better or for worse.

EDIT: You contradict yourself. If a party was populist then it wouldn't represent the views of only a small portion of the voters.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

EDIT: You contradict yourself. If a party was populist then it wouldn't represent the views of only a small portion of the voters.

It's like how in the usa the green party is the only one with environmentalist goals :laugh4:

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

It's like how in the usa the green party is the only one with environmentalist goals :laugh4:

I didn't say anything like that. :inquisitive:

[Louis VI the Fat]

'Populist' in common parlance does not mean a party which represents the populace at large, or represents the will of the people.

Populist is a pejorative term, for demagoguery, for 'easy' quick-fix solutions, for form over content.

This is why a populist party never refers to itself as such, no more than an environmental party refers to itself as 'tree-huggin' hippies'. Populism is not by definiton rightwing.

A populist party will always claim to represent the true will of the people, usually contrasted to an out-of-touch elite, or an even more sinister conspiracy.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

'Populist' in common parlance does not mean a party which represents the populace at large, or represents the will of the people.

Yes, in common parlance perhaps, but not in the definition provided. In effect, a democracy can and should run on "populism." Populism is intended to represent the will of the people, even if it does not always precisely do so. If they promote unpopular policies they aren't really populist in the true sense. The danger in representing populism as you do is that when the claim of an out of touch and autocratic elite is legitimate, they are easily demonized and ignored.

[HoreTore]

:inquisitive:

It isn't a conspiracy theory. It's politics. Political parties adopt and push policies they think people want. That's just how the system works, which is why I see populist parties as an important pressure bloc to force major parties to adopt policies that they need to adopt, but not as parties that will realistically gain power, for better or for worse.

EDIT: You contradict yourself. If a party was populist then it wouldn't represent the views of only a small portion of the voters.

Populists claims they represent the "common man". In reality, they only represent a small portion, as every single election result has shown. The majority in this country, for example, vastly favour social democracy. Lower taxes, less government and no immigration simply isn't what the majority of this country wants, only some 20% of us want that.

[The Stranger]

Muslims are not a race, it is a religion; anti-semitic is taken to be anti-Jew, but again the race / religion line is blurred as not all Semites are Jews... but then I'm pretty sure you know this.

Looking down on Africa does not make one a Racist. Some might look down equally on any group of countries that manage to have such high levels of corruption, starvation and ethnic violence whilst having such abundant mineral wealth. Many Carribbeans look down on Africa often for these very reasons.

~:smoking:

and where does the abundance of mineral wealth and any other type of wealth or abundance for that matter (richest fishgrounds, hardwoods, coffee etc) go to? oh yeah... it feeds the rest of the world.

[The Stranger]

The Devil's Advocate in me wishes to make the point that Africa has peoples from all over the globe - whites, blacks, Indians and Arabs. If he'd specified "Black" then you'd be on firmer ground.



Since a lot of DNA is scaffolding and basic cell function, you need to go quite a long way from Primates before it drops below 70%



Never defended methods here. I think that many parents either fail to have any responsibility or try to be their children's friend. In this African, Caribbean and Indian methods often have a lot in common - stricter, boundries, some corporal punishment and aspirations. When I have my own kids I either need to find a nice ghetto to live in or else emigrate.

~:smoking:

you can go devils advocate all you want, you can say that if you read what it says he might have said nothing that is that bad or blablabla... but we all know what he meant... and he knows it too otherwise he wouldnt have (semi)apologised.

[The Stranger]

I don't think he was a racist, as he might have actually been talking about monkeys. It's a well-known fact that monkeys in asia are more liberal and open-minded and prone to race mixing and therefore more diverse, whereas the monkeys in Africa don't believe in "mixing the monkeys" and tend to be more hard-line, secluded and inbred.

so then one would suspect that the half-monkeys would be found in asia instead of africa... :inquisitive:

[The Stranger]

As long as they don't mix together, then some of those asian monkeys start to complain. Chinese example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Jing). Only to note that the western world is not the only place with rascists running around if anyone thought that (and because I've just red about it).

oh not, racism/discrimination is to be found everywhere in the world... (I know that asia is pretty bad also, the adore westerners, hate pretty much anything else... wont ever show or admit it freely/openly though.) but you find racism in africa too.. or south-america...

[The Stranger]

I need some math help. My childrens' grandmother is Thai. So my wife is half Thai, making my children 1/4 Thai. So, are my kids only 1/8 monkey? :laugh4:

depends from which point of view u look at... :P

are the thai the monkeys here or are you? or none of you? or maybe both.

[rory_20_uk]

and where does the abundance of mineral wealth and any other type of wealth or abundance for that matter (richest fishgrounds, hardwoods, coffee etc) go to? oh yeah... it feeds the rest of the world.

Cobblers.

First off, minerals rarely feed anyone. Diamonds are valuable, not edible.
Richest fishgrounds? Hardly.
Zimbabwe was a major exporter locally of food - not any more now of course. Better to starve under a black president than be fed under a white one I guess... :dizzy2:

Coffee may have its origins in Ethiopia, but is grown from South America to Indonesia.
Hardwoods - yeah, the world would collapse without African hardwoods...

Africa's corrupt leaders help provide resources to the rest of the world, but there is nothing that Africa has that can not be found elsewhere.

~:smoking:

[HoreTore]

Zimbabwe was a major exporter locally of food - not any more now of course. Better to starve under a black president than be fed under a white one I guess... :dizzy2:

Funnily enough, people tend to like being free more than they like being oppressed.

[The Stranger]

First off, minerals rarely feed anyone. Diamonds are valuable, not edible.
in this economical system minerals do feed people. indirectly.


Richest fishgrounds? Hardly.
i should have said one of the most richest, i dont know if its the richest...



Africa's corrupt leaders help provide resources to the rest of the world, but there is nothing that Africa has that can not be found elsewhere.
if that is true then why dont the leave africa to its problems and get the stuff elsewhere? and there is nothing (almost) in the world that cannot be found in africa (talking about natural rescourses).

We all know the reason africa is such a mess politically. :juggle2:

[rory_20_uk]

in this economical system minerals do feed people. indirectly.


i should have said one of the most richest, i dont know if its the richest...


if that is true then why dont the leave africa to its problems and get the stuff elsewhere? and there is nothing (almost) in the world that cannot be found in africa (talking about natural rescourses).

We all know the reason africa is such a mess politically. :juggle2:

Minerals can indirectly feed people if a system exists where the minerals are extracted, and either directly or indirectly the people are paid in some form for this. In some parts of Africa the payment is in weaponry so they can continue killing each other, or to support the regieme

In many areas the West has decided not to obtain resources from Africa. Sadly, the glaring error in this thinking is twofold: China steps in and the black market steps in.

African countries seem uninterested in stopping their (fellow) dictators. South Africa has a lot of clout over Zimbabwe. Yet nothing for over 20 years.

I think that there are many reasons for Africa being in a mess.
Being an ex-colony? Many successful colonies elsewhere.
Poverty? Doesn't help, but it seems that although Nigeria should get billions from oil, the people are still poor.
Relics from the Cold War? Didn't help, but African countries manage to continue the traditions long after the sponsors left.



Funnily enough, people tend to like being free more than they like being oppressed.

What a useful observation! :inquisitive:

But they like not dying from starvation even more.

~:smoking:

[The Stranger]

Being an ex-colony? Many successful colonies elsewhere.

~:smoking:

such as? the only ones i can think of (with similar colonial background) are india and brazil..

which succesful colony can you name where the (best/strongest) indiginous people were taken away, where they cut tribes into pieces with imaginary boundaries, promoted strife, exploited its natural rescourses, than left taking everything of use with them and at the moment the indiginous people still reign??

australia doesnt count... america doesnt count... hongkong and singapore might be on your list but the circumstances are hardly the same to that of africa... ill applaud you if you can name 10 countries...

[rory_20_uk]

such as? the only ones i can think of (with similar colonial background) are india and brazil..

which succesful colony can you name where the (best/strongest) indiginous people were taken away, where they cut tribes into pieces with imaginary boundaries, promoted strife, exploited its natural rescourses, than left taking everything of use with them and at the moment the indiginous people still reign??

australia doesnt count... america doesnt count... hongkong and singapore might be on your list but the circumstances are hardly the same to that of africa... ill applaud you if you can name 10 countries...

First off, there's been a few decades since Independence. Surely the reasonable peoples of Africa can re-draw the boundaries.

Who exploited the natural resources of England? English people! Did all benefit? No, the vast majority didn't. So why treat abroad any different? Press-gangs in the ports, conscription in the countryside. Poor houses and debtors prison, and deportation. In 1880 the life expectancy was 39 years. Life in the colonies was harsh, but white, English people were dropping like flies too.

Promoted strife? Doubt it. Strife is bad for business. Most colonies were initially taken to stop the threats to trade routes.
Taking everything? Like the Indian train lines? Or the buildings? Codes of law? Language? Democracy? Hmmmm... All the mineral wealth? No? What, exactly? To be cynical, most things weren't portable to take.

Indigenous I imagine includes the Maoris who were the only persons on New Zealand mainly thanks to them killing all the others. They were so warlike that they were the only indigenous peoples to have a treaty with the British. Obviously they learnt these skills plaiting flowers...

Here area few names that come to mind:

India
UAE
Malaysia
New Zealand
Ireland
Burmuda
Egypt?
Bahrain a colony in all but name
Kuwait [protectorate]
Cyprus - the invasion was hardly the British fault.
Hong Kong and Singapore are both areas of territory that either were or are self governing. Racially both were mixed and both have done extremelly well.
Most of the Caribbean were exploited, downtrodden farms and most are doing OK.

~:smoking:

[The Stranger]

First off, there's been a few decades since Independence. Surely the reasonable peoples of Africa can re-draw the boundaries.

Who exploited the natural resources of England? English people! Did all benefit? No, the vast majority didn't. So why treat abroad any different? Press-gangs in the ports, conscription in the countryside. Poor houses and debtors prison, and deportation. In 1880 the life expectancy was 39 years. Life in the colonies was harsh, but white, English people were dropping like flies too.

Promoted strife? Doubt it. Strife is bad for business. Most colonies were initially taken to stop the threats to trade routes.
Taking everything? Like the Indian train lines? Or the buildings? Codes of law? Language? Democracy? Hmmmm... All the mineral wealth? No? What, exactly? To be cynical, most things weren't portable to take.

Indigenous I imagine includes the Maoris who were the only persons on New Zealand mainly thanks to them killing all the others. They were so warlike that they were the only indigenous peoples to have a treaty with the British. Obviously they learnt these skills plaiting flowers...

Here area few names that come to mind:

India
UAE
Malaysia
New Zealand
Ireland
Burmuda
Egypt?
Bahrain a colony in all but name
Kuwait [protectorate]
Cyprus - the invasion was hardly the British fault.
Hong Kong and Singapore are both areas of territory that either were or are self governing. Racially both were mixed and both have done extremelly well.
Most of the Caribbean were exploited, downtrodden farms and most are doing OK.

~:smoking:

india i named already...

Malaysia doesnt count i think, did they take slaves away?
Ireland? you got to be joking me. Besides Ireland gets huge EU support.
Egypt, can't compare again... no slaves.
Bermuda? thats a small island chain, doubt the native inhabitants still live there.
Hong kong and Singapore, I might give you those...
Caribbean? Are there still any natives left? Don't think so... And they're not doing so well...

Apart from India? Name another big country...

[Louis VI the Fat]

Yes, in common parlance perhaps, but not in the definition provided. In effect, a democracy can and should run on "populism." No, I am afraid you miss the point of the word 'populism'. Populism is a pejorative term. When a populist party is accused of being 'populist', their common answer to this allegation will be to insist that 'We are not populists! We simply represent the will of the people'.

Hugo Chavez is 'a populist'. By this, his critics do not mean he is a fine democrat. What is meant, is that he is a demagogue etc.

[gaelic cowboy]

india i named already...

Malaysia doesnt count i think, did they take slaves away?
Ireland? you got to be joking me. Besides Ireland gets huge EU support.
Egypt, can't compare again... no slaves.
Bermuda? thats a small island chain, doubt the native inhabitants still live there.
Hong kong and Singapore, I might give you those...
Caribbean? Are there still any natives left? Don't think so... And they're not doing so well...

Apart from India? Name another big country...

All those ex colonies my own included have one thing in common a properly working civil society of native people who were able to run there own affairs. Not for the first time the British leave a place and leave a working civil service to run the affairs of government.

Irelands EU support is irrelevant all of it would be wasted without a properly functioning goverment to spend any support on infrastructure.

[rory_20_uk]

india i named already...

Malaysia doesnt count i think, did they take slaves away?
Ireland? you got to be joking me. Besides Ireland gets huge EU support.
Egypt, can't compare again... no slaves.
Bermuda? thats a small island chain, doubt the native inhabitants still live there.
Hong kong and Singapore, I might give you those...
Caribbean? Are there still any natives left? Don't think so... And they're not doing so well...

Apart from India? Name another big country...

In England the country has been invaded several times. Who are the Natives here? Possibly the Celts, but chances are they displaced earlier tribes. Slavery under the feudal system, followed by a man's freedom to either work or starve to death wherever he chose.

What is the big deal with Slavery? It's not something that is somehow unique to Africa. Most countries on the planet either have had or do have slavery in some form or another.

Natives in the Caribbean? So, being there for 3-400 hundred years or so doesn't count? And as for doing well, many Caribbean islands would disagree: Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada. All rubbing along. No civil wars, no begging for aid.

Most colonies were ruled by Europeans who were not native. Same as in Ireland. Ireland only recently got EU aid. It's been independent since after WW1.

Taking slaves from Africa did not ruin the entire continent. There weren't the numbers for starters, and secondly the continent did not suddenly blossom when this "yoke" was lifted. It's still a mess.

~:smoking:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Taking slaves from Africa did not ruin the entire continent. Indeed.

Until well into the 19th century, there were European slaves in Africa. Although not of the same scale as Africans taken by Europeans to the Americas, some estimates put the number of Europeans enslaved to Africa during the period of Atlantic slave trade alone as high as 1.5 million.

For a millenium, Mediterannean Europeans lived in constant danger of being raided and enslaved by Africans.


In the SouthEast of Europe, the Ottoman Empire systematically enslaved Europeans. Constantinople's population usually consited of about a quarter slaves, many from the Balkans. Men for the army, women as sex slaves. This didn't end until the 20th century.

[The Stranger]

Indeed.

Until well into the 19th century, there were European slaves in north-Africa (aka the mediteranean). Although not of the same scale as Africans taken by Europeans to the Americas, some estimates put the number of Europeans enslaved to Africa during the period of Atlantic slave trade alone as high as 1.5 million.

For a millenium, Mediterannean Europeans lived in constant danger of being raided and enslaved by Africans.


In the SouthEast of Europe, the Ottoman Empire systematically enslaved Europeans. Constantinople's population usually consited of about a quarter slaves, many from the Balkans. Men for the army, women as sex slaves. This didn't end until the 20th century.

the traditional slave system was something quite different than the triangle-slave system. the latter was far more brutal and demeaning to people (as far as a slave system can get more demeaning than it is) and you are right, slave system didnt ruin the continent it did add to the problem, but the core came with the rush for colonies later on..

the problem i have with your argument is that you make it seem that africa is a mess because its full of africans, and thats a fallacy... basically the situation in africa is somewhat similar to medieval europe in its early stages. im sure it will clean up.

[Papewaio]

@Pape - West European racism is anti-Black and anti-Muslim. Only a fringe is anti-Semitic or anti- East Asians.
Roger Madsen is rather standard in that he looks down on Africa, but admires Asia.

Well that is alright then, because if it ain't aimed at me and my brood it's a-ok. :2thumbsup: NOT.

I'd still like to see Roger Madsen introduced to this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Two_lambs_rubber_ring_tail_docking.jpg

Because it ain't just for tails ya know.

[HoreTore]

Well that is alright then, because if it ain't aimed at me and my brood it's a-ok. :2thumbsup: NOT.

I'd still like to see Roger Madsen introduced to this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Two_lambs_rubber_ring_tail_docking.jpg

Because it ain't just for tails ya know.

Why would you make him horny? :inquisitive:

[Papewaio]

If you are a male lamb but not destined to become a Ram, you get your nuts docked in the same manner as the tail... makes breeding a might hard when your 'nads shrivel up and drop off...

[HoreTore]

If you are a male lamb but not destined to become a Ram, you get your nuts docked in the same manner as the tail... makes breeding a might hard when your 'nads shrivel up and drop off...

yes....I was referring to exposing Mr. Madsen to the rear ends of two lambs....

I won't take the consequences for what will happen next.

[rory_20_uk]

the problem i have with your argument is that you make it seem that africa is a mess because its full of africans, and thats a fallacy... basically the situation in africa is somewhat similar to medieval europe in its early stages. im sure it will clean up.

Medieval Europe didn't have the option of syphoning off money to Swiss banks which allows so many African leaders to pillage countries to a level that would even make King Leopold III blush. The "cream" of European society were predominantly tied to their country. Running meant risking being used as a pawn in power games. In Africa you get a few billion and always have the option of going elsewhere. I fail to be optimistic about cleaning up. The African Union appears more keen in buttressing each other up rather than anything else.

Africa is a mess because of Africans... As a postulate it is impossible to prove or disprove. It could be cultural, but strongly doubt genetic. I stick to Africa is a mess and the leaders still prefer to blame Europe for most problems.

~:smoking:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Well that is alright then, because if it ain't aimed at me and my brood it's a-ok. :2thumbsup: NOT.

I'd still like to see Roger Madsen introduced to this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Two_lambs_rubber_ring_tail_docking.jpgOi, just describing the nature of Europe's rightwing populism for ya. It is important that Madsen said 'don't go to these African half-monkeys, go to Asia instead'. It is not coincidental.
It also helps to identify him, to know who or what he is.
He wrote his comments publicly on Facebook, about a visit from Norwegian royalty. It is very public, and would not have happened if it wasn't ubiquitous, if his thoughts weren't shared by so many of his voters. Madsen wrote it almost as an off-hand, 'common sense' comment.
If Madsen had said, say, 'don't hang out with Jews', he would've expected a lot of flak, instead of being almost surprised by it. It would also mean he would lose a lot of voters, instead of being in a government office as a member of the country's second largest party.



Racism is a contentious subject, with very many different subtexts. For example, when is the last time we heard anybody complain about Japan's 'mono-etnic' policy? If Finland doesn't want to take its share of refugees, they are considered hopeless racists. If Japan doesn't, nobody cares because their racism isn't white. It is simply accepted, taken for granted that Japan should be mono-etnic. Whereas white preferring mono-etnicity are deemed racists. The hidden subtext here is a remnant, or even lingering, idea that whites are superior. Or, more often, that white western culture is the natural standard, all other cultures variants from this standard. That is why westerners in a single breath will demand monocultural Finland to become multicultural, lest they be terrible racists, but will simultaneously deem it intolerable if mono-cultural Khoisan society should be 'destroyed' by foreign influence.

[Papewaio]

Not angry with you. I am annoyed with Mr Madsen, but the world is full of idiots who prove themselves with every word they utter. As for Japan I don't get that annoyed, its not like knee high socked school girls have taken over the internet...:inquisitive:

Finland probably isn't the best choice of a mono-culture... after all at this festive time of year the awareness of Sami would have to be at the yearly high.

[Strike For The South]

It seems like Europe is going to the facists....again. When will you people learn politics is much less important than football?

[A Very Super Market]

It seems like Europe is going to the facists....again. When will you people learn politics is much less important than football?

Aye, take a page from the Croats.














Or the Brits.

[The Stranger]

Medieval Europe didn't have the option of syphoning off money to Swiss banks which allows so many African leaders to pillage countries to a level that would even make King Leopold III blush. The "cream" of European society were predominantly tied to their country. Running meant risking being used as a pawn in power games. In Africa you get a few billion and always have the option of going elsewhere. I fail to be optimistic about cleaning up. The African Union appears more keen in buttressing each other up rather than anything else.

no they did it to templar banks or other moneylenders... dont tell me they werent corrupt... at the sides the worth of money now and then is different, if you did the sums i doubt there would be a huge difference. so, in medieval countries nobles were all tied to each other, they could always find refuge in some other country and they did.


Africa is a mess because of Africans... As a postulate it is impossible to prove or disprove. It could be cultural, but strongly doubt genetic. I stick to Africa is a mess and the leaders still prefer to blame Europe for most problems.

in any other place/country/people/etc you would call the problem political, but because it involves africa and africans you wont say that.

well... they are to blame. simple fact. and so are the africans themself

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

no they did it to templar banks or other moneylenders... dont tell me they werent corrupt... at the sides the worth of money now and then is different, if you did the sums i doubt there would be a huge difference. so, in medieval countries nobles were all tied to each other, they could always find refuge in some other country and they did.



in any other place/country/people/etc you would call the problem political, but because it involves africa and africans you wont say that.

well... they are to blame. simple fact. and so are the africans themself

Well, the Knights didn't lend at interest, they couldn't, and the other money lenders were "only" Jews and not really secure because their own positions meant they couldn't be relied upon to hold your money for you; a bank isn't much good if a mob might come along and burn it.

Further, you completely ignore A: the Power of the Church in restraining the worst excesses of the Kings and B: the fact that most monarchs were of the same race as their vassals and saw themselves as Father Figures. What happened when a nation was invaded by another race can be seen in the economic collapse in England a generation after the Norman Conquest, when what had once been the most stable nation in Europe was brought to it's financial knees by the incompetance of it's overlords and the grasping of it's officials.

Early Medieval Europe was always about recovering the glory of Rome, of healing the damage done by your own ancestors.

Currently Africa is about blaming your former overloads for your current problems. Everywhere the Bitish went, they built an efficient Civil Service, only in Africa has this completely broken down. Look at South Africa, sliding towards chaos and ruin since the end of Apartied.

Something is very wrong in Africa, and it isn't colonialism or current Western interference.

[Prussian to the Iron]

I think it was tasteless thing to say as man with such an influence.
But in general, I think its only racist if the ones being offended took it seriously.

How will most africans (Central and South) even know about it?


sorry, had to take it.


but really, i think this is racist. id put him on suspension from his job, and bring him back in a few months to see if he's re-thought his views on africa.

[HoreTore]

How will most africans (Central and South) even know about it?

I don't know.... Perhaps if a bunch of africans, you know.... Lived here.... In this country... As immigrants...

Sure glad they don't though!