The Desire To Protect "Culture"

[Strike For The South]

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people but most of you are smart enough to wrap up your child like xenophobic fears in enough flowerly prose to deflect such an elementary diagnosis

Get over yourself

Granted this goes both ways

Something to think about

[HoreTore]

Agreed completely.

Also, the desire to protect a culture shows a complete misunderstanding of what culture is. Culture isn't static or final, it is constantly changing. In 100 years the culture here will be completely different, but it will still be our culture, just like the culture in 1911 was completely, but still our culture.

Trying to preserve it will only lead to stagnation and eventual ruin. Everyone who has tried have gone under, while those society who have been open has seen innovation and growth.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people but most of you are smart enough to wrap up your child like xenophobic fears in enough flowerly prose to deflect such an elementary diagnosis

Get over yourself

Granted this goes both ways

Something to think about

Get off your high horse.

There is no reason why any people should accept the influx of millions of outlanders who do not share their values, beliefs or even language. The current movements of people into Europe are the greatest since the collapse of the Roman Empire, both in numbers and also (probably) proportionally.

Since we don't need more people the incomers are not welcome if they want to cause social problems as well as stressing our public services

[PanzerJaeger]

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people but most of you are smart enough to wrap up your child like xenophobic fears in enough flowerly prose to deflect such an elementary diagnosis

Get over yourself

Granted this goes both ways

Something to think about

Would you rather live in a Western culture or an Islamic one? Would you rather live in America or Mexico? Culture is worth preserving, especially if the alternative is far worse.

[Centurion1]

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people but most of you are smart enough to wrap up your child like xenophobic fears in enough flowerly prose to deflect such an elementary diagnosis

Get over yourself

Granted this goes both ways

Something to think about

as soon as you get over yourself

[Subotan]

One wonders what the reaction to this thread would have been if instead of asking whether culture should be defended, the contributions immigrants have made to modern European culture had been celebrated and applauded. I would imagine that the importance of "culture" would have been ridiculed and sneered at, as opposed to the resolute defence it has received in this thread.

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy
I personally think it's Chinese Ultra-Nationalism.

Since we don't need more people the incomers are not welcome if they want to cause social problems as well as stressing our public services
Yes we do, as we're not having enough babies. And I thought us Europeans were meant to be good at sex.

Would you rather live in a Western culture or an Islamic one? Would you rather live in America or Mexico? Culture is worth preserving, especially if the alternative is far worse.
False equivalence, as both of the latter have lower living standards and are less democratic than mine.

[Rhyfelwyr]

The OP should not treat culture and political systems as being distinct. The fact is that liberal democracy is a product of western culture. When it is exported to other parts of the world, it always seems to export western culture along with it.


Also, the desire to protect a culture shows a complete misunderstanding of what culture is. Culture isn't static or final, it is constantly changing. In 100 years the culture here will be completely different, but it will still be our culture, just like the culture in 1911 was completely, but still our culture..

Who do this "our" include/exclude?

[Louis VI the Fat]

I've got nothing against culture. Some of my best friends are cultured men.


Yes we do, as we're not having enough babies.But why should a population grow for all eternity? Or stay at the exact amount it is now?

I say let Europe lose half its population, or three quarters. This will be far more sustainable. East Asian populations are dropping too. Nobody is contemplating replacing the shrinking population of Japan with New Guineans.

[Strike For The South]

Would you rather live in a Western culture or an Islamic one? Would you rather live in America or Mexico? Culture is worth preserving, especially if the alternative is far worse.

Becuase these immagrants wont assimalate

Just like the Irish,Germans,Italians, Poles, Jews ECETERA ECETERA

You're also delusional if you think the culture of Mexico and America are seperated by anything but language

[Louis VI the Fat]

You're also delusional if you think the culture of Mexico and America are seperated by anything but languageLeft southern Texas much?

Oregon, Ohio, Massachussets - these are not Yucatan. :yes:

There is a process of acculturation in the US, notably in the Southwest, where the difference between Hispanics and others is fading. Even outside the contact epicentre this is noticable. Latin America is starting to resemble North America at an even faster pace than the US is becoming hispanicised.

Sometimes I see videos on the web or on the news about some six lane highway, white-coloured SUVs, a large gas station, drive-thru restaurant, and I would've sworn it it was the US, and it turns out to be Colombia, or Brazil. Even the people look similar, and I don't just mean ethnically. Same short hair, same semi-baggy clothes, same body types - those typically American half-fit, half-overweight huge bodies.

I guess the same thing is going on in Europe. I went to Marseille some time ago and I would've sworn I was in Marrakech.

[PanzerJaeger]

Becuase these immagrants wont assimalate

Just like the Irish,Germans,Italians, Poles, Jews ECETERA ECETERA

You've listed several different groups of Europeans migrating into a European-structured country. And the larger groups did indeed change the fabric of the nation, some for the better and some for the worse. Say what you will, but WASP culture turned this backwater into a superpower and delivered to it unheard of levels of wealth and prosperity, and its dissolution has largely underpinned our current failings. :shrug:


You're also delusional if you think the culture of Mexico and America are seperated by anything but language

I think you're so enamored with your own self righteousness that you've lost touch with reality.

Culture is variable across peoples and nations, and not every culture is equal. Humanity has been so traumatized by the wars and genocides of the 20th century that it has become politically correct to assume equality not only in race, but in every aspect of humanity. While noble on an individual level, when this assumption of equality is then extrapolated to nations and culture, it becomes highly dangerous.

There are reasons why Mexico is different than the United States, just as there are reasons why Spain is different than Germany and Saudi Arabia is different than France. Those reasons are universally underpinned by cultural dimensions.

Have you ever heard of Geert Hofstede?

[HoreTore]

The OP should not treat culture and political systems as being distinct. The fact is that liberal democracy is a product of western culture. When it is exported to other parts of the world, it always seems to export western culture along with it.

Take a look at India.


Who do this "our" include/exclude?

It doesn't exclude anyone, and it includes everyone who lives here.

[Andres]

Get off your high horse.

There is no reason why any people should accept the influx of millions of outlanders who do not share their values, beliefs or even language. The current movements of people into Europe are the greatest since the collapse of the Roman Empire, both in numbers and also (probably) proportionally.

Since we don't need more people the incomers are not welcome if they want to cause social problems as well as stressing our public services

Indeed.

The problem is not that Europe is not hospitable enough, the problem is that we've been way too hospitable for decades and are now feeling the backlash of this.

Holding the doors wide open for years and throwing money at people without really expecting anything in return, turned out to be a moronic idea. Even those who called the people pointing such a no-brainer out "racists" no longer than 15 years ago, now see and understand that (but most won't admit that they carry a huge part of the blame).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Yes we do, as we're not having enough babies. And I thought us Europeans were meant to be good at sex.

We are overcrowded and have too many people for too few jobs. The state needs to be restructed and the retirement age needs to rise, we don't need more babies.

Strike should try getting off his high horse.

[Andres]

But why should a population grow for all eternity? Or stay at the exact amount it is now?

I say let Europe lose half its population, or three quarters. This will be far more sustainable. East Asian populations are dropping too. Nobody is contemplating replacing the shrinking population of Japan with New Guineans.

Overpopulation and the graying of our population are the real threats for Europe. The fact that previous generations of politicians wasted the tax money of my parents instead of saving some, makes these problems potential disasters. Looking at our current generations of politicians, it has all the looks that these problems will indeed turn out disastrous for us. Legions of uneducated immigrants with no skills won't be the solution; in fact they might become the catalyst to set the disasters in motion.

[Furunculus]

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people but most of you are smart enough to wrap up your child like xenophobic fears in enough flowerly prose to deflect such an elementary diagnosis

Get over yourself

Yes and no. As Horetore notes culture is not a static thing and is in fact constantly evolving, however, what culture is in fact from the point of view of society is a bell-curve where the majority of people have an expectation that society won't act in a manner antagonistic to their core values.

Where there is a mistake is where you fixate on static features of society in its current form and try to protect them, such as banning Burkas.

Society is a battle for ideas and if you don't have confidence that a healthy society will prevail then its a lost cause regardless of artificial measures put in place.

There is nothing wrong with limiting the influx of people from different cultures in order that the bell-curve does not become too shallow, for that leads to social strife and a reduction in cohesion, regardless of how brown they are.

So no, I won't get over myself.

[Incongruous]

Take a look at India.

I look at India and I see a nation obsessed with cricket, film stars and IT. When one goes the most modern parts of Bombay, it's hard to distinguish between western and indian forms of pop culture, apart from the skin tones, India is fast becoming Westernised. As Rhyf said, political structure and culture are not properly seperable.

Europe is under no obligation to take in vast numbers of immigrants who's arrival the native population was never given a just say in, if it went to vote, immigration would plummet, as is only right. When I'm in England I want to be in England, not some cosmopolitan's lala land experiment gone wrong.

[HoreTore]

We never voted for it? That's high up on the "worst lies ever"-list.

We hsve voted every fourth year for the last century. We have consistantly voted in parties who support immigration. Of course we have voted in favour of the immigration policies we have. It's not like its a party with low turnout who have forced their will on the rest, all the biggest parties in Europe support immigration.

There ism however, a very vocal minority. But that doesn't change the fact that the majority of thte european populatiln has voted consistantly in favour of mass immigration.

[Andres]

We never voted for it? That's high up on the "worst lies ever"-list.

We hsve voted every fourth year for the last century. We have consistantly voted in parties who support immigration. Of course we have voted in favour of the immigration policies we have. It's not like its a party with low turnout who have forced their will on the rest, all the biggest parties in Europe support immigration.

There ism however, a very vocal minority. But that doesn't change the fact that the majority of thte european populatiln has voted consistantly in favour of mass immigration.

The problem is, there has been a very long period where the choice was: "uncontrolled mass immigration" and "your local extreme-right nutters"; because, at least in my country, everything that resembled something that looked like saying that there may be some truth in what the extreme right-wingers are saying, was deemed "racist" by the "politically correct" or the "democratic parties". There has been no middle-ground on this issue for ages.

Which mean that as a party you either supported moronic mass immigration with no control whatsoever or you were put in the racist camp.

Of course, most people won't vote for the extreme right and don't want to be associated with racist scum; it's only when a substantial part of the population, being sick and tired of having been ignored on this issue, started to vote the extreme right out of sheer desperation and frustration, that the more sane parties started to think about maybe doing something that resembles a bit of control on the immigration and, oh no, perhaps expecting immigrants to do something in return for the € that are thrown into their direction.

Reap what you sow. The key is now not to fall into the opposite extreme of "you're all welcome, here's a house or a hotel room and a paycheck. Feel free to invite your 8 brothers and sisters and all their children as well, we'll gladly pay. Ignore the racists who expect you to learn the local language and get a job. They're idiots", which is the credo plenty of mostly francophone political parties over here are still following, together with the Flemish nepotist caviar socialists.

[Fragony]

Is the biggest threat to Western Style Democracy

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people but most of you are smart enough to wrap up your child like xenophobic fears in enough flowerly prose to deflect such an elementary diagnosis

Get over yourself

Granted this goes both ways

Something to think about


Same assumptions, same answer. Has nothing to do with brown people. What makes you think it is? Now THAT is really something to think about

[Subotan]

But why should a population grow for all eternity? Or stay at the exact amount it is now?

I say let Europe lose half its population, or three quarters. This will be far more sustainable. East Asian populations are dropping too. Nobody is contemplating replacing the shrinking population of Japan with New Guineans.
Well that's because both Japanese and Korean society are rather racist. Besides, there are calls for the Japanese to accept more immigrants, but it's a third rail subject in Japanese politics.


The problem is not that Europe is not hospitable enough, the problem is that we've been way too hospitable for decades and are now feeling the backlash of this.
And yet America has been extremely hospitable to immigrants for decades, including Muslims, and has seen great benefits come from this. The problem with the way Europe treated and treats immigrants is through our treatment of immigrants as Gastarbeiter, expecting them to eventually piss off back to their original country, as opposed to new citizens.


We are overcrowded and have too many people for too few jobs
Overcrowding is such a relative term. What seems crowded today isn't at all by Singaporean standards, and likely won't be either in 50 years or so. I also fail to see how reducing the labour supply is going to create more jobs for our workforce.


The state needs to be restructed and the retirement age needs to rise, we don't need more babies.
But people want to have their cakes and eat them as well. They don't want to retire later, or want to have more babies, and yet they want economic growth and higher living standards. The only way that's going to happen is through an expansion of the labour supply, which needs immigrants.

[rory_20_uk]

Granted I'm convinced most of you just don't like brown people

I Married a Trindadian. My son is therefore mixed race.

She views herself as English, and our son is English. The colour of our skin is not the issue.

~:smoking:

[Strike For The South]

You've listed several different groups of Europeans migrating into a European-structured country. And the larger groups did indeed change the fabric of the nation, some for the better and some for the worse. Say what you will, but WASP culture turned this backwater into a superpower and delivered to it unheard of levels of wealth and prosperity, and its dissolution has largely underpinned our current failings. :shrug:

The same WASPS whom spent us into debt and got us into wars of empire, clearly they know what there doing.


I think you're so enamored with your own self righteousness that you've lost touch with reality.
Thank you


Culture is variable across peoples and nations, and not every culture is equal. Humanity has been so traumatized by the wars and genocides of the 20th century that it has become politically correct to assume equality not only in race, but in every aspect of humanity. While noble on an individual level, when this assumption of equality is then extrapolated to nations and culture, it becomes highly dangerous.

There are reasons why Mexico is different than the United States, just as there are reasons why Spain is different than Germany and Saudi Arabia is different than France. Those reasons are universally underpinned by cultural dimensions.

MOst of these differences can be traced back to money, besides I know the sons and daughters of these Mexicans immagrants will become more Americanized, like all the others. Sure they will change us a bit but thats always how these things work


Have you ever heard of Geert Hofstede?

No but a quick wiki search does not impress me, culture shock from Holland to England? Really?



Left southern Texas much?

Oregon, Ohio, Massachussets - these are not Yucatan. :yes:

There is a process of acculturation in the US, notably in the Southwest, where the difference between Hispanics and others is fading. Even outside the contact epicentre this is noticable. Latin America is starting to resemble North America at an even faster pace than the US is becoming hispanicised.

Sometimes I see videos on the web or on the news about some six lane highway, white-coloured SUVs, a large gas station, drive-thru restaurant, and I would've sworn it it was the US, and it turns out to be Colombia, or Brazil. Even the people look similar, and I don't just mean ethnically. Same short hair, same semi-baggy clothes, same body types - those typically American half-fit, half-overweight huge bodies.

I guess the same thing is going on in Europe. I went to Marseille some time ago and I would've sworn I was in Marrakech.


:sad:

[Furunculus]

I Married a Trindadian. My son is therefore mixed race.

She views herself as English, and our son is English. The colour of our skin is not the issue.

~:smoking:

exactly.

even the nationalists here, myself included, tend to be civic nationalists.

it doesn't matter what colour a persons skin is, all that I care about is that they immigrants consider themselves British and attempt to comply with the public mores of wider society.

strike in his own topic, is once again conflating race with culture.

[gaelic cowboy]

it doesn't matter what colour a persons skin is, all that I care about is that they immigrants consider themselves British and attempt to comply with the public mores of wider society.



The need not consider themselves British if they merely comply with public mores and get on with there own thing then society will get over it.

[Tellos Athenaios]

The need not consider themselves British if they merely comply with public mores and get on with there own thing then society will get over it.

Precisely. For me it is "I don't require you to feel any attachment to some artificial identity, all I ask is that you behave yourself and you are welcome to seek your fortunes here".

[Louis VI the Fat]

It used to be that Europe subdued Africa. Not anymore. The roles have been reversed. The Dark Continent is now swamping Europe, destroying our societies.

I TOLD YOU SO


Europe's future lies under Africa, scientists suggest

The continents are converging; and for many millions of years, the northern edge of the African tectonic plate has descended under Europe.
But this process has stalled; and at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) meeting last week, scientists said we may be seeing Europe taking a turn.
If they are correct, this would signal the start of a new subduction zone - a rare event, scientifically fascinating.

Beneath the Mediterranean Sea, the cold, dense rock at the extreme north of the African plate has virtually all sunk under the Eurasian plate on which Europe sits.
But the African landmass is too light to follow suit and descend.

"Africa won't sink, but Africa and Europe continue to move together; so where is this taken up?" asked Rinus Wortel from the University of Utrecht.
"It looks possible that on the appropriate timescale, we are witnessing the beginning of subduction of Europe under Africa," he told BBC News.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13015252

[Furunculus]

The need not consider themselves British if they merely comply with public mores and get on with there own thing then society will get over it.

granted, my objection principally lies with the obverse, immigrants who actively reject a british identity, as its both frankly ungrateful and an indicator of an unwillingness to conform.

not the kind of people I would be overjoyed to welcome to our shores.


It used to be that Europe subdued Africa. Not anymore. The roles have been reversed. The Dark Continent is now swamping Europe, destroying our societies.

I TOLD YOU SO

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13015252

is that an obscure metaphor for gaddafi unleashing immigrants into the schengen area with the connivance of italy? :p

[Shibumi]

I supported immigration as long as we had an assimilation policy, and as long as we had immigration and not mass-immigration.

I think Andres is spot on, and PJ touched the topic too. Hitler and the brown-shirts very much did the western world a disservice (obvious reasons aside), as anything remotely close to their beliefs will immediately be tagged as racist/nazi/fascist.

I have said this before on this forum, but I will repeat myself. What has made the winds change politically as of late is (IMHO) the fact that we have a huge amount of people who simply can not get a job, while the bleeding-hearts left is still trying to defend the immigration policy with "we need need more people to work". No, we do not need illiterate sheep herders from Afghanistan, to think they will pay for my pension is ludicrous. On the contrary, they drain the national economy. You will not find a single economist these days who say immigration is profitable.

The immigration has also had a cold effect on the national atmosphere at large. Paying taxes did not use to be a problem, as it went to people who needed it. We were all raised pretty much the same way, we had the same beliefs, same values, same upbringing. Of course we should support those unfortunate. But money no longer go to the unfortunate. The system that was created to support a mother who had lost her husband now is used to milk cash from the state. I would happily help a woman who by no choice of her own is stuck having to support her kids. I am however less thrilled about supporting some African woman with a machine gun uterus, getting 8 kids who none of them pass elementary school, but instead are out on the streets vandalizing, having a "divorced" dad who lies around all day chewing khat between conceptions. "Divorced" in the sense of the law, not religion(!?).

We have schools in the ghettos where 9/10 kids do not finish elementary school with qualified grades - clearly we are succeeding with the second generation immigrants, and they will be an absolute hoot on the work market.

And no, of course all immigrants are not like that. But enough to start having an impact at society at large.

[HoreTore]

No economists agree that immigration is good? What? That's why the employers union here crave even more immigration...?

[gaelic cowboy]

No economists agree that immigration is good? What? That's why the employers union here crave even more immigration...?

Gotta get those wages down so the shareholders are happy so they can move the company to China

[Shibumi]

No economists agree that immigration is good? What? That's why the employers union here crave even more immigration...?

I believe I said economists, not delusional leftist union people.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No economists agree that immigration is good? What? That's why the employers union here crave even more immigration...?

Because employers like wages in the gutter.

A better question is why a so-called Socialist is quoting a union of employers.

[gaelic cowboy]

I believe I said economists, not delusional leftist union people.

Economists think immigration is a good thing, they would see it as driving down real wages therefore increasing company profits, it does not matter if the wages are skilled or unskilled they would all go down due to lower costs of living driven by cheaper service wages.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I believe I said economists, not delusional leftist union people.

Delusional rightist people more like... immigration gives the fat cats cheaper labour so the natives can't get a job.

[Shibumi]

Sorry, I meant national economists. Should have specified that.

[Incongruous]

We never voted for it? That's high up on the "worst lies ever"-list.

We hsve voted every fourth year for the last century. We have consistantly voted in parties who support immigration. Of course we have voted in favour of the immigration policies we have. It's not like its a party with low turnout who have forced their will on the rest, all the biggest parties in Europe support immigration.

There ism however, a very vocal minority. But that doesn't change the fact that the majority of thte european population has voted consistantly in favour of mass immigration.

Nice try, but no cigar, we have never had a vote on mass immigration and the issue has become (at least until recently) rather tasteless due to the media's obsession with the extremist views of both it's proponents and destractors, the views of most of the populace go unheard by the state and cowed by an intillectualism which seeks to undermine all opposition to it by constructing the apparatus of cultural guilt and moralism. Your eqation of a person voting Tory with being pro-immigration is incorrect, or for that matter voting labour with being pro-immigration (many of the working class are anti-immigration), I voted Tory because I abhor the champagne socilism of Labour more than washed down Thatcherism. Whatever you may think of the justification, it in no way implies I am pro-immigration.

This is going to be an issue of great importance very soon in European political culture (indeed it may very well already be), the realisation that the silence (relatively) of the major parties on the issue of immigration has created and will continue to create an undercurrent in society verging upon xenophobia and racism (the proper racism whish we no longer really get in the West, I'm talking Hindustani type racism y'know the BJP and Co.), then it will no longer be an undercurrent but a viable and popular be cultural alternative to the current open minded society we currently enjoy, and then there will be trouble, perhaps the type involving mass racist violence and the destruction (or hiatus) of political and civil order.

Man is very much an animal, and within his society he occupies a "niche" or societal role, when a foriegn group then is allowed to enter into his society and compete with him for that niche animal incticnts will come to the fore, and foreign cultural bodies unless they possess either the backing of those whom rule society or themselves possess that power, will be acted against, to the native multiculturalism or mass immigration can be viewed as a dismembered limb of imperialism to the effect that they will inevitibaly justify violence as being mora;l;y justified and ethically correct. One need only look at how civilians and other innocents are targeted in the violence commited by those who believe themselves to be striving for some form of liberation.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I agree with those that wish to protect European culture, I disagree with those that extend that philosophy to American culture.

[Furunculus]

the realisation that the silence (relatively) of the major parties on the issue of immigration has created and will continue to create an undercurrent in society verging upon xenophobia and racism (the proper racism whish we no longer really get in the West
THIS!

what is sickeningly funny is that it is the very people who have supported multi-culturalism along with high net-immigration that are DIRECTLY responsible for the growing intolerance in British society.

what is worse is that they exhibit ZERO self-awareness and no ability to empathise, traits that would allow them to appreciate that they are not typical, and that their actions are antithetical to a large part of British society.

if these idiots are truly comitted to seeing greater tolerance of ethnic minorities, and a reduced racism at the extreme margins of politics, then they need to IMMEDIATELY quite their cretinous harping about diversity and support a reduction in immigration along with a renewed emphasis in assimilation.

[Fragony]

No economists agree that immigration is good? What? That's why the employers union here crave even more immigration...?

The leftist church that's why. Multiculturalism is a religion that accepts no doubt, saying anything else means excommunication.

[HoreTore]

The leftist church that's why. Multiculturalism is a religion that accepts no doubt, saying anything else means excommunication.

So.....

Hardline capitalists are now part of the leftist church too....?

[Fragony]

So.....

Hardline capitalists are now part of the leftist church too....?

I thought you said unions.... ?

[Skullheadhq]

Culture is dead already, nothing immigrants can do to kill it.

[HoreTore]

I thought you said unions.... ?

Employers union, the NHO (http://www.nho.no/english/).

In short, the opponent of the labour unions.

[Shibumi]

They probably want cheap labour.

But HoreTore, I said economists - not exployer union. I later specified national economists (I assumed people understood that first time around though).

So you are using apples to compare oranges.

[HoreTore]

Is there anything left that isn't a conspiracy to screw over the "common man"?

[Subotan]

Culture is dead already, nothing immigrants can do to kill it.
lol wut

[Fragony]

Employers union, the NHO (http://www.nho.no/english/).

In short, the opponent of the labour unions.

That's the trading union, there is no employers union it doesn't exist. Cheap labour, good for them not for the economy. They get the few that get up before 12 and you get to feed the rest. A very conservative estimation is that multiculture has costed us 200.000.000.000 euro so far, a drain of 8.000.000.000 a year.

[HoreTore]

That's the trading union, there is no employers union it doesn't exist.

Ah, so that's why they call themselves "employers union"....? ("arbeidsgiverforening" in norwegian)

Anyway. I've only ever seen one comprehensive study on whether immigration adds more than it costs or not. And that study showed it on the whole added more than it costs. No, that's far from enough to draw conclusions, but drawing the conclusion that it costs more than it adds lacks even more basis in reality, and remains based solely on subjective feelings and opinions, not facts.

[Fragony]

Ah, so that's why they call themselves "employers union"....? ("arbeidsgiverforening" in norwegian)

Anyway. I've only ever seen one comprehensive study on whether immigration adds more than it costs or not. And that study showed it on the whole added more than it costs. No, that's far from enough to draw conclusions, but drawing the conclusion that it costs more than it adds lacks even more basis in reality, and remains based solely on subjective feelings and opinions, not facts.

They call themselves the employers association.

And we do do these studies here, and no there is no benefit it are billions that are leeched, 8 billion a year in fact. Gone. 8.000.000.000/15.000.000= WAY too much as it isn't exactly an enrichment as people from 100% white neighbourhoods demand you to know it is. If you don't know there is only one culture and it's multi watch your back

If a fellow Dutchie wants to correct me here's the place to do it

[insert total bull here]

[HoreTore]

100% white? The two classes I teach both have around 50% immigrants, and live in the kebab-capitol of Norway. In fact, a study that was done a few years ago(that I don't have atm, but I have referenced it here before), has shown that the parts of the country with the fewest immigrants are most hostile to immigraton, while the places with the most immigrants are the most positive. This fits nicely with the pro-immigration parties(Left and Socialist Left) having most of their support in urban areas(where most immigrants are found), and the right wingers(progress party) having lots of support in rural areas(where you won't find many immigrants).

And no benefit? Bah, they work and pay taxes, that is the benefit. What the only study I have ever seen found, was that immigrants contributed more in taxes than they recieved in benefits. Less than the rest of the population, sure, but still more than we spend on them.

[Tellos Athenaios]

They call themselves the employers association.

And we do do these studies here, and no there is no benefit it are billions that are leeched, 8 billion a year in fact.
I don't know where you get that figure from. The most an admittedly quick Google yields is a much more complex picture. An estimate by Pieter Lakeman of 5.9bn a year spent (but what about the money brought back in through tax revenues on stuff them immigrants buy for instance). OTOH there is apparently a 2003 study which claims a net loss of 43K over the lifetime of an immigrant. Non native Dutch make up about 20% of the population, so assuming this is what the figure refers to and applying a generous life time expectancy of about 74 years we get for a generous population estimate of 17M: 0.20 * (€43*10^3*17*10^6)/ 74 = €2.0*10^9 = €2.0bn per year. Or about one Icesave. ~;)

[Andres]

In fact, a study that was done a few years ago(that I don't have atm, but I have referenced it here before), has shown that the parts of the country with the fewest immigrants are most hostile to immigraton, while the places with the most immigrants are the most positive.



Obviously, a town where 50 % of the people are immigrants, will be more positive towards immigrants than a town where there are only 10 %...

Was it really necessary to waste money on a study to learn that?

[HoreTore]

Obviously, a town where 50 % of the people are immigrants, will be more positive towards immigrants than a town where there are only 10 %...

Was it really necessary to waste money on a study to learn that?

This was among the non-immigrant population, if that's what you're after.

[Fragony]

I don't know where you get that figure from. The most an admittedly quick Google yields is a much more complex picture. An estimate by Pieter Lakeman of 5.9bn a year spent (but what about the money brought back in through tax revenues on stuff them immigrants buy for instance). OTOH there is apparently a 2003 study which claims a net loss of 43K over the lifetime of an immigrant. Non native Dutch make up about 20% of the population, so assuming this is what the figure refers to and applying a generous life time expectancy of about 74 years we get for a generous population estimate of 17M: 0.20 * (€43*10^3*17*10^6)/ 74 = €2.0*10^9 = €2.0bn per year. Or about one Icesave. ~;)

Comes from Nyfer, make it 7.200.000.000 a year by the way, 8 comes from Elsevier

[Incongruous]

Wow, so immigrants make monet and pay taxes, so do the natives, not really something I see as positive.

[Fragony]

Wow, so immigrants make monet and pay taxes, so do the natives, not really something I see as positive.

Read. Immigrants cost us 7.200.000.000 a year, so there is no benefit

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Cameron says we need to clow immagration http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13072509

Cable says this risks "inflaming extremism"

Isn't that the point? We are fostering a hostile group within our own borders.

[Furunculus]

Cameron says we need to clow immagration http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13072509

Cable says this risks "inflaming extremism"

Cable is as usual utterly ***-backwards on the matter.

HE is the reason why extremism is being 'flamed'


what is sickeningly funny is that it is the very people who have supported multi-culturalism along with high net-immigration that are DIRECTLY responsible for the growing intolerance in British society.

what is worse is that they exhibit ZERO self-awareness and no ability to empathise, traits that would allow them to appreciate that they are not typical, and that their actions are antithetical to a large part of British society.

if these idiots are truly comitted to seeing greater tolerance of ethnic minorities, and a reduced racism at the extreme margins of politics, then they need to IMMEDIATELY quite their cretinous harping about diversity and support a reduction in immigration along with a renewed emphasis in assimilation.

[Fragony]

Cable says this risks "inflaming extremism"


Nothing wrong with inflaming extremists as long as there's gassoline involved. Or did he mean something else.

[Leet Eriksson]

apparently 5% of france can force the rest of the populace into a religious theocracy, I learn new things everyday.

[HoreTore]

I woke up this morning, put on my american clothes (jeans) and had my first cup of Indonesian coffee(Java). Then I read an american newspaper(WSJ) on my american designed iPad. I then drove to a lecture in my german car(Opel), listening to the radio, who played a song by the norwegian band Big Bang, who plays an american genre(rock) and sings in english. When I arrived, I had my breakfast, which was a piece of meat between to slices of bread, which is a german meal. During the lecture, we debated three theorists. One french(piaget), one american(dewey) and one russian(vygotskij). After that, I watched an american sitcom (Seinfeld). And now I'm writing in english on an international forum.

Yes, the norwegian culture is under pressure from outside forces. But it's not from the arab world, and it aint bad at all.

[Louis VI the Fat]

apparently 5% of france can force the rest of the populace into a religious theocracyNo, no, they can't.

And we must do everything we can to ensure it stays that way. :yes:

[Louis VI the Fat]

I woke up this morning, put on my american clothes (jeans) and had my first cup of Indonesian coffee(Java). Then I read an american newspaper(WSJ) on my american designed iPad. I then drove to a lecture in my german car(Opel), listening to the radio, who played a song by the norwegian band Big Bang, who plays an american genre(rock) and sings in english. When I arrived, I had my breakfast, which was a piece of meat between to slices of bread, which is a german meal. During the lecture, we debated three theorists. One french(piaget), one american(dewey) and one russian(vygotskij). After that, I watched an american sitcom (Seinfeld). And now I'm writing in english on an international forum.

Yes, the norwegian culture is under pressure from outside forces. But it's not from the arab world, and it aint bad at all.Wait...you can learn about Piaget without having a million Frenchies spout their graffitti over your cities? And you can drink Indonesian coffee and drive a German car without having to import a million immigrants from each?

Send it to the multiculturalists! They must know this!

[HoreTore]

Wait...you can learn about Piaget without having a million Frenchies spout their graffitti over your cities? And you can drink Indonesian coffee and drive a German car without having to import a million immigrants from each?

Send it to the multiculturalists! They must know this!

Graffiti? You mean the practice that was exported from the hiphop subculture in New York?

I wouldn't mind it much if a million new yorkers moved here.

[Leet Eriksson]

I woke up this morning, put on my american clothes (jeans) and had my first cup of Indonesian coffee(Java). Then I read an american newspaper(WSJ) on my american designed iPad. I then drove to a lecture in my german car(Opel), listening to the radio, who played a song by the norwegian band Big Bang, who plays an american genre(rock) and sings in english. When I arrived, I had my breakfast, which was a piece of meat between to slices of bread, which is a german meal. During the lecture, we debated three theorists. One french(piaget), one american(dewey) and one russian(vygotskij). After that, I watched an american sitcom (Seinfeld). And now I'm writing in english on an international forum.

Yes, the norwegian culture is under pressure from outside forces. But it's not from the arab world, and it aint bad at all.

No you don't understand, the immigrant hordes are at the gates! the only solution is to marginalize them even further and implement moronic measures to further alienate them.

[HoreTore]

No you don't understand, the immigrant hordes are at the gates! the only solution is to marginalize them even further and implement moronic measures to further alienate them.

One thing the right wingers never want to talk about, is that they said the same thing 20 years ago about east asians(primarily vietnamese).

It didn't happen then, it won't happen now. What problems we have now will be solved, just like we solved the problems with the vietnamese, who as a group now beats ethnic norwegians when it comes to things like employment and education.

[Skullheadhq]

lol wut

Ever watched TV? Listened to today's music? Ate any 'modern' dishes? Read any of today's books? It's safe to say culture is dead, only nobody noticed it was.

[PanzerJaeger]

^:laugh4: @ your new sig...

[Strike For The South]

I woke up this morning, put on my american clothes (jeans) and had my first cup of Indonesian coffee(Java). Then I read an american newspaper(WSJ) on my american designed iPad. I then drove to a lecture in my german car(Opel), listening to the radio, who played a song by the norwegian band Big Bang, who plays an american genre(rock) and sings in english. When I arrived, I had my breakfast, which was a piece of meat between to slices of bread, which is a german meal. During the lecture, we debated three theorists. One french(piaget), one american(dewey) and one russian(vygotskij). After that, I watched an american sitcom (Seinfeld). And now I'm writing in english on an international forum.

Yes, the norwegian culture is under pressure from outside forces. But it's not from the arab world, and it aint bad at all.

I remember my first meme

[Noncommunist]

Ever watched TV? Listened to today's music? Ate any 'modern' dishes? Read any of today's books? It's safe to say culture is dead, only nobody noticed it was.

What's the difference between today's music and music from any other time period, or food, or TV, or books?

[Skullheadhq]

What's the difference between today's music and music from any other time period, or food, or TV, or books?
The fact that it's all trash now, never listened to what's on the radio then?


^:laugh4: @ your new sig...

The mods hated it and slapped it with a warning, I thought it was funny as well, I got three mod pm's within the hour about it, nobody would have cared if it was a picture of France or Belgium, other countries attacked in the blitzkrieg, pretty childish it is. Anyway, this might be more something for the watchtower.

[Louis VI the Fat]

It is the British wot done it!



Thursday 14 April 2011 by Formelia Alberthine
Mass Migration only ruined by British society, insist immigrants



British society is the only thing ruining what is an otherwise perfectly pleasant place to come and take the blame for a country’s social and economic struggles, according to immigrants polled by pressure group, Liberty.

The poll was commissioned in the wake of Prime Minister David Cameron’s claim that immigrants systematically refuse to congregate at the cluttered bosom of Mother Britannia with their steadfast refusal to learn enough English to realise just how much their neighbours hate them.
A thousand immigrants, supposedly contributing to the erosion of British pastimes such as fish and chips by the seaside and urinating in the street, were asked what was the worst thing about living in Britain with all answering ‘British society’.

Immigrant Rajesh Sharma explained, “You know, we get that when we are given our three bed room semi-detached house and weekly citizen eclipsing allowances, it’s not really ‘free’.”
“Life among the British society is the debt that we pay.”
“We must be prepared for the most horrendous abuse from the nation when everything goes tits up on the job front, and shoulder the blame that would otherwise be directed at the government.”
“They come knocking at our doors instead saying oh ‘you take our jobs, you take our jobs,’ waving sticks and wanting to kill us.”
“But that’s not true. We don’t take your jobs, we just take the benefits paid for by taxes taken from you. That’s very different.”


Immigration debate

Liberty’s Shami Chakrabarti said the prime minister’s comments showed a misappropriation of accountability akin to blaming a family of squirrels for nibbling on the nuts that had been left out for them the night before.
She said, “It’s outrageous. He says that he wants immigrants to be more ‘British’ when they come here.”
“Yet he gets all angry when they arrive and abuse the benefits system – I mean, what could be more British than that?”


http://newsthump.com/2011/04/14/mass-migration-only-ruined-by-british-society-insist-immigrants/

[HoreTore]

:laugh4:

[Fragony]

One thing the right wingers never want to talk about, is that they said the same thing 20 years ago about east asians(primarily vietnamese).

It didn't happen then, it won't happen now. What problems we have now will be solved

Probably, over here it's all pretty cozy really Dutch muslims rock, in Belgium and France it's absolutely grim though. Mind you, what is true now was also true 20 years ago, only on a different scale

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I woke up this morning, put on my american clothes (jeans) and had my first cup of Indonesian coffee(Java). Then I read an american newspaper(WSJ) on my american designed iPad. I then drove to a lecture in my german car(Opel), listening to the radio, who played a song by the norwegian band Big Bang, who plays an american genre(rock) and sings in english. When I arrived, I had my breakfast, which was a piece of meat between to slices of bread, which is a german meal. During the lecture, we debated three theorists. One french(piaget), one american(dewey) and one russian(vygotskij). After that, I watched an american sitcom (Seinfeld). And now I'm writing in english on an international forum.

Yes, the norwegian culture is under pressure from outside forces. But it's not from the arab world, and it aint bad at all.


German, really?

Odd, I thought that was invented by an English Aristocrat.

Anyway....

The issue is not simply whether immigrants are welcome, it is whether or not we A: need them or B: have room for them.

People sidestep these questions in favour of absurd left/right charicatures. At least Cameron's speech was relatively restrained.

[Centurion1]

I wouldn't mind it much if a million new yorkers moved here.

Yes. Yes you would.

I live in the City and I wouldn't wish a million of these savages on my worst enemies. Filthy, rude, ignorant people. :clown:

/end stereotype

Okay but seriously you wouldn't want a million of those SOB's

[HoreTore]

German, really?

Odd, I thought that was invented by an English Aristocrat.

yes, that's why it's called "english aristocrater", not "hamburger"...







No, wait.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

yes, that's why it's called "english aristocrater", not "hamburger"...





No, wait.


Oh.... you mean the thing the Romans ate at the Games?

[HoreTore]

Oh.... you mean the thing the Romans ate at the Games?

No, the romans didn't mince their meat that way.

[Fragony]

Got a little headbreaker for you by the way Horetore, as you probably know we have the most rightwing government we ever had, many a member of the parlement would get banned here. And guess what people are more positive about immigrants. Open discussion is good even when it can be nasty, it's liberating. The left never allowed it.

[HoreTore]

Of course open discussion is good! Free and open speech and discussion leads to enlightenment and destroys hatred, bigotry and fear.

This has always been my position. What makes you think I thought otherwise....?

[HoreTore]

I've posted this before, but I feel like bring it up again:



Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the State was to make men free to develop their faculties; and that in its government the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. They valued liberty both as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty. They believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.

Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.

Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.

....which is my position as well, but written more eloquently than I could ever hope to do.

[Fragony]

Of course open discussion is good! Free and open speech and discussion leads to enlightenment and destroys hatred, bigotry and fear.

This has always been my position. What makes you think I thought otherwise....?

Because the left will never abandon their ideological fortress, open discussion within the very confined space that is solemny granted, well it just doesn't work all that well you see. Only a psychopath wishes upon others any harm, would be great if people would get that first.

[HoreTore]

Because the left will never abandon their ideological fortress, open discussion within the very confined space that is solemny granted, well it just doesn't work all that well you see. Only a psychopath wishes upon others any harm, would be great if people would get that first.

I am most certainly a part of the "left", Frags. And yet I am fully capable of holding the views outlined above. In fact, the primary reason as to why I identify myself as being "left" is because of those views.

[Fragony]

I am most certainly a part of the "left", Frags. And yet I am fully capable of holding the views outlined above. In fact, the primary reason as to why I identify myself as being "left" is because of those views.

I am pretty sure you know some with that mindset, wasn't directed at you personaly although you are a bit of a serial-relativator

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8451917/Who-is-to-blame-for-fractured-Britain.html

Yep, I'm disturbed.

[Subotan]

Ever watched TV?
Yes. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0306414/)


Listened to today's music?
Yes, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pvfQtUhtNE) and yes if you want something classical. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYiokai3FW4) Finish listening to them both.


Ate any 'modern' dishes?
Yes.
(http://www.gordonramsay.com/royalhospitalroad/)

Read any of today's books?
Yes.
(http://www.murakami.ch/main_2.html)

It's safe to say culture is dead, only nobody noticed it was.

"Narrow minds devoid of imagination. Intolerance, theories cut off from reality, empty terminology, usurped ideals, inflexible systems. Those are the things that really frighten me. What I absolutely fear and loathe." - Haruki Murakami

[Incongruous]

just like we solved the problems with the vietnamese, who as a group now beats ethnic norwegians when it comes to things like employment and education.

I'm sorry, how is this meant to endear native Europeans to the idea of immigration? All it does is create a feeling of animosity, "let us in, we'll do better than you!", as soon a the native population percieves this to be a dominant trend in society, tolerance very quickly goe's tits up. HM Government should not be in the business of providing some kind of self betterment course for immigrants, it should stick to working for the betterment of Britons, something which it has done exceedingly poorly. Telling me that immigrants have done financially well in the last 30 years means bugger all when more and more of the British working class fall into the welfare underclass.

[HoreTore]

I am pretty sure you know some with that mindset, wasn't directed at you personaly although you are a bit of a serial-relativator

I know plenty with that mindset, and I argue with such people almost daily. But to say that this idea is limited to the left is a lie, this is just as common on the right.

A nice red herring to slap in peoples faces is to tell them you plan to walk around with some other nations flag on May 17th. That will reveal the true colours of every Norwegian. And its sad to say, that the freedom of others to express themselves freely isn't something we care that much about. Apparently, I have the right to express myself however I want as long as it pleases the nationalist mob.

@bopa: I consider a government that tries to better one ethnic group above other to be a rqcit government. I do not believe that the english govenment should work to improve the lives of the ethnic english, instead I believe the english govenment should try to better humanity. And the same goes for all other governments.

And for the record: the vietnamese situation didn't resolve itself through massive government spending, time was all that was needed, the situation resolved itself. Just like the muslim situation will too.

[Skullheadhq]

Yes. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0306414/)


Yes, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pvfQtUhtNE) and yes if you want something classical. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYiokai3FW4) Finish listening to them both.


Yes.
(http://www.gordonramsay.com/royalhospitalroad/)

Yes.
(http://www.murakami.ch/main_2.html)


"Narrow minds devoid of imagination. Intolerance, theories cut off from reality, empty terminology, usurped ideals, inflexible systems. Those are the things that really frighten me. What I absolutely fear and loathe." - Haruki Murakami

With the exception of Gordon Ramsay I didn't like any of the above.

[Furunculus]

One thing the right wingers never want to talk about, is that they said the same thing 20 years ago about east asians(primarily vietnamese).

It didn't happen then, it won't happen now. What problems we have now will be solved, just like we solved the problems with the vietnamese, who as a group now beats ethnic norwegians when it comes to things like employment and education.

oh contraire, if i could replace every immigrant X with an ex-British army immigrant from Nepal I would do so in a shot.

instant way to achieve a harmonious society in one easy move.

[Banquo's Ghost]

oh contraire, if i could replace every immigrant X with an ex-British army immigrant from Nepal I would do so in a shot.

instant way to achieve a harmonious society in one easy move.

Not really. Gurkhas are highly protective of their own culture and have re-shaped British regimental structure to match their needs. One of the favourite jokes about Gurkha officers back in my day was how quickly they went "native". With sufficient numbers (one assumes you would allow dependents, not just the soldiers themselves) ex-Gurkhas would (and do) gravitate towards their own groups and present just as many issues of alienation as many other immigrants. Then you get their descendants - not having served in the military, but legitimate citizens - who may well suffer the same sense of culture-clash as many second and third generation immigrants who didn't make the decision to live in the UK.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Not really. Gurkhas are highly protective of their own culture and have re-shaped British regimental structure to match their needs. One of the favourite jokes about Gurkha officers back in my day was how quickly they went "native". With sufficient numbers (one assumes you would allow dependents, not just the soldiers themselves) ex-Gurkhas would (and do) gravitate towards their own groups and present just as many issues of alienation as many other immigrants. Then you get their descendants - not having served in the military, but legitimate citizens - who may well suffer the same sense of culture-clash as many second and third generation immigrants who didn't make the decision to live in the UK.

True, but the same can be said of any of the other "native" minority ethnic groups, they are still nominally "British" though and conform to basic British ideas about civic authority and law and order.

So Furunculus may have a point.

[HoreTore]

oh contraire, if i could replace every immigrant X with an ex-British army immigrant from Nepal I would do so in a shot.

instant way to achieve a harmonious society in one easy move.

What on earth has that to do with my post...?

[Banquo's Ghost]

True, but the same can be said of any of the other "native" minority ethnic groups, they are still nominally "British" though and conform to basic British ideas about civic authority and law and order.

So Furunculus may have a point.

I don't disagree that he has a point. Immigrants who dedicate themselves to the service of their new country are always welcome and usually beneficial.

It's the "instant harmonious society" that I wanted to challenge - especially in terms of what happens to the second generation (who typically did not give such service whether military or otherwise).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I don't disagree that he has a point. Immigrants who dedicate themselves to the service of their new country are always welcome and usually beneficial.

It's the "instant harmonious society" that I wanted to challenge - especially in terms of what happens to the second generation (who typically did not give such service whether military or otherwise).

I think you're completely right, but I also think Furunculus is talking in relative terms, not absolutes. I have to say, living in Exeter, that the expansion in the Muslim population has been extraordinary in the last five years or so. In the last two or three years there has also been an expansion in the number of veiled women.

I'll say flat out, I don't like it, I don't want it. Not being able to someon's face makes me deeply uncomfortable and I actively resent it.

Say whatever you like about me, I just find it intollerable.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I think you're completely right, but I also think Furunculus is talking in relative terms, not absolutes. I have to say, living in Exeter, that the expansion in the Muslim population has been extraordinary in the last five years or so. In the last two or three years there has also been an expansion in the number of veiled women.

I'll say flat out, I don't like it, I don't want it. Not being able to someon's face makes me deeply uncomfortable and I actively resent it.

Say whatever you like about me, I just find it intollerable.

I sympathise with your situation, and have wrestled with my own intolerance regarding "invasive" changes to my rural idyll.

But then I get far more annoyed with young white men who wear their hats on backwards and apparently have difficulty dressing themselves adequately enough to keep their trousers at a decent level. I resent so many things about modern society it's barely tolerable.

[Subotan]

With the exception of Gordon Ramsay I didn't like any of the above.
That's entirely beside the point, as you were talking about culture being dead - not that you personally dislike modern culture. For example, if we take IMDB's top 50 TV Series of all time (http://www.imdb.com/search/title?num_votes=5000,&sort=user_rating,desc&title_type=tv_series), we find that only 19 out of 50 started before the turn of the Millennium - hardly the kind of ominous sign that TV is dead. I gave you an example of the boundaries modern metal is pushing against, and knowing that you'd dislike that anyway, I showed you that the modern era can produce great oper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Atomic)a of all things. Murakami is universally regarded as one of the greatest writers of the age, and your failure to recognise this is remarkable, given that he focuses on the alienation of the individual from modern life.

Besides, what makes the past so awesome anyway?

[Strike For The South]

I sympathise with your situation, and have wrestled with my own intolerance regarding "invasive" changes to my rural idyll.

But then I get far more annoyed with young white men who wear their hats on backwards and apparently have difficulty dressing themselves adequately enough to keep their trousers at a decent level. I resent so many things about modern society it's barely tolerable.

samesies bro, samesies

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I sympathise with your situation, and have wrestled with my own intolerance regarding "invasive" changes to my rural idyll.

My Idyll remains exactly the same, poor local peasents and a few comuters, but the Country's Principle City has changed at an alarming pace, with two new mosques in about five years and, as I said, these veiled women. The rest I can get used to, but the veils I can barely tollerate.


But then I get far more annoyed with young white men who wear their hats on backwards and apparently have difficulty dressing themselves adequately enough to keep their trousers at a decent level. I resent so many things about modern society it's barely tolerable.

Well, imagine feeling like the only sane man of your generation. Those "people" with the ridiculous trousers are about my age.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well my non-rural idyll has quite a lot of immigrants and I never thought anything of it before I heard of all this immigration talk, and I still don't. No burqas, no bombs. Plus if anything they are politer than other people. But then they do tend to be Pakistani/Bangladeshi, and it seems most people in this thread don't like Arabs.

I still think the cultural aspect of immigration is a fuss over nothing. What I don't like is the economic side because they do take jobs from the locals. But I don't blame that on the immigrants, more scumbag politicians...

[Fragony]

Nothing going on here either. Muslims aren't the problem, they just come from islamic countries. Islamphilae and islamism is a toxic brew though, the leftist church will never understand they aren't doing anyone a favour

[Paltmull]

"All immigrants are unemployed and lazy. They're just taking advantage of our welfare system!"
"But I know a lot of immigrants who have jobs, and who aren't like that at all."
"Well... uhm... THEY'RE TAKING OUR JOBS!!!11"



Circular reasoning, anyone?

[Louis VI the Fat]

"All immigrants are unemployed and lazy. They're just taking advantage of our welfare system!"
"But I know a lot of immigrants who have jobs, and who aren't like that at all."
"Well... uhm... THEY'RE TAKING OUR JOBS!!!11"



Circular reasoning, anyone?Rubbish.

They take all our jobs, and they are all on welfare.

[Rhyfelwyr]

"All immigrants are unemployed and lazy. They're just taking advantage of our welfare system!"
"But I know a lot of immigrants who have jobs, and who aren't like that at all."
"Well... uhm... THEY'RE TAKING OUR JOBS!!!11"



Circular reasoning, anyone?

They do both, and in both cases they are being unhelpful.

[Fragony]

"All immigrants are unemployed and lazy. They're just taking advantage of our welfare system!"
"But I know a lot of immigrants who have jobs, and who aren't like that at all."
"Well... uhm... THEY'RE TAKING OUR JOBS!!!11"



Circular reasoning, anyone?

Nobody ever said all so no there is no circular reason, anywhere

No caps to be found either, only in your post

[HoreTore]

They do both, and in both cases they are being unhelpful.

Nonsense!

They will only take your job if they can do it better than you. And when better people are employed, our economy gets better, which in turn creates even more jobs, which means that even lazy brits can get one.

[rory_20_uk]

They get jobs also if they are willing to do it when locals are not.

Those with jobs can then bring in the rest of their family. Not in itself a problem at all as long as they are desiring to integrate. But often they are not.

It also creates more and more who drag the economy down as they do not have jobs, but require housing, food etc. Why get a job when one can not have one officially, get handouts and discounts and then do something else off the books?

~:smoking:

[Rhyfelwyr]

Nonsense!

They will only take your job if they can do it better than you. And when better people are employed, our economy gets better, which in turn creates even more jobs, which means that even lazy brits can get one.

The thing is we could do without the competition because when there's more people than jobs then its idiotic to invite more in. And immigrants will often get priority because its easier to pay them under the minimum wage.

[HoreTore]

The thing is we could do without the competition because when there's more people than jobs then its idiotic to invite more in. And immigrants will often get priority because its easier to pay them under the minimum wage.

More competition for jobs equals lower pay, and rising pay is the main enemy of export activity, and exports is sgain crucial to economic growth. Therefore, keeping immigrants from taking jobs from brits leads to economic stagnation, which in turns leads to british people getting laid off. Thus, to ensure that british people have jobs, immigrants needs to take their jobs.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Nonsense. Immigrants don't take jobs from Brits, because Brits don't want to work that regime for such lousy payment. Sainsbury's has a really simple business proposition: scale up (i.e. fewer shops), or hire Poles to work 6AM - 10PM. Otherwise the local shops are simply not profitable. Then take credit for keeping open local shops thereby giving the villagers the idea that somehow something is actually still going on. :shrug:

[Subotan]

More competition for jobs equals lower pay, and rising pay is the main enemy of export activity, and exports is sgain crucial to economic growth. Therefore, keeping immigrants from taking jobs from brits leads to economic stagnation, which in turns leads to british people getting laid off. Thus, to ensure that british people have jobs, immigrants needs to take their jobs.
I.e. White working class male Brit is screwed regardless of government policy

[HoreTore]

I.e. White working class male Brit is screwed regardless of government policy

No. The increased economic growth that results from immigrants taking low-paid jobs results in jobs created for the british working class.

So in summary, immigrants taking the jobs from the british means that the british can get a job.

[Beskar]

Well my non-rural idyll has quite a lot of immigrants and I never thought anything of it before I heard of all this immigration talk, and I still don't. No burqas, no bombs. Plus if anything they are politer than other people. But then they do tend to be Pakistani/Bangladeshi, and it seems most people in this thread don't like Arabs.

Same here. They seem politer and seem genuinely concerned about things and situations. Average whitie doesn't even know the day of the week it is, never mind having an actual opinion on something more complex than a slobbering half-hanged jaw.

[Paltmull]

Nobody ever said all so no there is no circular reason, anywhere

No caps to be found either, only in your post

I was exaggerating quite a bit, but I feel that some people (not necessarily in this thread) hold this quite contradictory opinion. If an immigrant is unemployed, he/she is cheating the welfare system. If an immigrant has a job, he/she is "stealing" said job from the natives. Imagine being in that situation as an immigrant. Whatever you do, someone will blame you for all problems that the country has. I, for one, wouldn't be too eager to "assimilate" into a society that treated me like that.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No. The increased economic growth that results from immigrants taking low-paid jobs results in jobs created for the british working class.

So in summary, immigrants taking the jobs from the british means that the british can get a job.

Well, no, because there is no gap in the market for the unskilled Briton if immigrants take all the working class jobs. The long and short of it is that the British working class cannot have everything the middle class does, and if they are going to have jobs it is going to be for less pay than the middle class.

[HoreTore]

Well, no, because there is no gap in the market for the unskilled Briton if immigrants take all the working class jobs. The long and short of it is that the British working class cannot have everything the middle class does, and if they are going to have jobs it is going to be for less pay than the middle class.

.....and the economic boost immigration gives creates that kind of jobs. The service sector is always the first one to expand when things start growing.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Thus, to ensure that british people have jobs, immigrants needs to take their jobs.

HoreTore, you are doing that thing where you want something to be true so you decide that it is going to be true... as can be seen from statements like the above.

When exactly should working class Britons expect to reap the benefits if the system works the way you say it does? They've been coming in in droves for a few decades now and I haven't seen it yet...


Same here. They seem politer and seem genuinely concerned about things and situations. Average whitie doesn't even know the day of the week it is, never mind having an actual opinion on something more complex than a slobbering half-hanged jaw.

Also true I guess. They tend to be pretty well informed and aren't all just a giant Labour block vote, a lot of them are small business owners so they vote Tory.

[HoreTore]

"want something to be true"?

Immigration keeps wages down. Low wages strengthens the export industry. A strong export sector is the fundation of a strong and growing economy. A growing economy creates more jobs.

Don't let your marxist side cloud your vision, Rhy. Zero unemployment and high wages look quite appealing, but it will lead to en economic collapse in a very short while. Some unemployment and sensible wages are key to sustainable economic growth.

And when will the british cash in? They already have, living standards have been rising dramatically for the last 30 years in all of europe. "Coincidentally", that's also the period where we have had immigration.

[HoreTore]

It's very telling that the leading british racist party's charter also contains a splendid recipe for garuanteed economic stagnation and collapse.

Racism and economic incompetence goes hand in hand.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

.....and the economic boost immigration gives creates that kind of jobs. The service sector is always the first one to expand when things start growing.

....that get taken by immigrants often as not. The British service sector is minimum-wage, it is in that "immigrant" wage bracket you're so excited about.

So no dice.

[Louis VI the Fat]

"want something to be true"?

Immigration keeps wages down. Low wages strengthens the export industry. A strong export sector is the fundation of a strong and growing economy. A growing economy creates more jobs.

Don't let your marxist side cloud your vision, Rhy. Zero unemployment and high wages look quite appealing, but it will lead to en economic collapse in a very short while. Some unemployment and sensible wages are key to sustainable economic growth.

And when will the british cash in? They already have, living standards have been rising dramatically for the last 30 years in all of europe. "Coincidentally", that's also the period where we have had immigration.Ah, great. Just when the Chicago School of Economics has finally been intellectually bankrupted our resident Marxist becomes a convert.

[Louis VI the Fat]

AP - A train carrying Tunisian immigrants from Italy was halted at the French border Sunday in an escalation of an international dispute over the fate of North African migrants fleeing political unrest for refuge in Europe.
But France blamed what it said were hundreds of activists on the train planning a demonstration in France, and posing a problem to public order. Traffic was re-established by evening - but not before Italy lodged a formal protest.

“At no time was there a ... closing of the border between France and Italy,” French Interior Ministry spokesman Pierre-Henri Brandet said. It was an “isolated problem,” he said by telephone, “an undeclared demonstration.”

He estimated that up to 10 trains may have been affected, five on each side.

There was no immediate Italian reaction to the French explanation late Sunday.

Italy has been giving temporary residence permits to many of the roughly 26,000 Tunisians who have gone to Italy to escape unrest in northern Africa in recent weeks. Many of the Tunisians have family ties or friends in France, the country’s former colonial ruler, and the Italian government says the permits should allow the Tunisians to go there under accords allowing visa-free travel among many European countries.

France says it will honor the permits only if the migrants prove they can financially support themselves and it has instituted patrols on the Italian border - unprecedented since the introduction of the Schengen travel-free zone - bringing in about 80 riot police last week. Germany has said it would do the same.

http://www.france24.com/en/20110417-italy-france-train-illegal-tunisia-migrants-lampedusa-eu-north-africa-diplomacy

Since the revolutions, Italy's been swamped with tens of thousands of illegal North African immigrants in the past few months. To put pressure on the rest of Europe, Italy last week has granted visas to them. Then started to put them on trains to other European countries.

Bar France in turn managing to offload them all onto Britain in some sort of cunning scheme, I want the borders to remain firmly closed.
Let Italy do the same. Then we help somebody to power in Libya, anybody, on the condition we can return to Libya all illegal African immigrants since the start of the revolutions.
While we're at it, let's bombregimechange Italy too. Their autocratic leader is well past his expiry date.

[HoreTore]

....that get taken by immigrants often as not. The British service sector is minimum-wage, it is in that "immigrant" wage bracket you're so excited about.

So no dice.

Then they should get better at their jobs instead of whining because someone more able gets it.

Louis, this is called "frontfagsmodellen"(doesn't translate well), and it's the economic modell Norway(through Labour) has followed since the 80's.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Same here. They seem politer and seem genuinely concerned about things and situations. Average whitie doesn't even know the day of the week it is, never mind having an actual opinion on something more complex than a slobbering half-hanged jaw.

Stereotyping for racist purposes cuts both ways and will be punished according to the rules.

Everyone please consider this my final warning.

Thank you kindly.

:bow:

[Furunculus]

It's very telling that the leading british racist party's charter also contains a splendid recipe for garuanteed economic stagnation and collapse.

the BNP can indeed add being left-wing to the list of its sins.

[Incongruous]

No. The increased economic growth that results from immigrants taking low-paid jobs results in jobs created for the british working class.

So in summary, immigrants taking the jobs from the british means that the british can get a job.

Yes, that is how it works, just not in real life, or at least not in Britain. The combination of a nannying welfare sate and mass immigration upon the native working class has been to obliterate it economically and culturally, they have been crushed by the absurd promises of leftist charlatans and a cut throat class of business owners.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Then they should get better at their jobs instead of whining because someone more able gets it.

Louis, this is called "frontfagsmodellen"(doesn't translate well), and it's the economic modell Norway(through Labour) has followed since the 80's.

No, the immigrants are more likely to work long hours for bad wages - Brits are just as capable of doing the jobs, but they want better ones. Back to my original point, immigration has depressed wages and the welfare state/politicians promises have created unreasonable expections for the native working class.

Still no dice.

You're completely isolated here, HoreTore.

[Rhyfelwyr]

the BNP can indeed add being left-wing to the list of its sins.

C'mon man, you know better than to throw terms like that around just for petty point scoring.

Anyway, it is a myth that white people just won't do the jobs immigrants do. Maybe you can tell that to the people I know who do all kinds of crappy unpaid work schemes for a few weeks at a time and still get no permant job out of it... basically a scam where the company recycles to the next person on Jobseekers to get an unlimiated supply of free labour. But they still go through this in the hope of getting some kind of work.

And all the while we are carting in immigrants from the Third World so big business owners can dodge the mimimum wage. I mean, this isn't even a free market issue like HoreTore is saying, we're talking about paying people illegaly low wages, which is in fact unhealthy for the economy.

This whole thread is getting surreal, why is the left-winger arguing for the free market?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Anyway, it is a myth that white people just won't do the jobs immigrants do.
Yes, that's where the Poles come in. No, seriously, the reason Poles are hired is not just because they want to work for that wage. They want to work for that wage and those hours and they don't appear to require the same benefits (health/pension/insurance). That seems odd, until you realise what you just wrote a few sentences down...


Maybe you can tell that to the people I know who do all kinds of crappy unpaid work schemes for a few weeks at a time and still get no permant job out of it... basically a scam where the company recycles to the next person on Jobseekers to get an unlimiated supply of free labour. But they still go through this in the hope of getting some kind of work. Yes, Britain has a weird intern scheme. We all know that.


And all the while we are carting in immigrants from the Third World so big business owners can dodge the mimimum wage. I mean, this isn't even a free market issue like HoreTore is saying, we're talking about paying people illegaly low wages, which is in fact unhealthy for the economy.

That is the real issue: those Poles and other immigrants do work for conditions which border on (or are outright) illegal under your employment laws. What you don't realise is that as bad as people want jobs, Brits will quickly find out how efficient government can be if it concerns undeclared income. So they will want their employer to take care of the paperwork he is legally obliged to provide. Unless they are not British and they can almost freely dodge the whole employment law issue by virtue of being from some other place without equivalent laws; when the taxes are not due to Britain, but Poland say. The reason for this is even simpler: burden of proof. Easy to provide if you are supposed to be handed all the paperwork, less so if the paperwork is in Polish and not forthcoming.

[Noncommunist]

C'mon man, you know better than to throw terms like that around just for petty point scoring.

Anyway, it is a myth that white people just won't do the jobs immigrants do. Maybe you can tell that to the people I know who do all kinds of crappy unpaid work schemes for a few weeks at a time and still get no permant job out of it... basically a scam where the company recycles to the next person on Jobseekers to get an unlimiated supply of free labour. But they still go through this in the hope of getting some kind of work.

And all the while we are carting in immigrants from the Third World so big business owners can dodge the mimimum wage. I mean, this isn't even a free market issue like HoreTore is saying, we're talking about paying people illegaly low wages, which is in fact unhealthy for the economy.

This whole thread is getting surreal, why is the left-winger arguing for the free market?

If the wages are illegally low, that seems to be more of a problem with them charging illegally low wages, not the immigration.

[Beskar]

If the wages are illegally low, that seems to be more of a problem with them charging illegally low wages, not the immigration.

Supply and Demand. People flooding in lowers wages as people will work for cheaper.

On the otherside, in limited employment, wages rise as they need to provide incentive for people to work there.

[Banquo's Ghost]

This whole thread is getting surreal, why is the left-winger arguing for the free market?

In his own inimitable way, this is what Fragony is on about. The multiculturalist creed is so strongly in favour of unlimited immigration that they end up tying themselves in knots, even to the extent of throwing out other principles like socialist economics. Just as long as immigration can be justified without criticism.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Though, there are very few genuine lefties on this board.

[HoreTore]

If the wages are illegally low, that seems to be more of a problem with them charging illegally low wages, not the immigration.

Indeed. The blame for that should not be on the immigrant, but on the employer. Social dumping is a serious issue, of course, and one that I haven't touched on so far ithis thread(even though the ones above seem to think I do). All businesses needs to be regulated by a tariff negotiated between the employers and the unions, and of course noone can be paid below that tariff, immigrant, pole or native.

That's not the scenario I've talked about when I've talk about "keeping wages low"(actually, it's "keeping wage growth low").

In the past decades, western europe(do I care about britistan?) has experienced tremendous growth and job creation. Without immigration, we would have next to no unemployment. Sounds like a dream, but the reality of it is quite the nightmare. What happens with too low unemployment, is that the workers gain too much power, and will use it to raise wages(too much creates the opposite problem, of course). This will cripple the export economy, which in turn will cripple the economy. What is needed, is a steady, slow and sustainable growth. For that to happen, you need to have a proper balance of power between the three parties in the labour market(worker, employ and state). What immigration does is keep that balance by limiting the otherwise unbalanced power the workers will have during times of econmic growth. Thus, immigration is vital to the economy.

If we hadn't gotten a bunch of poles here this decade, the norwegian economy would've tanked long ago, as there is no doubt that the limited supply of construction workers would've created a bubble.

Sustainable growth, the answer to every question in life. :balloon:

[HoreTore]

In his own inimitable way, this is what Fragony is on about. The multiculturalist creed is so strongly in favour of unlimited immigration that they end up tying themselves in knots, even to the extent of throwing out other principles like socialist economics. Just as long as immigration can be justified without criticism.

The model I'm talking about has been the social democratic creed since the 60's, Banqou, long before we had any immigration.

It's also quite Keynesian, and how is that anything but true leftism? Free market... Hah! I'm arguing in favour of the three-party cooperation, just like you should expect any norwegian leftie to do.

[Noncommunist]

Supply and Demand. People flooding in lowers wages as people will work for cheaper.

On the otherside, in limited employment, wages rise as they need to provide incentive for people to work there.

Certainly, the market value would be lowered normally with more workers. However, if the government has created a price floor, then the fault is with the employers lowering wages to an illegal level.

[HoreTore]

Certainly, the market value would be lowered normally with more workers. However, if the government has created a price floor, then the fault is with the employers lowering wages to an illegal level.

Quite correct. The proce floors doesn't have to be set by the government though, it ca be negotiwted between the workers union and the employers union.

[Fragony]

In his own inimitable way, this is what Fragony is on about. The multiculturalist creed is so strongly in favour of unlimited immigration that they end up tying themselves in knots, even to the extent of throwing out other principles like socialist economics. Just as long as immigration can be justified without criticism.

Well yeah that's about it, they keep furiously demanding both immigration and socialism. It's simply not possible someone has to haul that cart. Nothing wrong with a full stop on immigration for a few years except that some people think that's not 100% ok and might get mean

edit; and thx for understanding that I don't give a crap about immigrants themselves

[Skullheadhq]

besides, what makes the past so awesome anyway?
Homerus, Vergilius, Dante, Machiavelli, Augustinus, Erasmus, Luther, Erico Caruso, Plato, Verdi, Mozart, Chopin etc. etc.
Name one modern equivalent...

[Fragony]

Homerus, Vergilius, Dante, Machiavelli, Augustinus, Erasmus, Luther, Erico Caruso, Plato, Verdi, Mozart, Chopin etc. etc.
Name one modern equivalent...

Only one? Equivalent of Dante would be Harry Potter by the way

[HoreTore]

Only one? Equivalent of Dante would be Harry Potter by the way

Indeed.

Nostalgia is dangerous. We elevate what was once good to divine levels, and start seeing new things and creativity as dangerous.

Art is fundamentally about creating emotions in people, and of course, the art that makes us feel happy and good is what we enjoy the most. Take Lady GaGa, for example. I'm quite sure SkullheadHQ will dismiss her as trash, but her music has brought happiness and enjoyment to millions, if not billions. Every saturday night, people are happy and dancing while listening to her music. If you can't see that as a good thing, you've really detached yourself from the real world.

And don't come saying it's so easy to make pop music. There are millions of people trying to be pop stars, and only a handful make it. How many people tried to compose music in Mozart's day? A few thousands? The skill needed to make it today is much greater than the skill needed to make it before.

There's also the fact that we only remember the good stuff. They made a ton of crap before as well, but that's all forgotten, just like the crap today will be forgotten. But mozart and beethoven is still remembered, just like MJ and Madonna will still be remembered in 2211.

I was once like this too. I only listened to the guitar-heavy rock of the 60's and 70's, and despised everything modern. My eyes were shut, and I refused to see. But when I opened my eyes, I realized that there's just as much creativity in todays world, if not more. Music has evolved, and so should I.

[Beirut]

Homerus, Vergilius, Dante, Machiavelli, Augustinus, Erasmus, Luther, Erico Caruso, Plato, Verdi, Mozart, Chopin etc. etc.
Name one modern equivalent...

You're covering about 2500 years of recorded history with that list, indeed the vast majority of recorded history, and leaving only the last 150 years to compare to the twenty-five centuries that came before.

You can't confine the other person to less than 10% of what you yourself claim as a working area and then blame the other person for not producing as much.

[Banquo's Ghost]

You're covering about 2500 years of recorded history with that list, indeed the vast majority of recorded history, and leaving only the last 150 years to compare to the twenty-five centuries that came before.

You can't confine the other person to less than 10% of what you yourself claim as a working area and then blame the other person for not producing as much.

Of course you can. My God man, what do you expect we over-fifties to do all day othwerwise? :shakes stick:

[Jaguara]

Only one? Equivalent of Dante would be Harry Potter by the way

Uh, no.

Dante = Author/poet
Harry Potter = Character in a popular book, or you could be referring to the series of books themselves.

Thus...
Dante could relate to Rowling
or the Divine Comedy could relate to the Harry Potter series
(though based only on popularity - the quality of the literature is not comparable. As to long term impact...will Harry Potter be remembered in 100 years? in 500?)

Logic 101, my dear fellow.

Anyway, I would say that Tolkien and the Lord of the Rings Trilogy are a better comparison to Dante and the Divine Comedy. (Though the format is different)
As for modern poets and writers, we still have many that are formidable, some of which are still alive. Can we go back as far as the the Victorian era to claim the rights to Dickens and the like?

Anyway, as HoreTore & Beirut alluded, the whole thing is rather silly.

Of course, I don't get why Dante ranks #3 on his list of great people of the past, frankly...or even in the top 10. All of a sudden people are talking about Dante again, I hadn't heard him spoken of for 20 years and now I hear of him everywhere. But I digress...

[Beirut]

Of course you can. My God man, what do you expect we over-fifties to do all day othwerwise? :shakes stick:


Curmudgeons is us. :cool:

[Skullheadhq]

Indeed.

Nostalgia is dangerous. We elevate what was once good to divine levels, and start seeing new things and creativity as dangerous.

Art is fundamentally about creating emotions in people, and of course, the art that makes us feel happy and good is what we enjoy the most. Take Lady GaGa, for example. I'm quite sure SkullheadHQ will dismiss her as trash, but her music has brought happiness and enjoyment to millions, if not billions. Every saturday night, people are happy and dancing while listening to her music. If you can't see that as a good thing, you've really detached yourself from the real world.

And don't come saying it's so easy to make pop music. There are millions of people trying to be pop stars, and only a handful make it. How many people tried to compose music in Mozart's day? A few thousands? The skill needed to make it today is much greater than the skill needed to make it before.

There's also the fact that we only remember the good stuff. They made a ton of crap before as well, but that's all forgotten, just like the crap today will be forgotten. But mozart and beethoven is still remembered, just like MJ and Madonna will still be remembered in 2211.

I was once like this too. I only listened to the guitar-heavy rock of the 60's and 70's, and despised everything modern. My eyes were shut, and I refused to see. But when I opened my eyes, I realized that there's just as much creativity in todays world, if not more. Music has evolved, and so should I.

Lady GaGa? Madonna? Michael Jackson? What is happening to the .Org? And if you think they're more than trash, you've really detached yourself from the real world. And just take the opposite of what billions think, and you've arrived at the truth, and if the people of 2211 remember these failures, then they're as worthless as the people of today, something which I don't hope for.

[Subotan]

Homerus, Vergilius, Dante, Machiavelli, Augustinus, Erasmus, Luther, Erico Caruso, Plato, Verdi, Mozart, Chopin etc. etc.
The only unifying themes between all of these that I can discern is that they are all dead, and have been for some time, and that there are no scientists/mathematicians/etc. amongst them.


Name one modern equivalent...
I already mentioned Murakami. If you want more authors, then both Iain (M.) Banks and Alan Moore (http://www.destroythecyb.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/watchmen5-21.jpg) are pioneers in their respective media. With regards to classical music, Steve Reich comes to mind instantly (Different Trains (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYnAQ-lK74A) \m/ ). Seeing as you won't like that, here's something from a guy who has only been dead a few years (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n2tKOATj-A). With regards to philosophy, Chomsky is an obvious choice (Even if his political musings are off the wall), as are people like A.C. Grayling etc.

True cultured-ness does not come from the exclusive adoration of the long dead, but from a combination of open-mindedness and an ability to disregard crap, old or new. For example, I like to listen to both Ludwig van Beethoven and Wolfgang Gartner - sometimes at the same time. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fS7K-shd64I) To exclude your taste to either the historical or the modern is small-minded, and in the case of the former, the height of pretentiousness.

EDIT:

Lady GaGa? Madonna? Michael Jackson? What is happening to the .Org? And if you think they're more than trash, you've really detached yourself from the real world.
If anyone has detached themselves from the real world, it's you. Jackson will definitely be remembered in the future - how could the best selling artist of all time possibly be excluded from the history of music? And I say that as someone who loathes Jackson's music, as well as Madonna's (Gaga - not so much. Her music is quite fun when you're drunk.).



And just take the opposite of what billions think, and you've arrived at the truth
You're just a Hyper-Hipster, nothing more.



If the people of 2211 remember these failures, then they're as worthless as the people of today, something which I don't hope for.
Why should you care what they think if humanity is doomed to cultural death anyway?

[Beirut]

And just take the opposite of what billions think, and you've arrived at the truth, and if the people of 2211 remember these failures, then they're as worthless as the people of today, something which I don't hope for.

People will still be listening to Floyd in 2211.

It gives me hope for the future.

:7astronaut: "...I'll see you on the dark side of the mooooon."

[Subotan]

People will still be listening to Floyd in 2211.

It gives me hope for the future.

:7astronaut: "...I'll see you on the dark side of the mooooon."
Also this. As well as the Beatles, Led Zep etc.

[Skullheadhq]

You're just a Hyper-Hipster, nothing more.

Didn't knew what it meant, so I checked Wikipedia:


Hipster is a slang term that first appeared in the 1940s, and was revived in the 2000s and 2010s to describe types of young, recently settled urban middle class adults and older teenagers with interests in indie rock, independent film, magazines such as Vice and Clash, and websites like Pitchfork Media.[1] In earlier contexts (2000s), hipsters were also referred to as scenesters

"Hipster" has been used in sometimes contradictory ways, making it difficult to precisely define "hipster culture" because it is a "mutating, trans-Atlantic melting pot of styles, tastes and behavior[s]."[1] One commentator argues that "hipsterism fetishizes the authentic" elements of all of the "fringe movements of the postwar era—beat, hippie, punk, even grunge," and draws on the "cultural stores of every unmelted ethnicity", and "regurgitates it with a winking inauthenticity."[3] Others, like Arsel and Thompson, argue that hipster is a cultural mythology, crystallization of a mass mediated stereotype generated to understand, categorize and marketize the indie consumer culture rather than an objectified group of people

Well, I'm not even close, I don't like any of the things above, try another name.

[HoreTore]

The artists of the past that we remember as "the greats" had no more deoth than Madonna or Jackson. Their music, plays, books, etc, aimed to please their audience. Which they did, just like MJ has done.

The lyrics of songs has remained almost unchanged since music was invented, it's still mostly about the relations with the other sex. I challenge you to name one opera that isn't about some guy trying to get into some chicks pants.

Heck, what was Shakespeare's plays about? Not much more than Braveheart. It's just regular tales of what some King did, we've made tons of movies like that in juwt in this decade. Also, I challenge you to find an old play that's better than, say, Schindler's List.

One thing has changed though. Due to the dictatorian rule of the past, extremely few artists dared to challenge the establishment. This has changed now, and we can now enjoy challenging art, like punk, for example.

[Tuuvi]

While I agree that there is modern art that is comparable in quality to the classics, I disagree that pop music has as much artistry and quality as classical music.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well quality isn't something you can measure scientifically measure, and there isn't some objective standard either... if people like it then its all good.

I am very thankful to have the culture we have now, I couldn't take having nothing but classical music to listen to. :skull:

[Beirut]

Also this. As well as the Beatles, Led Zep etc.

Sweet. :cool:

[Beirut]

Heck, what was Shakespeare's plays about? Not much more than Braveheart.

It's not what they were about so much as how they were expressed. And the expression was divine.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I had to read Romeo and Juliet in school and it was meh.

[Beirut]

I had to read Romeo and Juliet in school and it was meh.

Certainly not every play is for every man. But this does not take away from Shakespeare being the greatest English language writer ever.

[Fragony]

Certainly not every play is for every man. But this does not take away from Shakespeare being the greatest English language writer ever.

Would still prefer a frontal lobotomy over having to read that old crap. And the best English writer is Brett Easton Ellis you silly

[HoreTore]

While I agree that there is modern art that is comparable in quality to the classics, I disagree that pop music has as much artistry and quality as classical music.

Indeed, it's not the same quality. Modern pop music is far betteer, I agree. Mozart had a thousand other composer to beat if he wanted to be considered the best. Lady GaGa has to beat millions to get to the top. In the modern age, we have also figured out that it's OK to cooperate with others to create art. Mozart was alone inh his basement, a modern artist works with a huge team.

And when all is said and done; if you could offer Mozart a modern mega-hit, like Bad or Pokerface, would he take it? Of course he would. He was an artist, and his mission was to make other people happy. Bad and pokerface makes people happy, millions of them in fact, and I'm pretty sure Mozart would've seen the value in that, instead of snobbing it.


It's not what they were about so much as how they were expressed. And the expression was divine.

Bah, there's not much difference in how they're expressed either.

[Subotan]

Well, I'm not even close, I don't like any of the things above, try another name.
:rolleyes:

One of the key characteristics of hipsters is that they hate "mainstream" culture, and take a bizarre amount of pride in exclusive appreciation of their own sub-culture - you have exactly the same mindset, only with the additional pretensions of someone who only appreciates the works of the dead.


While I agree that there is modern art that is comparable in quality to the classics, I disagree that pop music has as much artistry and quality as classical music.
That's not really a fair comparison - a better one would be to compare pop/rock/metal etc. with folk music, which was the pop of its time.

[Fragony]

Lady Gaga is not the best example, she is eccentric most of all. But Amy Whitehouse is one of the geniuses of our time. There is sooooooooooooo much overrated classic, Moonlight Senata common, completely predictable.

[HoreTore]

Lady Gaga is not the best example, she is eccentric most of all. But Amy Whitehouse is one of the geniuses of our time. There is sooooooooooooo much overrated classic, Moonlight Senata common, completely predictable.

It was just one random example among many.

[Beirut]

Bah, there's not much difference in how they're expressed either.

I sense that your discomfort with your inability to appreciate literary genius is manifesting itself as negativity.

[HoreTore]

I sense that your discomfort with your inability to appreciate literary genius is manifesting itself as negativity.

Nonsense. I simply reject the view that there is an all-time great, and that Shakespeare belongs on a pedestal, far above contemporary artists.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Shakespeare is good at what he does which is first of all to describe. Most of his plays are as much about describing the scenery as they are about actual plot -- with only so much budget for the stage he needs to give his audience the necessary visual cues through their imagination. But his writing is not that earth shattering to me. What I admire in writing is not just the ability to arrange words in a pleasing configuration, but to be able to capture the less definable characteristics of your subject through the way you write. Which is why I think “The naming of cats” by T.S. Elliot is really good:


The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter,
It isn't just one of your holiday games;
You may think at first I'm as mad as a hatter
When I tell you, a cat must have THREE DIFFERENT NAMES.
First of all, there's the name that the family use daily,
Such as Peter, Augustus, Alonzo or James,
Such as Victor or Jonathan, George or Bill Bailey--
All of them sensible everyday names.
There are fancier names if you think they sound sweeter,
Some for the gentlemen, some for the dames:
Such as Plato, Admetus, Electra, Demeter--
But all of them sensible everyday names.
But I tell you, a cat needs a name that's particular,
A name that's peculiar, and more dignified,
Else how can he keep up his tail perpendicular,
Or spread out his whiskers, or cherish his pride?
Of names of this kind, I can give you a quorum,
Such as Munkustrap, Quaxo, or Coricopat,
Such as Bombalurina, or else Jellylorum-
Names that never belong to more than one cat.
But above and beyond there's still one name left over,
And that is the name that you never will guess;
The name that no human research can discover--
But THE CAT HIMSELF KNOWS, and will never confess.
When you notice a cat in profound meditation,
The reason, I tell you, is always the same:
His mind is engaged in a rapt contemplation
Of the thought, of the thought, of the thought of his name:
His ineffable effable
Effanineffable
Deep and inscrutable singular Name.

[Beirut]

Nonsense. I simply reject the view that there is an all-time great, and that Shakespeare belongs on a pedestal, far above contemporary artists.

And what contemporary, may I ask, would you see as his equal?

[Banquo's Ghost]

Shakespeare is good at what he does which is first of all to describe. Most of his plays are as much about describing the scenery as they are about actual plot -- with only so much budget for the stage he needs to give his audience the necessary visual cues through their imagination. But his writing is not that earth shattering to me

:jawdrop:

Clearly, you have never read the bard.

He is responsible for some of the most iconic and revisited plots of all Western literature. One can level many criticisms at Shakespeare, but description over plot is not one of them.

[Banquo's Ghost]

And what contemporary, may I ask, would you see as his equal?

Christopher Marlowe, John Donne, Sir Philip Sidney, Cervantes, would I think, be on the pedestal alongside.

[HoreTore]

And what contemporary, may I ask, would you see as his equal?

Unless it's political or educational, I rarely read modern books. 95% of the fiction books I read date from 1800 to 1920, so I'm not the best one to answer that question.

But from the period I read? Plenty. Dumas, Tolstoj, Dostojevski, Skram, Hamsun. Need I go on?

[Beskar]

There is such thing as modern 'classical' music with people performing it such as Yiruma: the river flows in you.

As for fiction, a lot of it is written for the television now as Shakespeare wrote for the theatre, and there is a great many number of shows which are exceedingly well written.

[johnhughthom]

Indeed, it's not the same quality. Modern pop music is far betteer, I agree. Mozart had a thousand other composer to beat if he wanted to be considered the best. Lady GaGa has to beat millions to get to the top. In the modern age, we have also figured out that it's OK to cooperate with others to create art. Mozart was alone inh his basement, a modern artist works with a huge team.

And when all is said and done; if you could offer Mozart a modern mega-hit, like Bad or Pokerface, would he take it? Of course he would. He was an artist, and his mission was to make other people happy. Bad and pokerface makes people happy, millions of them in fact, and I'm pretty sure Mozart would've seen the value in that, instead of snobbing it.


So you are saying classical music was written for the happiness of the masses, and not the nobility? The main motivation for classical music and modern pop was more likely making money, it just came from a select group of people back then. Progress means we all subsidise the lives of "artists" now.

[Tellos Athenaios]

:jawdrop:

Clearly, you have never read the bard.

He is responsible for some of the most iconic and revisited plots of all Western literature. One can level many criticisms at Shakespeare, but description over plot is not one of them.

I have read him, and that (scenery over plot) is not my criticism. I don't find fault in his writing, rather the quality of his writing is in his ability to describe the scenery clearly without overwhelming his plots. Still, to me it doesn't hit those notes which make the reading of it memorable rather than his writing merely famous.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Nonsense. I simply reject the view that there is an all-time great, and that Shakespeare belongs on a pedestal, far above contemporary artists.Clearly, you understand nothing about literature. :wall:

Hamlet's Shakespeare is such a moving read! His 27 page stream-of-soliloquy at the end of Ulysses moves me to tears. And there are other great Irish novellists besides Hamlet! Such as that one already named by Banquo, Bard. And those masters of contemporary surrealism, Brian Cowen and Bertie Ahern (nicknamed 'The Bert'). And Brian O'Driscoll, although he is more famous for his many essays.

:book:

[HoreTore]

So you are saying classical music was written for the happiness of the masses, and not the nobility? The main motivation for classical music and modern pop was more likely making money, it just came from a select group of people back then. Progress means we all subsidise the lives of "artists" now.

In what alternative universe is the taste of a bunch of inbred twits(the nobility) better than that of functional humans?

[johnhughthom]

In what alternative universe is the taste of a bunch of inbred twits(the nobility) better than that of functional humans?

Probably the same universe where you don't totally miss my point.

[HoreTore]

Probably the same universe where you don't totally miss my point.

Ah.

I like being in that universe. It's so cozy......

[Beirut]

Christopher Marlowe, John Donne, Sir Philip Sidney, Cervantes, would I think, be on the pedestal alongside.

Apologies. I meant contemporary to HoteTore, not to Shakespeare. My mistake.

[Beirut]

:jawdrop:

Clearly, you have never read the bard.

He is responsible for some of the most iconic and revisited plots of all Western literature. One can level many criticisms at Shakespeare, but description over plot is not one of them.

:bow:

[Fragony]

:jawdrop:

Clearly, you have never read the bard.

He is responsible for some of the most iconic and revisited plots of all Western literature. One can level many criticisms at Shakespeare, but description over plot is not one of them.

It just reminds us that people could think up kewl plots even then, feel free to marvel at that but I'm not that surprised they could do that. Had Harry Potter been written hundreds of years ago people would be equally awed by Rowlings clever observations of society.

[Skullheadhq]

In what alternative universe is the taste of a bunch of inbred twits(the nobility) better than that of functional humans?

I would rather be ruled by the nobility then by the people. Here, I said it.
Oh, and compare songs like 'La donna é mobile' and 'O sole mio' with today's songs, comparisations like these make me sad. And these two songs aren't even that old. And I do think some of today's singers can sing it good, but they don't produce good music today.

[HoreTore]

Your subjective opinion.

That's all there is. Personally, I find both of them to be crap. But that's my subjective opinon. Psonally, I consider The Song Remains The Same the greatest song ever produced. But that's my personal opinion.

[Skullheadhq]

Your subjective opinion.

That's all there is. Personally, I find both of them to be crap. But that's my subjective opinon. Psonally, I consider The Song Remains The Same the greatest song ever produced. But that's my personal opinion.

What else than subjective opinion there is on this subject? Over smaak valt niet te twisten.
Oh, and anything containing electrical guitars doesn't qualify as music. But that's just my opinion.

[Fragony]

but they don't produce good music today.

Ya uh-huh, just disregard 99.99999% out of a hundred

[Skullheadhq]

Ya uh-huh, just disregard 99.99999% out of a hundred
Are you saying 99.99999% of today's music is good?

[Fragony]

Are you saying 99.99999% of today's music is good?

No 99.999999999999999999% isn't old

[Noncommunist]

I would rather be ruled by the nobility then by the people.

What's the big difference other than that nobility happen to have certain parents and don't have as much job insecurity?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What's the big difference other than that nobility happen to have certain parents and don't have as much job insecurity?

Upbringing.

The Queen of England believes it is her God-ordained duty to rule, but not her right. At its best the nobility embodies an idea of service that modern career politicians do not even echo, though they increasingly indulge in all the nobility's vices.

[Noncommunist]

Upbringing.

The Queen of England believes it is her God-ordained duty to rule, but not her right. At its best the nobility embodies an idea of service that modern career politicians do not even echo, though they increasingly indulge in all the nobility's vices.

How is serving the people because God told you to do so better than serving the people because the people said so? And wouldn't an upbringing among the people be of more help in serving them than an upbringing far removed from anything the common people experience?

[Skullheadhq]

What's the big difference other than that nobility happen to have certain parents and don't have as much job insecurity?

Many nobleman have a good education, the people usually don't.

[Ironside]

Upbringing.

The Queen of England believes it is her God-ordained duty to rule, but not her right. At its best the nobility embodies an idea of service that modern career politicians do not even echo, though they increasingly indulge in all the nobility's vices.

And the rest 99.9999% of the time when they aren't at their best?

[ICantSpellDawg]

I like Hispanic people alot, i just have an ingrown fear of black people due to life experiences. I don't value them any less than all people and I want to see them succeed, but seriously, what the hell is going on with black culture? Right?....Right?

[Skullheadhq]

black culture?

I laughed.

What is black culture?

[Noncommunist]

Many nobleman have a good education, the people usually don't.

Certainly, there are some spots where education for the masses can be improved but for the most part, the masses have a decent education. Plus, anyone clever enough to do well as a politician can probably become educated if necessary.

[Beskar]

Many nobleman have a good education, the people usually don't.

I have a better education then Prince Harry and Prince William. Should I take their place in line to the throne?

[Skullheadhq]

I have a better education then Prince Harry and Prince William. Should I take their place in line to the throne?

I am Dutch, If one of us is to take the throne of England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution) it should be me.

and you =/= the entire population.

[Strike For The South]

Many nobleman have a good education, the people usually don't.


I like Hispanic people alot, i just have an ingrown fear of black people due to life experiences. I don't value them any less than all people and I want to see them succeed, but seriously, what the hell is going on with black culture? Right?....Right?


I laughed.

What is black culture?

Maybe the muslims aren't the problem LOL.....Of course these prejudeces come from being told white people are the best from an early age, even if its just subtle. It's a problem that infects Western teaching on history and philosophie.

Of course that top comment is just abhorrent, "nobles" should stay in middle earth where they belong

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

And the rest 99.9999% of the time when they aren't at their best?

That depends on what you value, doesn't it?

Take Prince Charles for example, he was behind organic farming and environmentalism decades before any major elected politician. Yet people deride him for being stupid because, like many middle aged men, he has largish ears.


How is serving the people because God told you to do so better than serving the people because the people said so? And wouldn't an upbringing among the people be of more help in serving them than an upbringing far removed from anything the common people experience?

Well, one is an obligation, a duty, and the other is a choice. Remember, politicians actively seek power, most (Western) monarchs don't.

[Ironside]

That depends on what you value, doesn't it?

Take Prince Charles for example, he was behind organic farming and environmentalism decades before any major elected politician. Yet people deride him for being stupid because, like many middle aged men, he has largish ears.'

Well, one is an obligation, a duty, and the other is a choice. Remember, politicians actively seek power, most (Western) monarchs don't.


I deride him on the basis that uses population demographics. There's about 60 millions citizens in the UK. Unless the royal line is bred for this for generations, there's about 1/1.000.000 that he belongs to the 60 people in the UK that embodies the idea of service best. Sure, the extra education from birth gives a small bonus (that is probably lost on other matters due to the unusual and disconnected upbringing), but nobles aren't baseline better than the rest of the population.

Organic farming has the flaw that in brings smaller harvests. And what happened with food prices around 2008 before the crisis? Are smaller harvests a good idea when signs of food shortages are starting to be noted?

Environmentalism, while I do prefer it, has the problem that economics are involved. So it needs to be considered from that aspect as well, since we don't run SimWorld 1.0. Which makes it a very large and complicated issue.

See, that's something to know about. If you're famous, but not in political power you got it easy. You only need to say what you prefer and then do very little, perhaps some funding at most.
I wish for peace on earth. If you're in power you'll need to make it happen, since that's your job.


Well, one is an obligation, a duty, and the other is a choice. Remember, politicians actively seek power, most (Western) monarchs don't.

Monarchs are simply born with it and never been without it. Taking things for granted does gives some interesting lack of perspectives.

[Noncommunist]

That depends on what you value, doesn't it?

Take Prince Charles for example, he was behind organic farming and environmentalism decades before any major elected politician. Yet people deride him for being stupid because, like many middle aged men, he has largish ears.

There have also been some monarchs with profoundly awful ideas as well. Just think of all the terrible ideas carried out in the 20th century that would have been stopped if the people actually had a say.


Well, one is an obligation, a duty, and the other is a choice. Remember, politicians actively seek power, most (Western) monarchs don't.

Then why should we force it upon them? Shouldn't power be for those who are willing to make sacrifices to gain the mandate of the people rather than those who were set up to inherit it whether they want it or not?

[Subotan]

I would rather be ruled by the nobility then by the people. Here, I said it.
Oh, and compare songs like 'La donna é mobile' and 'O sole mio' with today's songs, comparisations like these make me sad. And these two songs aren't even that old. And I do think some of today's singers can sing it good, but they don't produce good music today.
You've backtracked somewhat from MY CULTURE IS DEAAAAAAAAAAAAD (http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/3/batmans_parents_are_dead.jpg)


Oh, and anything containing electrical guitars doesn't qualify as music. But that's just my opinion.
Unfortunately, I can't bang my head against the wall and post this response at the same time. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-y33Uq6HGs)

[Tuuvi]

Indeed, it's not the same quality. Modern pop music is far betteer, I agree. Mozart had a thousand other composer to beat if he wanted to be considered the best. Lady GaGa has to beat millions to get to the top. In the modern age, we have also figured out that it's OK to cooperate with others to create art. Mozart was alone inh his basement, a modern artist works with a huge team.

And when all is said and done; if you could offer Mozart a modern mega-hit, like Bad or Pokerface, would he take it? Of course he would. He was an artist, and his mission was to make other people happy. Bad and pokerface makes people happy, millions of them in fact, and I'm pretty sure Mozart would've seen the value in that, instead of snobbing it.



Bah, there's not much difference in how they're expressed either.

Actually, I was trying to say that classical music is better quality than pop music. If you listen closely to a good classical piece, you'll hear many different tones, melodies and rhythms and it's amazing to me how they work together to form a song. You don't really get that with pop music. The composition in a lot of pop music is really pretty bland because the the songs are lyric oriented, so the instrumentation is just mean to stay in the background. I've always felt that pop music is more for casual listening, because it seems to me like people who are more interested in music seek out other genres like rock, classical, jazz, alternative, etc.

Not that classical music should be put on a pedestal and be considered "high art" or whatever, because there are some pretty boring classical pieces out there.

As someone who likes to listen to obscure punk rock bands I disagree that popularity should be one of the main measures of quality, there are hundreds of unknown musicians out there with more talent than today's top artists who just lack the finances, social network, luck, or even desire to become famous. Plus your statement "Lady GaGa has to beat millions to get to the top." implies that making music is some sort of competition, which is false.

Of course the quality of music is completely up to the listener and this is just my opinion.

[Fragony]

Of course these prejudeces come from being told white people are the best from an early age, even if its just subtle. It's a problem that infects Western teaching on history and philosophie.

que wut? Examples please

[Banquo's Ghost]

Actually, I was trying to say that classical music is better quality than pop music. If you listen closely to a good classical piece, you'll hear many different tones, melodies and rhythms and it's amazing to me how they work together to form a song. You don't really get that with pop music. The composition in a lot of pop music is really pretty bland because the the songs are lyric oriented, so the instrumentation is just mean to stay in the background. I've always felt that pop music is more for casual listening, because it seems to me like people who are more interested in music seek out other genres like rock, classical, jazz, alternative, etc.

Not that classical music should be put on a pedestal and be considered "high art" or whatever, because there are some pretty boring classical pieces out there.

As someone who likes to listen to obscure punk rock bands I disagree that popularity should be one of the main measures of quality, there are hundreds of unknown musicians out there with more talent than today's top artists who just lack the finances, social network, luck, or even desire to become famous. Plus your statement "Lady GaGa has to beat millions to get to the top." implies that making music is some sort of competition, which is false.

Of course the quality of music is completely up to the listener and this is just my opinion.

The problem with "classical" and "popular" music being compared at all is that we do not have access to the entire classical oeuvre - only those works that were popular enough to survive (and some snippets of dross). Add to this that the "classical" era actually spans a thousand years - from plainsong to movies, and we can see that we are comparing apples and oranges. For example, I am greatly fond of early Renaissance church music but less keen on the Romantic composers of the 19th century (what my father used to dismiss as "blowing, banging and scraping music").

And of course, I am being sadly euro-centric there. The classical music of Japan is either inspiring or excruciatingly dull depending on one's taste. We are discovering more and more wonderful music from mediaeval Africa. The list goes on.

Classical music is not more complex than popular music. True, one finds much of modern music execrable and repetitive, but this is usually the stuff turned out factory-style from the big studios (and, as you note just my opinion). But even Mozart had to turn out low-grade stuff to make a living - The Magic Flute was a bit of pop theatre, which was wildly successful compared with his true masterpiece opera of Don Giovanni. But there are plenty of pop music works that are astonishing in their complexity - perhaps the best known is Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody' - many here will be better placed to name others.

And (in my opinion) almost all modern pop music is several orders of magnitude better than almost all of modern classical composition. The latter is atonal garbage in virtually every case as composers try to be "innovative". But then my distant ancestor probably said much the same thing about that Handel fellow with his harpsichords, trumpets and fireworks. What's wrong with a nice tune on the good old hurdy-gurdy?

[Skullheadhq]

There have also been some monarchs with profoundly awful ideas as well. Just think of all the terrible ideas carried out in the 20th century that would have been stopped if the people actually had a say.



Shouldn't power be for those who are willing to make sacrifices to gain the mandate of the people

Like demagogues....


but less keen on the Romantic composers of the 19th century (what my father used to dismiss as "blowing, banging and scraping music").

HERESY! HERESY!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb6o1uRdewo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUj7NgFHYB0

[Skullheadhq]

double post, please ignore or delete

[Banquo's Ghost]

HERESY! HERESY!

And yet, I raise you with the very voice of God.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZL3POaATn8

No blowing, banging or scraping. Tell me that isn't the epitome of purity.

Which of course, it's not, being almost completely revised from Allegri's rather spartan original. Bloody modernists.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Nothing can compare with modern classical and jazz fusion for musical complexity.

Neither are worth listening too.


Musical taste is about something else. Part personal, part cultural. I find mediaevil Japanese music excruciatingly dull because I do not understand the culture it belongs to. In order to appreciate 16th century Japanese drum, one must read 19th century Japanese poetry. In this same realisation lies an appreciation of modern pop music. Lady Gaga is a genius. As Édith Piaf is considered now. It takes some time for a cultural expression to ripen, to become classic itself, symbols of an age, a bygone era. The thirties have now become classic, now that the last are dying. The fifties are on their way to become classic. It's architecture, art, literature. Soon thereafter, the Beatles and brutalist architecture and lava lamps will become a symbol of the cultural refinement of a more elegant age. That is, if the tendency to think of culture as regressing from a previous golden age will continue, as it will might, in light of its wide appeal throughout the ages and across cultures.

[Skullheadhq]

And yet, I raise you with the very voice of God.
No blowing, banging or scraping. Tell me that isn't the epitome of purity.

Which of course, it's not, being almost completely revised from Allegri's rather spartan original. Bloody modernists.

I love it, Latin is a great language. Makes me feel sad about modern songs.
Perhaps the fact that English replaced Latin is the reason why modern songs are worthless? Interesting idea to think about.

[Noncommunist]

Like demagogues....

Who tend to be a problem because they undermine democracy turning it back into an autocracy like monarchism.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I love it, Latin is a great language. Makes me feel sad about modern songs.
Perhaps the fact that English replaced Latin is the reason why modern songs are worthless? Interesting idea to think about.

Not really, listening to Latin in song is a different experience if you know the words. What has changed is the manner of singing, the shift from long training to the auto-tuner and from acustics to the microphone.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I love it, Latin is a great language. Makes me feel sad about modern songs.
Perhaps the fact that English replaced Latin is the reason why modern songs are worthless? Interesting idea to think about.Interesting to think about indeed. I have given it some thought, and have come to the conclusion that it is all complete bollox.

English did not replace Latin in song. English did not replace Latin in the first place, it was replaced by centuries of national languages. What's more, with the exception of ecclasiatic music and student drink songs Latin hasn't dominated song at all. We have a tradition of centuries of song in French, German, Italian, Spanish, regional languages which has preceded the current dominance of English language popular music.

[Tuuvi]

The problem with "classical" and "popular" music being compared at all is that we do not have access to the entire classical oeuvre - only those works that were popular enough to survive (and some snippets of dross). Add to this that the "classical" era actually spans a thousand years - from plainsong to movies, and we can see that we are comparing apples and oranges. For example, I am greatly fond of early Renaissance church music but less keen on the Romantic composers of the 19th century (what my father used to dismiss as "blowing, banging and scraping music").

And of course, I am being sadly euro-centric there. The classical music of Japan is either inspiring or excruciatingly dull depending on one's taste. We are discovering more and more wonderful music from mediaeval Africa. The list goes on.

Classical music is not more complex than popular music. True, one finds much of modern music execrable and repetitive, but this is usually the stuff turned out factory-style from the big studios (and, as you note just my opinion). But even Mozart had to turn out low-grade stuff to make a living - The Magic Flute was a bit of pop theatre, which was wildly successful compared with his true masterpiece opera of Don Giovanni. But there are plenty of pop music works that are astonishing in their complexity - perhaps the best known is Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody' - many here will be better placed to name others.

And (in my opinion) almost all modern pop music is several orders of magnitude better than almost all of modern classical composition. The latter is atonal garbage in virtually every case as composers try to be "innovative". But then my distant ancestor probably said much the same thing about that Handel fellow with his harpsichords, trumpets and fireworks. What's wrong with a nice tune on the good old hurdy-gurdy?

Yes you've got a point I thought about it some more and I realized there isn't really any point in comparing the pop music to classical music, because they're made to suit different audiences in different occasions.