Deconstructing the white european majority. [Archive]

ICantSpellDawg

08-16-2012, 12:56

We are getting to a point where - if someone is intentionally trying to reduce someones voice due to their racial origins; they are declaring a war. HoreTore and people like him are in for a rude awakening if they think that they can endlessly attack the lives and livelihoods of others while eschewing any ability to defend themselves from physical force. The people that you attack and seek to actively disenfranchise are armed, numerous and will murder you. When you rob from people due to their race, you are a bad person. We should encourage people to make the most of their lives, not work against people for reasons of color. We were all peasants up until 100 years ago and to single out "white people in Europe" for cultural destruction makes Breivik look sane. Would you do this to asians in asia? or blacks in Africa? or Hispanics in S America? Maybe, but that's only because you are a moron with a nonsense morality.

Kralizec

08-16-2012, 13:01

I'm guessing that the quoted statement is supposed to mean something entirely different from what you people are thinking, and that HoreTore is trying to rile you all up.

If so: :thumbsup:

Fragony

08-16-2012, 13:05

I'm guessing that the quoted statement is supposed to mean something entirely different from what you people are thinking, and that HoreTore is trying to rile you all up.

If so: :thumbsup:

Possibly, but probably not. It's the whole idea behind it, get as many in too weaken nationalism, no nationalism no war.

Vladimir

08-16-2012, 13:08

Link or it didn't happen.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 13:19

Link or it didn't happen.

His wiki, we have the real thing here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hylland_Eriksen

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

08-16-2012, 13:44

I'd like to introduce you all to one of my favourite academics, the Norwegian professor Thomas Hylland Eriksen. I'll demonstrate why I like him by showing you my favourite quote:

"The most important thing now, is to deconstruct the white majority, and do it properly, so that it can never be called a majority again."

I agree completely. Do you?

That depends, if he means:

"we need to deconstruct the concept of "whiteness" in the sense that Norwegian = English = Dutch = German = Italian."

Then yes, I do agree. However, it goes without saying that we likewise need to deconstruct the Black and Asian majorities.

There was someone have a winge of the Guardian the other day about white privilage and white rage at dissenfranchisement.

"Whiteness", like "Blackness" exists primarily as an international concept, not a national one.

Lemur

08-16-2012, 13:53

You know, in New York some white dudes pay top dollar to be deconstructed by hot young things in leather.

Wait, maybe I'm reading this wrong.

HopAlongBunny

08-16-2012, 13:53

More to the point I think he is aiming at: there is no white race; no "pure" race; so get over it :p

Taking away the refuge of ppl who have reached the end of possibilities to denigrate the "other".

Sigurd

08-16-2012, 14:02

Save me a space at the nearest tanning saloon.

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 14:11

Couldn't really give a damn what he means, it's a bloody stupid thing to say and he should be locked up.

rvg

08-16-2012, 14:15

Couldn't really give a damn what he means, it's a bloody stupid thing to say and he should be locked up.

Locked up for what exactly? Saying stupid things is not a crime.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 14:16

Couldn't really give a damn what he means, it's a bloody stupid thing to say and he should be locked up.

We can lock up just about every leftist intellectual than. Not that bad an idea actually. They really believe this.

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 14:48

Locked up for what exactly? Saying stupid things is not a crime.

If I went around shouting about 'deconstructing Asians in Europe' or some such I would locked up pretty damn quick. If the law is equal he deserves the same for being offensive to me.

Greyblades

08-16-2012, 14:59

Locked up for what exactly? Saying stupid things is not a crime.

Though in some cases it really should be.

rvg

08-16-2012, 15:04

Though in some cases it really should be.
That's up to the Ministry of Truth to decide.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 15:20

Though in some cases it really should be.

He is harmless, just another leftist idiot. Best to just nod and let them ramble. If you try to explain that racism isn't exclusive to whites he wouldn't understand and will either sheepingly gaze or cast 'populismos' (or in the worst case scenario try to claw out your eyes but this one isn't female)

Ser Clegane

08-16-2012, 15:42

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

08-16-2012, 15:46

If I went around shouting about 'deconstructing Asians in Europe' or some such I would locked up pretty damn quick. If the law is equal he deserves the same for being offensive to me.

A: No, you wouldn't.

B: He's an academic, and HoreTore is almost certainly quoting from mid-way through a paper he has written or a lecture he has given, i.e. out of context.

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 15:46

If I went around shouting about 'deconstructing Asians in Europe' or some such I would locked up pretty damn quick. If the law is equal he deserves the same for being offensive to me.

Whathe said just before my quote, was that we have already deconstructed the asians.

I'm going on a safari tomorrow, so unfortunately I have to end my trolling. Krazilec wins the thread!

Hedid thecorrect thing, and asked "what does it mean?" yes.... What does deconstruction mean? It's quite obvious that none of the conservatives here know it. To me, that perfectly sums up the right's appraochto science; they don't have a clue, but act like they do.

So, on totheanswer; what does deconstruction mean?

Deconstruction is a scientific method in social anthropology(Hylland Eriksen's field). The method is to break down the field of study into as small parts as possible, identify all the parts and then see how they relate to each other. So, if you wanted to deconstruct the Norwegian population, you could start by breaking it up into "ethnic norwegians" and "immigrants". Then you could divide the "ethnic norwegians" into "northerners" and southerners, for example. Then you can go further and break them down to "rural" and "urban", "rich" and "poor", and so on.

As for the entire quote, what he is talking about is the following:

We have deconstructed all the various minority groups. We have studies on pakistanies who have been born herem pakistani's who have immigrated here, gay and straight muslims, rural and urban immigrants, etc etc. We have, however, not done the same with the majority population. Thomas Hylland Eriksen thus means that we do not have as good knowledge of the majority as we should have, and then urges his fellow researchers to focus on the various groups that make up the category "majority". He also wants it done properly, so that in the future there is no need to refer to a vague term like "the majority".

Sound scary? Nah. If you know the term, you know what it's about. If you don't, you should try to find outwhat that unknown word means, like Krazilec did. Add a hefty dose of ignorance and paranoia, however, and what you have is a conspiracy theory worthy of David Icke.

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 15:46

A: No, you wouldn't.

B: He's an academic, and HoreTore is almost certainly quoting from mid-way through a paper he has written or a lecture he has given, i.e. out of context.

Interview, actually. :smash:

Edit: just noticed pvc's and ser_clegane's posts; you get silver and bronze respectively. Good job!

Edit2: 'deconstruction' is actually a method sociology has nicked from literature studies. From my understanding the method is a little different there, but since I'm clueless about literature I have no idea what that is.

Lemur

08-16-2012, 15:53

'deconstruction' is actually a method sociology has nicked from literature studies. From my understanding the method is a little different there, but since I'm clueless about literature I have no idea what that is.
In my limited exposure to academics, I have come to believe that "deconstruction" can mean pretty much anything.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 15:57

I am not a native English speaker - but isn't the meaning of the term "deconstruct" a bit different from "destruct"? Could it be the the professor simply suggests that the "white majority" is actually also a collection of different groups?

EDIT: reading all posts actually helps - just noticed that PVC already basically said the same.
Well ... back to work...

I don't think anyone here read it as a call for destruction. I didn't at least. He's a typical leftist idiot, I get enough from his wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hylland_Eriksen

Multiculturalist.

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 16:00

I don't think anyone here read it as a call for destruction. I didn't at least. He's a typical leftist idiot, I get enough from his wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hylland_Eriksen

Multiculturalist.

You still had no clue what he was talking about, acted you like did, and then calls him an idiot.... Right.

Political and scientific terms do not always mean the same thing, frags.

THE is a known critic of multiculturalism, by the way.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 16:09

You still had no clue what he was talking about, acted you like did, and then calls him an idiot.... Right.

Political and scientific terms do not always mean the same thing, frags.

THE is a known critic of multiculturalism, by the way.

I know the type and I heard it all before, and I know what the idea behind multiculturalism is. Might be a hard nut to crack but I don't actually expect you to back someone who calls for destructing whites.

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 16:14

I know the type and I heard it all before, and I know what the idea behind multiculturalism is. Might be a hard nut to crack but I don't actually expect you to back someone who calls for destructing whites.

"Deconstructing the majority" is a call for more research on the majority. Given your political outlook, you should be thrilled by that, frags.

Ser Clegane

08-16-2012, 16:16

Fragony

08-16-2012, 16:20

"Deconstructing the majority" is a call for more research on the majority. Given your political outlook, you should be thrilled by that, frags.

Nope, not at all because for what end. I am also not thrilled by this

Between 2004 and 2010, Eriksen directed an interdisciplinary research programme, Cultural Complexity in the New Norway (CULCOM), at the University of Oslo. In a programmatic statement, he said that a main goal was to "redraw the map of Norway" to make it fit the new transnational, complex and globalised realities

and this

Eriksen has been a minor political candidate for the Norwegian Liberal Party.[1] In the local elections of 2011, he is a minor candidate for the Green Party in Oslo.

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 16:27

Nope, not at all. I am also not thrilled by this

Between 2004 and 2010, Eriksen directed an interdisciplinary research programme, Cultural Complexity in the New Norway (CULCOM), at the University of Oslo. In a programmatic statement, he said that a main goal was to "redraw the map of Norway" to make it fit the new transnational, complex and globalised realities

and this

Eriksen has been a minor political candidate for the Norwegian Liberal Party.[1] In the local elections of 2011, he is a minor candidate for the Green Party in Oslo.

Yes, he called for more research on the differences within the group we call "the norwegian majority" on serval occasions(that'swhat "redrawing the map" means"). Things like "what has happened to the old industrial towns?" and "is technological innovation enjoyed equally or unequally by different parts of the population?" The interview my quote comes from was given when he was in charge of culcom.p He also has loose affiliations with two centrist parties, one of whom(the liberals) is looking to support a new government in 2013, one which includes our "furthest right"-party, the progress party.

I believe you are talking about things you have no knowledge about, frags.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 16:33

Your english is fine Horetore but you can't read multiculti

Beskar

08-16-2012, 16:40

If I went around shouting about 'deconstructing Asians in Europe' or some such I would locked up pretty damn quick. If the law is equal he deserves the same for being offensive to me.

Depends on if you was "Asian" or not. He is a "White" person saying about "De-constructing Whites in Europe" and as such, as if an "Asian" person said about "De-constructing Asians in Europe", no one will act as it is socially far more acceptable than an "Other-Racial-Construct" saying "De-constructing Different-Racial-Construct in Europe".

Rather like some people use racial slurs against people of their own "race", but if you went up and went "sup n' ", you would be on the receiving end of a slap down. Such comments in context is described as "attacking yourself", and are viewed far more leniently than you attacking another person.

Anyway, he isn't a "lefty" anyway, if he was a lefty, he would be saying "The most important thing now, is to deconstruct the highly flawed socially constructed divides based on deep rooted prejudice with no consideration of the the facts". Ie: the notion of 'race'.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 16:45

Depends on if you was "Asian" or not. He is a "White" person saying about "De-constructing Whites in Europe" and as such, as if an "Asian" person said about "De-constructing Asians in Europe", no one will act as it is socially far more acceptable than an "Other-Racial-Construct" saying "De-constructing Different-Racial-Construct in Europe".

Rather like some people use racial slurs against people of their own "race", but if you went up and went "sup n' ", you would be on the receiving end of a slap down.

Anyway, he isn't a "lefty" anyway, if he was a lefty, he would be saying "The most important thing now, is to deconstruct the highly flawed socially constructed divides based on deep rooted prejudice with no consideration of the the facts". Ie: the notion of 'race'.

He can't be overly leftist as he is getting millions from the Norwegian government for trying to make multiculti work, so sometimes he will actually have to admit some things.

Just saying,

Five faculties collaborate in the University of Oslo’s great investment in “multicultural” questions. Since CULCOM was started up in the fall of 2004, eight doctoral projects have gotten underway, and soon nearly 30 Master’s theses will have been completed, three publications in CULCOM’s book series about fundamental questions concerning “Norway in the 21st century” have come out, and many conferences and seminars have been arranged. In particular, CULCOM has linked researchers from different fields of study who perhaps did not know about each other previously.

Over here we would call that a project

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

08-16-2012, 16:51

Whathe said just before my quote, was that we have already deconstructed the asians.

I'm going on a safari tomorrow, so unfortunately I have to end my trolling. Krazilec wins the thread!

Hedid thecorrect thing, and asked "what does it mean?" yes.... What does deconstruction mean? It's quite obvious that none of the conservatives here know it. To me, that perfectly sums up the right's appraochto science; they don't have a clue, but act like they do.

So, on totheanswer; what does deconstruction mean?

Deconstruction is a scientific method in social anthropology(Hylland Eriksen's field). The method is to break down the field of study into as small parts as possible, identify all the parts and then see how they relate to each other. So, if you wanted to deconstruct the Norwegian population, you could start by breaking it up into "ethnic norwegians" and "immigrants". Then you could divide the "ethnic norwegians" into "northerners" and southerners, for example. Then you can go further and break them down to "rural" and "urban", "rich" and "poor", and so on.

As for the entire quote, what he is talking about is the following:

We have deconstructed all the various minority groups. We have studies on pakistanies who have been born herem pakistani's who have immigrated here, gay and straight muslims, rural and urban immigrants, etc etc. We have, however, not done the same with the majority population. Thomas Hylland Eriksen thus means that we do not have as good knowledge of the majority as we should have, and then urges his fellow researchers to focus on the various groups that make up the category "majority". He also wants it done properly, so that in the future there is no need to refer to a vague term like "the majority".

Sound scary? Nah. If you know the term, you know what it's about. If you don't, you should try to find outwhat that unknown word means, like Krazilec did. Add a hefty dose of ignorance and paranoia, however, and what you have is a conspiracy theory worthy of David Icke.

So, basically what I said?

Viking

08-16-2012, 17:06

Then you can go further and break them down to "rural" and "urban", "rich" and "poor", and so on.

Also, they need to be broken down into "pragmatic" and "non-pragmatic". If you want people to understand you, then minimise the risk of misinterpretation. In non-linguistic terms, deconstruct is destruct with -con- added. It could be a mistake done by the author just as well as a genuine word with a different meaning. Whenever an academic is using words with a particular meaning within his field, he will be best understood if he deconstructs his words to the audience where potentially required.

Since the guy was brought up, it might be relevant to provide more quotes by him:

Cultural relativism provides no moral advices. It can only tell us that the world looks different from different viewpoints. Turning cultural relativism into a source of moral guidance will ultimately mean that one abandons every moral: then one will have to accept anything, if it just can be justified within some "culture". In our days, such a position is equal to no position at all.

Source (http://folk.uio.no/geirthe/Fleretniske.html):
Kulturrelativismen gir ingen moralske råd. Den kan bare fortelle oss at verden ser forskjellig ut fra forskjellige ståsteder. Å gjøre kulturrelativismen til moralsk rettesnor vil i siste instans innebære at man gir avkall på enhver moral: da vil man komme til å godta hva som helst, bare det kan begrunnes ut fra en eller annen "kultur". I våre dager er en slik posisjon jevngod med ingen posisjon.

Which is the truth. Cultural relativism sucks, just as hard as the results of multiculturalism do. A weak and vague monoculture is what to strive for.

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 17:37

Look it doesn't matter what he means by 'deconstruct' or that he's some Uni Prof (hell I've got an Phd myself but so what?) or that hes white or green or blue.

If you go throwing bricks off the top of buildings and one hits someone on the head then you are found negligent. He has said something damn silly and if it offends someone he should pay. To say that he didn't mean it offensively is like saying "I never meant the brick to hit someone on the head". To say that he's a Uni Prof giving a lecture on aerodynamics of bricks is not a defense either. What damn colour he happens to be is entirely irrelevant.

Look this Prof clearly disagrees with the notion of a 'white race'. Perhaps white people are more than one race? Slavs and say Celts may have their differences in genetic, language and cultural degrees but the fact is that they are white, predominantly (now) Christian and have lived in Europe for over 4000 years of known history. He may be right that it is a culture that Brevik and others wish to protect rather than a 'race'. Doesn't stop his comment being offensive. Lock him up!

As for 'cultural relativism' it's bollocks. Nor do I hold with religious relativism. I can respect the fact that others are different from me - even appreciate it at times (I very much like Bedouin Arab culture and visit Sinai where I have Bedu friends at least once a year) but I can only see the world through my eyes.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 17:39

Look it doesn't matter what he means by 'deconstruct' or that he's some Uni Prof (hell I've got an Phd myself but so what?) or that hes white or green or blue.

If you go throwing bricks off the top of buildings and one hits someone on the head then you are found negligent. He has said something damn silly and if it offends someone he should pay. To say that he didn't mean it offensively is like saying "I never meant the brick to hit someone on the head". To say that he's a Uni Prof giving a lecture on aerodynamics of bricks is not a defense either. What damn colour he happens to be is entirely irrelevant.

Look this Prof clearly disagrees with the notion of a 'white race'. Perhaps white people are more than one race? Slavs and say Celts may have their differences in genetic, language and cultural degrees but the fact is that they are white, predominantly (now) Christian and have lived in Europe for over 4000 years of known history. He may be right that it is a culture that Brevik and others wish to protect rather than a 'race'. Doesn't stop his comment being offensive. Lock him up!

You misunderstood he didn't say such a thing, post some context next time Horetore

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 17:49

Throw bricks and hit someone with a soft skull by accident? Still no defense.

Beskar

08-16-2012, 17:57

He can't be overly leftist as he is getting millions from the Norwegian government for trying to make multiculti work, so sometimes he will actually have to admit some things.

The thing is that two different concepts are so close together but they fundamentally different things.

If we go back to before christiandom, you have the Roman Empire and Rome. You would you say that "Rome" was pretty much "Roman" for a very long time? Possibly even imagine Rome being full of genetically similar people, born and raised there, perhaps expanding out across the ancient world which the history books sometimes portray it as? The reality is far far different. Rome was heavily reliant on bringing in foreigners, and the great expanse of the empire was not to create a lebensraum for the Roman people, but to bring more people into Rome. The City of Rome itself so genetically diverse far more so then the cosmopolitan cities of today with great waves of people entering the city having no clue on how to even speak Latin. What always persisted was the fundamentals on what it is to be Roman, certain cultural tenets which live on to this day. So people entered the city, bringing with them great ideas, their cultures, their diversity, then they were assimilated, pretty much like borg, adding their cultural and technological distinctive to Roman's own, then they were spat back out as Romans.

This happened throughout the ages, examples such as the British Empire were British people took up the habit of wearing pyjamas when going to bed. This whole notion now seems very British as depicted in the stereotypical "Arthur Dent" from Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, pyjamas, tea, tea towel... all this "Britishness" actually comes from the British colonisation of India, all these things are India concept that has been assimilated into British culture.

What actually happened was a liberation movement, a worldwide surge of nationalism which is more fundamentally a more rightist concept (division). This lead to the breakup of the colonial empires into many nation states we know today. In this brand new environment which is embracing diversity, the old ways of assimilation were thrown out of the window with people taking up the concept of "Multi-culturalism", the idea of having separate cultural identities all together upon the plate, far from the true "melting pot" of the old ways. Naturally, this does not work and people start fighting for more separation, as there is a tendency in human nature to run away from something, even if the solution is simply assimilation or in other words, giving each other a great big hug.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 17:59

Sure but it was never active policy

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 19:10

The thing is that two different concepts are so close together but they fundamentally different things.

If we go back to before christiandom, you have the Roman Empire and Rome. You would you say that "Rome" was pretty much "Roman" for a very long time? Possibly even imagine Rome being full of genetically similar people, born and raised there, perhaps expanding out across the ancient world which the history books sometimes portray it as? The reality is far far different. Rome was heavily reliant on bringing in foreigners, and the great expanse of the empire was not to create a lebensraum for the Roman people, but to bring more people into Rome. The City of Rome itself so genetically diverse far more so then the cosmopolitan cities of today with great waves of people entering the city having no clue on how to even speak Latin. What always persisted was the fundamentals on what it is to be Roman, certain cultural tenets which live on to this day. So people entered the city, bringing with them great ideas, their cultures, their diversity, then they were assimilated, pretty much like borg, adding their cultural and technological distinctive to Roman's own, then they were spat back out as Romans.

This happened throughout the ages, examples such as the British Empire were British people took up the habit of wearing pyjamas when going to bed. This whole notion now seems very British as depicted in the stereotypical "Arthur Dent" from Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, pyjamas, tea, tea towel... all this "Britishness" actually comes from the British colonisation of India, all these things are India concept that has been assimilated into British culture.

What actually happened was a liberation movement, a worldwide surge of nationalism which is more fundamentally a more rightist concept (division). This lead to the breakup of the colonial empires into many nation states we know today. In this brand new environment which is embracing diversity, the old ways of assimilation were thrown out of the window with people taking up the concept of "Multi-culturalism", the idea of having separate cultural identities all together upon the plate, far from the true "melting pot" of the old ways. Naturally, this does not work and people start fighting for more separation, as there is a tendency in human nature to run away from something, even if the solution is simply assimilation or in other words, giving each other a great big hug.

Sorry but I fundamentally disagree with your historical analysis. Rome started very much as a nationalist construct; "We're Romans and your Latins". The Roman Republic (which gained 80% of Romes Empire) was essentially aristocratic by nature (the land reforms of the Gracchi gave rise to a 'populist' movement of which Ceaser was the eventual heir). The British Empire was also a nationalistic and aristocratic enterprise. It is sometimes argued that the British Empire was based on trade while the Roman on war but this is rubbish too. The Roman Empire and it 'Equites' became the mercantile class in the Republican and Early Empire phases; if effect they became a 'middle class'. In the British and other European Empires the same applied - the would be middle class became managers of the Empire while the head of an administration, the Governor General or Pontius Pilate type always remained an aristocrat. Both Empires that you cite were brought about essentially through the need to protect their revenues (the Romans needed Sicily for food) and both were run at the time of their greatest expansion by aristocracies.

As for the end of the empires arguably the Anglo Saxon Empire has not finished. What is the USA but a continuation of the same policy as the old Empire?

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 19:26

You misunderstood he didn't say such a thing, post some context next time Horetore

Context? Bah, you can dig that up on your own if you're interested... Anyway, consider this a "test" of the backroom. I believe I ave sufficient clues as to the nature of the statement; I gave his name and his profession, whic you could've googled and found his field. Then, you could've found out what "deconstruct" means.

Instead, several here(with 3 notable exceptions) gave the word their own meaning, based on their own "frame". Noone has ever implied that deconstruction is a negative, but when one believes that there's a european civil war going on, one might be inclined to think so. That's the best explanation I can give for why some percieve deconstruction to be a negative term, anyway.

Also, it seems that two posters still haven't understood what deconstruction means, even though there are now several posts by several posters explaining what it is...

And Viking, who the hell supports normative cultural relativism instead of methodical cultural relativism? I want names, adresses and facebook pages to spam.

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 19:37

He can't be overly leftist as he is getting millions from the Norwegian government for trying to make multiculti work, so sometimes he will actually have to admit some things.

Just saying,

Five faculties collaborate in the University of Oslo’s great investment in “multicultural” questions. Since CULCOM was started up in the fall of 2004, eight doctoral projects have gotten underway, and soon nearly 30 Master’s theses will have been completed, three publications in CULCOM’s book series about fundamental questions concerning “Norway in the 21st century” have come out, and many conferences and seminars have been arranged. In particular, CULCOM has linked researchers from different fields of study who perhaps did not know about each other previously.

Over here we would call that a project

Culcom finished in 2010.

It's mission was to intensify research on a changing Norway. Everything from industrial change to demographic chanve. What was 'special' was that it joined several different fields together. I don't see how that can be seen as "multicultis takin' over our gubermintz", but then again I'm no big fan of conspiracy theories.

Also, what I like best about Hylland Eriksen is his writing style and well-timed arrogance.

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 19:45

HoreTore

08-16-2012, 19:55

You stir mud and people react. Happy?

Why doesn't the learned Prof 'deconstruct' something useful? I have nothing against studying for the sake of it but seriously we don't need 'educating' about who we are.

I am very much content, yes. I am also pleased to note that I am not really surprised to see who jumped on the bandwagon, and who had the ability to think things through.

And we don't need this kind of study, eh? We don't need to know what kind of measures for integration works best? We don't need to know how to best change from an old industrial society to a new industrial society? We don't need to know why people living on the east side of Oslo lives 10 years shorter than people on the west side? We should just accept whatever moronic and populist explanation right-wing leaders offer, eh? What has knowledge ever done for us? Much better to live in ignorance! That way we can be more effective at turning a blind eye to the problems in our societies.

That's a load of crap right there, good Sir.

Viking

08-16-2012, 19:56

And Viking, who the hell supports normative cultural relativism instead of methodical cultural relativism? I want names, adresses and facebook pages to spam.

It was primarily to provide some extra material written by the guy. But regardless, there is a continuous spectrum between saying A) "It's OK that they do it because they culture says its OK" (e.g. "honour" killings) and B) "I'll tolerate that they do it because it harms nobody" (e.g. to wear national costumes.). It doesn't take too much for the two to be mixed, e.g. when it is not clear or known whether or not something is harmful, cultural tolerance can lead to the topic of whether or not it actually is harmful not being studied. It doesn't even have to be a foreign culture, it could also be tolerance for one's own culture.

Beskar

08-16-2012, 20:01

Sorry but I fundamentally disagree with your historical analysis...

Nothing you said disagrees with anything I was talking about or has much relevance to it. However, if you want to know more of what I was talking about, feel free to watch "Meet the Romans" by Mary Beard (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01gknyq) which covers it in a nice presentational format.

Fragony

08-16-2012, 20:10

Culcom finished in 2010.

It's mission was to intensify research on a changing Norway. Everything from industrial change to demographic chanve. What was 'special' was that it joined several different fields together. I don't see how that can be seen as "multicultis takin' over our gubermintz", but then again I'm no big fan of conspiracy theories.

Also, what I like best about Hylland Eriksen is his writing style and well-timed arrogance.

No conspiracy just organised stupidity

ajaxfetish

08-16-2012, 20:59

Doesn't stop his comment being offensive. Lock him up!

Yikes, what a horrible sentiment. I'd hate to live in a world where any person choosing to take offense at an innocuous statement would be considered grounds for imprisonment. It's like a police state and a nanny state all rolled into one ball of horrible.

Ajax

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 21:08

I am very much content, yes. I am also pleased to note that I am not really surprised to see who jumped on the bandwagon, and who had the ability to think things through.

And we don't need this kind of study, eh? We don't need to know what kind of measures for integration works best? We don't need to know how to best change from an old industrial society to a new industrial society? We don't need to know why people living on the east side of Oslo lives 10 years shorter than people on the west side? We should just accept whatever moronic and populist explanation right-wing leaders offer, eh? What has knowledge ever done for us? Much better to live in ignorance! That way we can be more effective at turning a blind eye to the problems in our societies.

That's a load of crap right there, good Sir.

Suppose I start a thread called "The Deconstruction of Islam in Europe" and quote Anders Brevik. Does that make me clever? If you stir shit don't be surprised if you get hit by some.

As for your other questions 'integration' depends on immigration. Each will have their own their personal view on that but I fail to see how any academic thesis can help any integration. 'Deconstructing' your own society to integrate another is, in my opinion unacceptable. I do not want to become a minority in my homeland or accept sharia law. That of course is my own personal opinion.

Changing from an "old industrial society to a new industrial society" does not require a University Professor either... It is for business men and entrepreneurs to do, helped perhaps by low tax. A Uni Prof (which I once aspired to be) knows sod all of the reality of the business. Write all the theories you want... unless you get the money to start a business and can turn a profit it's all worthless.

We don't need to know why people living on the east side of Oslo lives 10 years shorter than people on the west side? We should just accept whatever moronic and populist explanation right-wing leaders offer, eh? What has knowledge ever done for us? Much better to live in ignorance! That way we can be more effective at turning a blind eye to the problems in our societies.

I don't know why the people on side of Oslo live longer than those the other side. Sure that is a decent area for research in my opinion - it is practical.

The rest is pure drivel... The implication is that if I reject Professor Eriksen then I reject knowledge and am thug populist. I reject his ideas because far from 'turning a blind eye to the problems in our societies' I believe he and his sort of pseudo communist 'cultural relativists' and the general 'socialist' 'intelligentsia', the European Nouveau Dictators and all of their ilk are causing and encouraging the problems in our societies.

ajaxfetish

08-16-2012, 21:21

Suppose I start a thread called "The Deconstruction of Islam in Europe" and quote Anders Brevik. Does that make me clever? If you stir shit don't be surprised if you get hit by some.Not a good analogy, since HoreTore's quote is from an intellectual, rather than a terrorist mass murderer. Bit of a significant difference in the source. I also have a hard time believing Breivik would be using the term deconstruction accurately, rather than as a malapropism for destruction.

'Deconstructing' your own society to integrate another is, in my opinion unacceptable. I do not want to become a minority in my homeland or accept sharia law. That of course is my own personal opinion.Is there any indication that the quoted source intends any of these things, or are you just arguing against your own imagination?

The implication is that if I reject Professor Eriksen then I reject knowledge and am thug populist. I reject his ideas because far from 'turning a blind eye to the problems in our societies' I believe he and his sort of pseudo communist 'cultural relativists' and the general 'socialist' 'intelligentsia', the European Nouveau Dictators and all of their ilk are causing and encouraging the problems in our societies.Are you sure you're not rejecting his ideas because you don't understand them?

Ajax

SoFarSoGood

08-16-2012, 21:59

Not a good analogy, since HoreTore's quote is from an intellectual, rather than a terrorist mass murderer. Bit of a significant difference in the source. I also have a hard time believing Breivik would be using the term deconstruction accurately, rather than as a malapropism for destruction.

One intellectuals opinion compared to another person does not make the 'intellectual' right. Perhaps my analogy was extreme but the point was just that HoreTore was stirring.

Is there any indication that the quoted source intends any of these things, or are you just arguing against your own imagination?

Well 'deconstructing the white european majority' basicly means we are deluded in thinking that we are white, european and a majority... Perhaps we never have been? Certainly there has never been a 'we'... a 'polis' that considers themselves as 'white europeans'. The English hate the French and the Serbs hate the Croats etc etc ad infinitum.

Are you sure you're not rejecting his ideas because you don't understand them?

Sadly I understand him and ilk all too well. He wishes a 'world society', I believe this means stagnation, dictatorship and corruption. I want freedom - he wants 'order'.

Sarmatian

08-16-2012, 22:53

Why doesn't the learned Prof 'deconstruct' something useful? I have nothing against studying for the sake of it but seriously we don't need 'educating' about who we are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=on9U_tdRIeU

8:44 for the win

Papewaio

08-16-2012, 23:56

As an Aussie and a member of the majority here I have watched the high point of reality TV called Masterchef.

Now since it is on in my household, I like a lot of Aussies have learned a lot of culinary terms. One of which is the dreaded deconstruction.

Now considering this is reality TV not a single contestant misunderstood the term to mean blowing up or destroying ones food. Seriously think about it for a moment. Reality TV contestants understand what deconstruction means. Do you really want to have a limited vocabulary that places you below that of Jersey Shore or The Kardashians?

Deconstruction in cooking is to understand all the components in a dish. Then with a better understanding of the fundamentals you reconstruct it into modern fare.

For instance deconstruct a fast food hamburger into a quality mince patty, with a salad on the side and a damper bun. Essentially take the same flavours, basic components and lift them up a notch.

=][=
Deconstruction of a population is what a census allows. You can figure out demographics such as age, ethnic, income, population density etc. Armed with this knowledge you can build schools, roads, hospitals, shopping malls and power plants.

To deconstruct the white majority in the UK. Is to understand that you have Anglo-Saxons and Celts. That you have rural Yorkshiremen and densely populated Liverpool. It is to understand the cultural differences between Northern and Southern England. It is to understand the needs, wants and diversity of different groups.

Armed with that knowledge it is possible to create solutions to regional problems such as multigenerational unemployment caused by the collapse of the steel and manufacturing industry. Those solutions will be different to those in more isolated rural areas or the city.

Deconstruction is about understanding what makes your population tick. IMDHO the professor was complaining that we understand the immigrants and it was about time we paid attention to the native majority so we can look to the majorities issues and resolve them.

In short deconstruction is about understanding the fundamentals components. It's the social equivalent of stripping down a car engine to understand how it works. It's about knowledge not obliteration.

Montmorency

08-17-2012, 00:15

Turning cultural relativism into a source of moral guidance will ultimately mean that one abandons every moral: then one will have to accept nothing

:mellow:

Why doesn't the learned Prof 'deconstruct' something useful? I have nothing against studying for the sake of it but seriously we don't need 'educating' about who we are.

The History PhD doesn't like the Anthro-Socio PhD? Hmm...

Major Robert Dump

08-17-2012, 00:49

I look forward to the day when whitey is no longer the majority. Maybe then everyone will finally STFU.

HoreTore

08-17-2012, 05:37

Well 'deconstructing the white european majority' basicly means we are deluded in thinking that we are white, european and a majority...

lol, I see you still haven't the faintest idea what the word "deconstruction" means... Hilarious.

rory_20_uk

08-17-2012, 09:39

I look forward to the day when whitey is no longer the majority. Maybe then everyone will finally STFU.

Yet countries where others are the majority they manage to get on without closeted idiots bemoaning that they live where they do, and complaining that there is not of others money spent on something or other.

~:smoking:

Fragony

08-17-2012, 09:49

I look forward to the day when whitey is no longer the majority. Maybe then everyone will finally STFU.

Doesn't work for Amsterdam. Needs mentioning that absolutetely nothing ever works in Amsterdam

Husar

08-17-2012, 10:08

Hax

08-17-2012, 10:29

Can we perhaps interpret "deconstruct" within the context of dispelling myths, preconceptions and tropes that apply to the "white European majority"? As someone of mixed birth I see culture not necessarily as inherited from the parents, but something that is largely formed by the social constructs with which a person is surrounded. Of course, family is a large aspect of this, but I think that education and extra-curricular activity play a much larger role in shaping a person as he is. To what the degree the government should support this I'm not sure. I think a large problem stems from the fact that foreigners are being treated differently, which will probably not lead to them ever feeling included.

Fragony

08-17-2012, 10:45

Sir Moody

08-17-2012, 12:52

I know he didn't mean destruction. But what he does is just as bad. He is a multiculturalist.

no just the opposite actually - he is criticising the way we go about Multiculturalism - he is pointing out we know more about the different minority groups and their problems than the groups which make up the Majority

He is advocating studying the groups which make up the Majority and identifying the problems they suffer rather than only looking at them as one big group

I would have thought this would match your world view since you advocate spending more time dealing with the "Natives" problems than the immigrants...

Fragony

08-17-2012, 13:12

no just the opposite actually - he is criticising the way we go about Multiculturalism - he is pointing out we know more about the different minority groups and their problems than the groups which make up the Majority

He is advocating studying the groups which make up the Majority and identifying the problems they suffer rather than only looking at them as one big group

I would have thought this would match your world view since you advocate spending more time dealing with the "Natives" problems than the immigrants...

He is critisizing it to move it forward, not to crush the idea itself. Which has to be done.

A wise man called Gelatinious Cube once nailed it: ' I think the answer to racism and issues of equality are simple: just treat everyone the same'

I think it was on page 2

there, so simple. I am not a lab-rat for crazy professors

'I would have thought this would match your world view since you advocate spending more time dealing with the "Natives" problems than the immigrants'

Explaine myself, your turn, what teh que do you mean?

a completely inoffensive name

08-18-2012, 03:47

You can't kill racism/prejudice. It's an emerging problem prompted by a lack of resources in a world where responsibility/guilt is disseminated along the entire division of labor.

Montmorency

08-18-2012, 03:56

You can't kill racism/prejudice.

Who said it?

It's an emerging problem prompted by a lack of resources in a world where responsibility/guilt is disseminated along the entire division of labor.

Resources? Responsibility? Guilt? Division of labor? Have you been hearing "social structure" get tossed around too often in Uni?

a completely inoffensive name

08-18-2012, 04:01

Who said it?
Resources? Responsibility? Guilt? Division of labor? Have you been hearing "social structure" get tossed around too often in Uni?

Sorry, was copy pasta a friend's status thing from facebook. I thought I could understand by posting it here and having people pick it apart.

Now I know my friends are weak minded.

Tuuvi

08-18-2012, 05:40

This thread makes me feel dumb. Especially because I'm planning on getting a PhD in Archaeology/Anthropology. I lost oxygen at birth, that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it.

SoFarSoGood

08-18-2012, 05:47

Do you really believe that having 'deconstructed the white European race' this Prof would reach an academic conclusion that would benefit what he has 'deconstructed'? We ALL become minorities so immigrants are not to be worried about is the end this 'deconstruction'. Doesn't matter that the majority of those he presumes to 'deconstruct' do not wish more immigrants. Divide and rule.

Papewaio

08-18-2012, 05:55

Of course Anglo-Saxon is a single pure race...

Sir Moody

08-18-2012, 14:10

He is critisizing it to move it forward, not to crush the idea itself. Which has to be done.

A wise man called Gelatinious Cube once nailed it: ' I think the answer to racism and issues of equality are simple: just treat everyone the same'

I think it was on page 2

there, so simple. I am not a lab-rat for crazy professors

'I would have thought this would match your world view since you advocate spending more time dealing with the "Natives" problems than the immigrants'

Explaine myself, your turn, what teh que do you mean?

of course Equality is the goal - but not everyone is the same or suffers the same problems - take 3 different groups (and I apologise for the Marketing groups I am about to use), the Blue Collar Roots, the Educated urbanites and Inner city adversity.

The Blue Collar represents the skilled long time workers - think Mechanics, Factory workers etc

The Educated Urbanites are the young well educated affluent professionals - think Bankers, IT workers etc

The Inner City Adversity represents the "Slum" occupants - generally immigrants.

What the professor is saying is we have spent a lot of time identifying the problems faced by the Inner City Adversity - but we spend no time looking at the other 2 groups and instead lump them together, what we should be doing is spending as much time looking at ALL the groups equally to asses what problems each group faces and how we can fix it - not just focus on some groups

Fragony

08-18-2012, 14:28

of course Equality is the goal - but not everyone is the same or suffers the same problems - take 3 different groups (and I apologise for the Marketing groups I am about to use), the Blue Collar Roots, the Educated urbanites and Inner city adversity.

The Blue Collar represents the skilled long time workers - think Mechanics, Factory workers etc

The Educated Urbanites are the young well educated affluent professionals - think Bankers, IT workers etc

The Inner City Adversity represents the "Slum" occupants - generally immigrants.

What the professor is saying is we have spent a lot of time identifying the problems faced by the Inner City Adversity - but we spend no time looking at the other 2 groups and instead lump them together, what we should be doing is spending as much time looking at ALL the groups equally to asses what problems each group faces and how we can fix it - not just focus on some groups

You don't understand, there is no common dominator that is making multiculture succeed for me. Everyone can live here I don't care, but multiculturalism is a very dangerous brand of social-engineering, a top-down aproach to multi-ethnism. Nice to consider all groups but if in the end the result has to be a hundred you will always have alter the numbers.

jirisys

08-18-2012, 19:22

You don't understand, there is no common dominator that is making multiculture succeed for me. Everyone can live here I don't care, but multiculturalism is a very dangerous brand of social-engineering, a top-down aproach to multi-ethnism. Nice to consider all groups but if in the end the result has to be a hundred you will always have alter the numbers.

What?

~Jirisys ()

Fragony

08-18-2012, 20:15

What?

~Jirisys ()

What I really mean is that we all should be more like Al Salvador can't you read between the lines

ajaxfetish

08-18-2012, 20:34

Fragony

08-18-2012, 20:41

Or, you know, you could stop talking about multiculture and start discussing issues relevant to the topic at hand.

Ajax

For the last time, I am not into that, not before you shave your legs. Period. Can we please stay on topic

jirisys

08-18-2012, 21:18

What I really mean is that we all should be more like Al Salvador can't you read between the lines

Ok, though I would love Al Salvador to be like the Natherlands.

Or, you know, you could stop talking about multiculture and start discussing issues relevant to the topic at hand.

Ajax

That.

For the last time, I am not into that, not before you shave your legs. Period. Can we please stay on topic

Would be nice if you actually stayed on topic yourself.

I was confused at the beggining of this thread when everyone was angry that someone wants to deconstruct the majority. Who in their right minds would equate deconstruction to "let's get some other races in here and make the white majority a minority"? Oh, hello there Fragony.

~Jirisys ()

Fragony

08-18-2012, 21:29

Ok, though I would love Al Salvador to be like the Natherlands.

That.

Would be nice if you actually stayed on topic yourself.

I was confused at the beggining of this thread when everyone was angry that someone wants to deconstruct the majority. Who in their right minds would equate deconstruction to "let's get some other races in here and make the white majority a minority"? Oh, hello there Fragony.

~Jirisys ()

I am on-topic flute-boy. I am not sure about you though, we were talking about what and where did I got adrift?

jirisys

08-18-2012, 21:58

I am on-topic flute-boy. I am not sure about you though, we were talking about what and where did I got adrift?

Studying the smaller groups that conform the white majority.

And you got adrift the second you wrote about the evils of the multiculturalist left.

~Jirisys ()

Fragony

08-18-2012, 23:20

Studying the smaller groups that conform the white majority.

And you got adrift the second you wrote about the evils of the multiculturalist left.

~Jirisys ()

Nope I really didn't, because for lefties such as yourself only within the multiculturalist context is any debate allowed. Too narrow a margin for me I need some more space to feel comfortable. Otherwise it's a bit creepy.

HoreTore

08-19-2012, 16:30

YOU'VE BEEN TROLLED BY HORETORE!

And the really sad part is that some of you still didn't get it several posts after he explained it...

I have to say that I didn't think of the scientific meaning at first either, even though I've heard it before.

And just to make that clear again, deconstruct in this context means to take it apart and then study the bits, not to destroy it or to make it less significant than it is today. It's a call for more detailed research. No reverse racism or self-hatred involved.
Whether a scientist should not usehis scientific language because some troll might quote him out of context to rile people up who will still be riled up because they're unable and unwilling to admit to being fooled after the troll explained them what he did there, is another question (and also somewhat laughable).

Point number one was to have a laugh.

The second, more serious point, is that these kind of things are what makes up the "facts" of the far-right idiots, like the BNP, Geert, etc. This is the kind of stuoidity they base their paranoia on.

The exact quote I used has been used before, by Fjordman among many others. The last time I know it was used, was by ABB in the trial. I just loved Hylland Eriksen's reply to that use; "well, you can't expect much better, he is uneducated after all..."

There might be some differences between the intelligence level of Eurabia and Holocaust denial, but I can't see it. Both "theories" represent thedeath of intelligent thought; very few things can be called dumber.

Fragony

08-19-2012, 16:45

There might be some differences between the intelligence level of Eurabia and Holocaust denial.

Since when are you so generous

Furunculus

08-19-2012, 16:51

Point number one was to have a laugh.
The second, more serious point, is that these kind of things are what makes up the "facts" of the far-right idiots, like the BNP, Geert, etc. This is the kind of stuoidity they base their paranoia on.

i'm not sure i recognise much of a direct parallel between the likes of the extreme right like the BNP and populist right like Geert.

Beskar

08-19-2012, 17:24

Geert is more reactionary popularist right, rather like the stereotypical Daily Mail reader. He is more a rabble-rouser, provoking attacks against things which threaten people, thus drawing upon the protective and defensive nature of a population. If there is no perceived threat, he would lose political support.

BNP are the extreme right which inhabits loonyville, they systematically march on in spite of reality.

SoFarSoGood

08-19-2012, 18:06

Reality is what you make it.

HoreTore

08-19-2012, 22:39

i'm not sure i recognise much of a direct parallel between the likes of the extreme right like the BNP and populist right like Geert.

They both subscribe to the nutty Eurabia theory, which is the subject of this thread.

Fragony

08-20-2012, 01:17

Not so nutty

Tellos Athenaios

08-20-2012, 03:00

Oh I don't know, Fragony. I'd say Papewaio was right and we should turn it into a food thread. Deconstructed fruitcakes would go well with some nuts...

Fragony

08-20-2012, 03:55

If you bring the oil I'll rub you up

a completely inoffensive name

08-20-2012, 04:01

I deconstructed a lasagna with my mouth and a fork just last night. Very enlightening.

Fragony

08-20-2012, 04:27

I deconstructed a lasagna with my mouth and a fork just last night. Very enlightening.

I get you, absolutely unthinkable that in an oil crisis arab states want something in return for a steady supply. It's just too much to even consider it.

jirisys

08-20-2012, 08:39

I get you, absolutely unthinkable that in an oil crisis arab states want something in return for a steady supply. It's just too much to even consider it.

Not to mention that the large amount of social establishments that call themselves "true chinese" contain many insipid and irrational nuts. And, with the large amount of chickens that are abundant; overthrowing those nuts seems like an impossible task, the stagnation is obvious. Even more as now rice is scarce and cannot even pretend that this added bonus would stabilize the system without requesting additional relief eforts that would have to be paid in hard money. Why? Because the socialité is too busy with imposing small rations in order to further their own agendas, which hurt the pocket of the regular people who have to shell out money on things they should not need to.

Really bad Chinese restaurant, don't recommend it.

~Jirisys ()

Fragony

08-20-2012, 08:55

Mockery is boring because it's so very very normal, way too normal to be clever

Strike For The South

08-22-2012, 05:21

Race is a complete social construct.

Once we let the Irish in, we knew we were just moving the goalposts

Hax

08-23-2012, 10:03

I get you, absolutely unthinkable that in an oil crisis arab states want something in return for a steady supply. It's just too much to even consider it.

What are you talking about?

Fragony

08-23-2012, 10:13

What are you talking about?

A deal that was struck between what was then the EU and the oil states during the oil crisis in the seventies, boils down to oil for immigration from islamic countries

I'll let Pam (rip) explain
http://www.meervrijheid.nl/?pagina=1391

Hax

08-23-2012, 12:17

Fragony

08-23-2012, 12:20

Don't tell me you actually believe that Eurabia horsecrap? The "document" you linked to contains no sources apart from Bat Ye'or's Eurabia book, which has long been debunked as being unadultered nonsense. It's warmongering and propaganda under the guise of academia that more often than not is unable to come up with any kind of evidence.

Oh yes I absolutely believe that, and no it has not be debunked it has been lolololo'ld but that's normal

Sources are in that book by the way, as she said. This is a collumn. Go to the library and read the book.

Hax

08-23-2012, 13:17

I'll do that when you pick up Edward Said.

Fragony

08-23-2012, 13:23

I'll do that when you pick up Edward Said.

What makes you think I haven't, he wrote the prologue of Gilles Kepel's 'jihad, the trail of political islam' by the way

Hax

08-23-2012, 13:32

Orientalism? Out of Place? Covering Islam?

Fragony

08-23-2012, 13:57

Edward Said's realm is the opinion of the west on the arab world, it has little to do with the arab influence in the west. It are completely different subjects.

Idaho

08-23-2012, 17:06

Would you agree with this sentiment?

Another problem is that of the muslims in our midst. We are being very indulgent to them. There is good reason to think that in some cases our indulgence is being abused. From facts within my own knowledge, I believe that many terrorists came here as immigrants. Many of these immigrants are muslims. They should be careful not to arouse the same resentment here as they have stirred up in so many countries.

I dislike racism as much as anyone, but it is a fact that the muslims are getting a stranglehold on European life out of all proportion to their avowed numbers. Many of the European muslims, often themselves recent immigrants from the Middle East, were the worst of their kind. In Europe, muslims formed a self-interested community, and the misdeeds of some bring down reprisals on the rest.

Sound reasonable Fragony?

Vladimir

08-23-2012, 17:22

Would you agree with this sentiment?

Sound reasonable Fragony?

On it own it looks reasonable but is phrased in a way that it could apply to almost any immigrant group.

Fragony

08-23-2012, 17:50

Would you agree with this sentiment?

Sound reasonable Fragony?

Sounds ok to me, where's the trap

HoreTore

08-23-2012, 20:46

A deal that was struck between what was then the EU and the oil states during the oil crisis in the seventies, boils down to oil for immigration from islamic countries

I'll let Pam (rip) explain
http://www.meervrijheid.nl/?pagina=1391

Ah yes...

One of the EU's numberless chit-chat clubs is blown out of proportion and given actual power and influence. Like the Illuminati before them, it's also been given extended life(EAD was shut down in 79, frags).

We all know how much politicians love giving up power. That's why european politicians gave up all power back in the seventies to a powerless foreign power. The "euro elites" decided that even though they are superior in organization, in military, in economics, in education, in technology, in everything, they were just going to hand power over to someone else.

That's Bat Ye'or for you, and that's the reason she belongs in an insane asylum. And puh-lease, her "sources" are nothing but circle-logic and/or irrelevant to the point she's making.

Edit: and I love you Idaho, I really do.

Fragony

08-23-2012, 20:55

In short, you simply know, for a fact, that it simply isn't true

HoreTore

08-23-2012, 21:02

In short, you simply know, for a fact, that it simply isn't true

No.

This thread has demonstrated that this is the way you form your opinions, not me. You were the one who jumped to a conclusion without knowing anything about what was being said, because you "already know the truth".

I have read the Eurabia arguments. I have also checked their claims. Thus, I know it's rubbish. It has no more merit than any other whacko conspiracy theory has. It belongs in the same category as Loose Change, the Protocols, fake moon landings and other such complete nonsense.

Fragony

08-23-2012, 23:58

So if I get this right you know, for a fact, that it simply isn't true

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 05:47

So if I get this right you know, for a fact, that it simply isn't true

Yes, I know for a fact that the Eurabia nonsense isn't true.

Just like I know that we did land on the moon, it wasn't filmed in a desert in California. And the Protocols were made by the Russian secret police, it has no basis in reality.

Kadagar_AV

08-24-2012, 06:30

Yes, I know for a fact that the Eurabia nonsense isn't true.

Just like I know that we did land on the moon, it wasn't filmed in a desert in California. And the Protocols were made by the Russian secret police, it has no basis in reality.

What part?

If you look at it from the perspective of: "There is no Cobra Commander in a secret base somewhere who points his fingers and have Muslims follow..." Well then yeah, I agree with you. It's rubbish.

However, if 90% of the population get 1,5 kids, and 10% of the population get 4,5 kids, the 10% will be in majority after two generations.

I don't know how it is with you over there in Norway, but here in Sweden we have rather low birth rates among native Swedes. The Afghanis and Somalis, however, seem to have no problem procreating in our Nordic environment.

From this perspective, one could worry about sharia laws hitting us within 50 years.

I know saying that is tin-foil-hat-worthy for some... But then, those same people would have put tin foil hats on any Swede who 30 years ago said we in Sweden would have immigrant Ghettos totally secluded from society at large by 2010.

Kadagar_AV

08-24-2012, 06:30

double post.

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 06:39

What part?

If you look at it from the perspective of: "There is no Cobra Commander in a secret base somewhere who points his fingers and have Muslims follow..." Well then yeah, I agree with you. It's rubbish.

However, if 90% of the population get 1,5 kids, and 10% of the population get 4,5 kids, the 10% will be in majority after two generations.

I don't know how it is with you over there in Norway, but here in Sweden we have rather low birth rates among native Swedes. The Afghanis and Somalis, however, seem to have no problem procreating in our Nordic environment.

From this perspective, one could worry about sharia laws hitting us within 50 years.

I know saying that is tin-foil-hat-worthy for some... But then, those same people would have put tin foil hats on any Swede who 30 years ago said we in Sweden would have immigrant Ghettos totally secluded from society at large by 2010.

"Eurabia" is a conspiracy theory claiming that "euro elites" has sold us into dhimmitude by opening our borders to immigration, apparently in exchange for oil. That's about as truthful as the Protocols.

As for muslim population... Most(sane) statistics show that most european countries will have around 10% immigrants in 30 years, quite far from the doomsday predictions. As for birthrates, that only applies to the women who have just arrived inthe country, the birthrate drops dramatically with each year the immigrant stays inthe country. A second gen has abiut the same rate as a european. Also, the birthratw varies dramatically between countries of origin. Basically, theyimmigrate with the birth stat of their home country, then assimilate quickly to the birth stat of their new country.

Also, there is nothing to suggest tha once we hit the 50% immigrant mark, if we ever do, we'll get sharia. First of all, only about 50% of people from muslim countries in Norway are actually religious. Of that50%, only a minority supports hard sharia laws.

I think we'll be safe in the future too. Unless the right-wingers gain power, that is. That's the real threath.

Kadagar_AV

08-24-2012, 07:16

"Eurabia" is a conspiracy theory claiming that "euro elites" has sold us into dhimmitude by opening our borders to immigration, apparently in exchange for oil. That's about as truthful as the Protocols.

As for muslim population... Most(sane) statistics show that most european countries will have around 10% immigrants in 30 years, quite far from the doomsday predictions. As for birthrates, that only applies to the women who have just arrived inthe country, the birthrate drops dramatically with each year the immigrant stays inthe country. A second gen has abiut the same rate as a european. Also, the birthratw varies dramatically between countries of origin. Basically, theyimmigrate with the birth stat of their home country, then assimilate quickly to the birth stat of their new country.

Also, there is nothing to suggest tha once we hit the 50% immigrant mark, if we ever do, we'll get sharia. First of all, only about 50% of people from muslim countries in Norway are actually religious. Of that50%, only a minority supports hard sharia laws.

I think we'll be safe in the future too. Unless the right-wingers gain power, that is. That's the real threath.

If the bold part is true, I should be absolutely horrified... We have more than 10% immigrants already...

Also, Norway don't specialize in accepting Somalis a.k.a. "Africa's answer to Gypsies" to the extent Sweden do.

Fragony

08-24-2012, 07:43

Yes, I know for a fact that the Eurabia nonsense isn't true.

That's normal. But it has all been documented.

Idaho

08-24-2012, 09:50

Sounds ok to me, where's the trap

Of course it was a trap. I took an editorial from 1939 from the pro-Nazi (at the time) Daily Mail, and just substituted Jews for muslims.

Original:

3) George Ward Price, Daily Mail (9th October, 1939)
Another war-problem is that of the aliens in our midst. We are being very indulgent to them. There is good reason to think that in some cases our indulgence is being abused. From facts within my own knowledge, I believe that many enemy agents came here as refugees. Many of these alien immigrants are Jews. They should be careful not to arouse the same resentment here as they have stirred up in so many countries.

I dislike as much as anyone else the Nazi persecution of that race, but it is a fact that the Jews were getting a stranglehold on German life out of all proportion to their avowed numbers. Many of the German Jews, often themselves recent immigrants from Eastern Europe, were the worst of their kind. In this country the national character is strong enough to absorb the better Hebrew type; in Germany, the Jewish aliens formed a class-conscious, self-interested community, and the misdeeds of some brought down reprisals on the rest.

rory_20_uk

08-24-2012, 10:01

Fragony

08-24-2012, 10:11

Of course it was a trap. I took an editorial from 1939 from the pro-Nazi (at the time) Daily Mail, and just substituted Jews for muslims.

Oh me so busted. Now that we are in godwin territory, did you know that Mein Kampf is THE bestseller in the muslim world. Which is hardly surprising given the rampant anti-semitism among muslims (and no not all but A LOT).

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 10:37

If the bold part is true, I should be absolutely horrified... We have more than 10% immigrants already...

Also, Norway don't specialize in accepting Somalis a.k.a. "Africa's answer to Gypsies" to the extent Sweden do.

Sorry for not being clear, it was immigrants from muslim countries I'm talking about, since I don't see how the number of aussies or vietnamese are relevant when talking about sharia...

That stat for Sweden in 2010 is around 4-5%, according to Pew Research Center(sane research). In 2030, they estimate tha you will have just under 10%. 10% is the highest percentage in 2030(belgium and france), with the average in europe being around 7%.

Now you need to divide that number by two to get the number of people who belong to a mosque(with the assumption that those who do not are not muslims, roughly speaking). Then you need to divide by three to get the number of people who go to a mosque regularly. And finally, from that small percentage, you can find those who want to implement Sharia. Should be around 5% or so of the muslim population, about the same as the number of whackjob christians in the christian population.

We'll be safe, Kadagar.

Of course, having a 90% muslim population does not equal sharia either, in any way. Muslim countries range from theocracies with divine law(Iran, Saudi Arabia) to democracies with secular law(Turkey, Albania). Believing that we will turn to sharia once we have x amount of our population affiliated with Islam is completely unfounded.

That's normal. But it has all been documented.

It has not, no. Batty bat ye'or and others have dug up some random documents(including a literature convention, for crying out loud) who they claim support their lunacy. It does not. In any way. Eurabia has a grand total of 0 - zero - facts to back it up.

It's no more than a collection of hate, fear of the unknown, fascist nostalgia and psychiatric disorders.

It's obvious that Eurabia proponents have issues. They should be given proper medical care, not be allowed to embarass themselves.

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 10:45

Oh me so busted. Now that we are in godwin territory, did you know that Mein Kampf is THE bestseller in the muslim world. Which is hardly surprising given the rampant anti-semitism among muslims (and no not all but A LOT).

Rofl.

The "mein kampf bestseller"-myth once again. I see you are really working hard to prove the extreme right has no clue.

This myth originated from this story (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/5182107/Indian-business-students-snap-up-copies-of-Mein-Kampf.html). It's almost a half-truth, I'll give you that. While the article describes India, it is at least a part of India with a few muslims. So, there were probably a lot of Muslim Indians who bought it too, even though the purpose was to learn management techniques, not world domination.

Not satisfied with just that, however, the nutters in the counterjihad-religion generalized the report and pretended that it said "best seller across all of the muslim world" instead of "a part of india". They also made the event timeless, even though the article described just a short period of time. And lastly, the article is based on hearsay and the opinions of a few street sellers, there are no hard facts whatsoever.

Fragony

08-24-2012, 10:50

Yes it has been well documented. it's normal that people who know, for a fact, that it simply isn't true know,for a fact, that it's full of nonsense. But the documents are all included.

Fragony

08-24-2012, 10:56

Rofl.

The "mein kampf bestseller"-myth once again. I see you are really working hard to prove the extreme right has no clue.

This myth originated from this story (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/5182107/Indian-business-students-snap-up-copies-of-Mein-Kampf.html). It's almost a half-truth, I'll give you that. While the article describes India, it is at least a part of India with a few muslims. So, there were probably a lot of Muslim Indians who bought it too, even though the purpose was to learn management techniques, not world domination.

Not satisfied with just that, however, the nutters in the counterjihad-religion generalized the report and pretended that it said "best seller across all of the muslim world" instead of "a part of india". They also made the event timeless, even though the article described just a short period of time. And lastly, the article is based on hearsay and the opinions of a few street sellers, there are no hard facts whatsoever.

Can't just decide it is a myth, it really has to be one

Even BBC covered it, Turkey this case http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4361733.stm

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 11:55

Yes it has been well documented. it's normal that people who know, for a fact, that it simply isn't true know,for a fact, that it's full of nonsense. But the documents are all included.

...and the point is that the documents Bat Ye'or refers to are worthless.

Can't just decide it is a myth, it really has to be one

Even BBC covered it, Turkey this case http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4361733.stm

so... 50.000 Turks bought Mein Kampf.

Out of curiosity; if a cheap paperback version was published in another country with the same population, how many would've been sold?

Claiming "Mein Kampf is a best seller in the Muslim world" based on 50.000 turks buying a cheap veersion of it is disingenous in the extreme. Your conclusion is in no way supported by your facts, frags.

So, I stick with "Mein Kampf bestseller"-myth. And yes, I do realize that the fanatically convinced will not change their opinions no matter what facts you show them. I am fully aware that this is an excercise in futility.

Fragony

08-24-2012, 12:07

It's an excersise in futility allright as lefties will never accept any critisism of religion. It's a bestseller in just about the whole arab world, the Arab translation is a major hit. People who know, for a fact, that Islam is peace, just can't accept it that it's not. They wouldn't be right and there is something very wrong about that

Sir Moody

08-24-2012, 12:31

It's an excersise in futility allright as lefties will never accept any critisism of religion.

erm what are you smoking?

I am a "lefty" and, like many other "Lefties" I know, I am an Atheist - I have what can only be described as a Hate Hate relationship with just about every major Religion out there - I am highly critical of Religion

you are not criticising a Religion - you are spouting conspiracy theory's

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms you can level at Islam (their treatment of women for example), or just about any Religion and I am sure Horetore would join in over valid concerns - but spouting half truths and out right fabrications just makes you look the the man on the corner holding the "End is Nigh" sign

Fragony

08-24-2012, 12:45

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 15:58

erm what are you smoking?

I am a "lefty" and, like many other "Lefties" I know, I am an Atheist - I have what can only be described as a Hate Hate relationship with just about every major Religion out there - I am highly critical of Religion

you are not criticising a Religion - you are spouting conspiracy theory's

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms you can level at Islam (their treatment of women for example), or just about any Religion and I am sure Horetore would join in over valid concerns - but spouting half truths and out right fabrications just makes you look the the man on the corner holding the "End is Nigh" sign

It is indeed the "end of the world is nigh"-thingy I really can't stand. Not with my fellow commies, and not with the right. The US ain't looking to enslave us all under capitalism, nor are them dar muslims trying to take our freedomz.

The world will carry on, and it will always be better and better, as it has done throughout history.

One other thing I really can't stand, is how everything is "culturalized". When there's something happening with ethnic groups, "culture" is always the answer for quite a few people. Indians and pakistanis get good grades? Culture. Somalis doing crime? Culture. Poles being carpenters? Culture. Moroccans unemployed? Culture. Bah, nonsense. Good ol' class structures can explain all of it perfectly. Thou shalt never stray from Marxism. "Culture" is irrelevant, and in reality culture is just the expression of a social class. So, class struggle is still the issue and solution.

I simply love how some r-tards honestly believe that proper marxists give a damn about something as irrelevant as "culture". A marxist disregards culture completely and will always look at class, you twats.

rory_20_uk

08-24-2012, 16:03

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 16:04

Your England http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

Amen

Right-wing logic 101:

The media always lies. They always fabricate stories. They're all liberal and will hide anything exposing the liberal agenda. They always twist and turn your words.

Except when they print a story which is in your favour. Then, none of the above applies. In those instances,the media is a shining beacon of truth.

And whe the story is debunked minutes later, it's because the media is in the grasp of liberals.

I'll say that once more, so you can follow it:

The media is Liberal Lies.
Then they suddenly turn into Conservative Truth for a moment, to publish the Article of Absolute Truth.
Then, seconds later, the media morphs back into Liberal Lies.

Got that, kids? In everyday speech, that is what we would refer to as "loonies". "Right-wing Logic" simply means "No Logic At All".

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 16:09

Cobblers. Certain backgrounds work harder than others. Certain backgrounds have increased interest in job stability than others. Or please explain HOW class structure explains the massive over-representation of those from the Indian subcontinent in Medicine in the UK.

~:smoking:

Simple, rory. The indian immigrants to the UK belonged to a specific social class in India, and India also had a specific socialclass system(like any country does). The combination of these two classes will result in X when it meets the social class system of England.

Simple, eh?

The somalis belong to one class.
The indians belong to one class.
The polish belong to yet another class.

Thus, all three should have different results when immigrating to the UK. And, lo and behold, they did get different results! Marxism triumphs once more! Come on everyone, let's all sing the International!

And you are completely correct in saying that different class backgrounds behave in different ways.

rory_20_uk

08-24-2012, 16:34

HoreTore

08-24-2012, 16:39

You are defining class by not only but what they do but also on their race in which case your example becomes self fulfilling. Class could end up being broken down as required to fit data until almost every individual is viewed as being in their own "class".

~:smoking:

Race is a social construct and a myth, and so I pay absolutely no attention to it.

It is, however, a clear fact that India, Poland and Somalia are in three very different economic situations. That also applies to the emmigrants fro those countries. Thus, if we hypothesize that class determines behaviour, we should expect diffrent behaviour from the three groups.

And we do see different behaviour in the three groups, and so our hypothesis is proven. Conclusion: screw culture, bring on the classes!

Fragony

08-24-2012, 17:08

Right-wing logic 101:

The media always lies. They always fabricate stories. They're all liberal and will hide anything exposing the liberal agenda. They always twist and turn your words.

Except when they print a story which is in your favour. Then, none of the above applies. In those instances,the media is a shining beacon of truth.

And whe the story is debunked minutes later, it's because the media is in the grasp of liberals.

I'll say that once more, so you can follow it:

The media is Liberal Lies.
Then they suddenly turn into Conservative Truth for a moment, to publish the Article of Absolute Truth.
Then, seconds later, the media morphs back into Liberal Lies.

Got that, kids? In everyday speech, that is what we would refer to as "loonies". "Right-wing Logic" simply means "No Logic At All".

But it wasn't debunked

Sir Moody

08-24-2012, 17:29

actually it was

this took 20 seconds to find Frag you are going to have to try harder...

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2009/10/the-neather-clarification/

tl:dr:

the Advisor in question claims the media vastly overstated his comments

and this doesn't even mention this is just an OPINION of one EX advisor who has no proof and is going by "a feeling" he had while working with Labour

utter over blown codswallop

Fragony

08-24-2012, 17:39

actually it was

this took 20 seconds to find Frag you are going to have to try harder...

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2009/10/the-neather-clarification/

the Advisor in question claims the media vastly overstated his comments

and this doesn't even mention this is just an OPINION of one EX advisor who has no proof and is going by "a feeling" he had while working with Labour

utter over blown codswallop

Do we suddenly like blogs when it suits, typical. That is no rectification nor a debunking

Sir Moody

08-24-2012, 18:18

the blog actually links to the guys column ... go read that if you want - the quote is directly from the Advisors own column in the London Standard

here is the link if you are feeling lazy

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/how-i-became-the-story-and-why-the-right-is-wrong-6739051.html

Fragony

08-24-2012, 18:31

Sir Moody

08-24-2012, 18:41

I give up... its a column written by the guy whose comments started the whole thing saying it was mostly overstated by the Right wing media

I cant give you much better than that its the freaking Horses mouth...

Fragony

08-24-2012, 18:46

I give up... its a column written by the guy whose comments started the whole thing saying it was mostly overstated by the Right wing media.

That's also what the maker of Femme de la rue says. Silly girl

Idaho

08-24-2012, 19:51

The Jews:

Spoke the German language
Followed German laws above their own religious laws
Were in many cases extremely patriotic
Were well integrated (well, they had been there for hundreds of years)

Often why finding Jews was so difficult as to anyone but the clinically insane they were in the main indistinguishable from other Germans (as outside Propaganda they wern't all 6'4" blonde, blue eyed supermen.)

Can the same be said now?

~:smoking:
That's really not true at all. While there are famous examples of very Germanised, patriotic jews (Fritz Haber is an excellent example), this wasn't the whole picture of German jewry, and definitely not a good description of jewry across central europe. My great grandfater couldn't speak "real" German, only Yiddish. And he came from a village (in modern Austria) which was, like many european villages and small towns, either entirely jewish, or with a distinct jewish ghetto.