The Geert Wilders trial

[Fragony]

Similar. It's still a silly argument.

It isn't an argument, it is normal that lefties do this, they can't debate the points so they ridicule the person. They even went so far as him not being able to get a muslim girl, it's pathetic and it isn't going to convince anybody, but if it's anti-Wilders the red machine will give you a stage.

[The Wizard]

Frag is making it look like the only arguments against Wilders us anti-Wilders people (conveniently all "lefties") have been able to come up with is the fact that he likes peroxide and happens to be half-Indo

In reality these are no more than the zanier bits in a vast collection of reasons to oppose this madman's march to power. One only has to look at Frag's mad rants against immigrants to understand that this man and his cronies should never get into power anywhere. That this thread even devolved into discussing his heritage and the effect it had on his psychology as well as his hairdo is a victory for the Wilders camp. It's sidetracking, derailing, it's a feint to make us ignore the real issue at hand: we have a party polling one third of the votes in a country, a party that wants to ban books and holds to calling entire population groups criminals.

[Skullheadhq]

, a party that wants to ban books

Another party that banned books...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Major Robert Dump]

I would gladly pay this man's way to America and let him live in my home for free. He can spearhead my KEEP MUSLIMS OUT OF THACKERVILLE crusade.

[Hax]

I would gladly pay this man's way to America and let him live in my home for free.

Yes, please, by all means, go ahead.

[Fragony]

Frag is making it look like the only arguments against Wilders us anti-Wilders people (conveniently all "lefties") have been able to come up with is the fact that he likes peroxide and happens to be half-Indo

In reality these are no more than the zanier bits in a vast collection of reasons to oppose this madman's march to power. One only has to look at Frag's mad rants against immigrants to understand that this man and his cronies should never get into power anywhere. That this thread even devolved into discussing his heritage and the effect it had on his psychology as well as his hairdo is a victory for the Wilders camp. It's sidetracking, derailing, it's a feint to make us ignore the real issue at hand: we have a party polling one third of the votes in a country, a party that wants to ban books and holds to calling entire population groups criminals.

Yeah we feel really good about not having to discus a haircut, and what it says about a person.

and oh please, that is deliberate slander at best, and most of all what we are used to anyway.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Frag is making it look like the only arguments against Wilders us anti-Wilders people (conveniently all "lefties") have been able to come up with is the fact that he likes peroxide and happens to be half-Indo

In reality these are no more than the zanier bits in a vast collection of reasons to oppose this madman's march to power. One only has to look at Frag's mad rants against immigrants to understand that this man and his cronies should never get into power anywhere. That this thread even devolved into discussing his heritage and the effect it had on his psychology as well as his hairdo is a victory for the Wilders camp. It's sidetracking, derailing, it's a feint to make us ignore the real issue at hand: we have a party polling one third of the votes in a country, a party that wants to ban books and holds to calling entire population groups criminals.

Please don't be so easily intimidated. Only those who subscribe to hardright anti-intellectualism think that any exploration of who Wilders is and what makes him tick is a beastly leftist personal attack that seeks to destroy Wilders or to avoid the issues.

Don't play the hardright game of letting them decide what is taboo. Wilders is a 'Pied-Noir', plain and simple. He can deny it, his base may declare it taboo, but the fact remains.
Wilders politics, or this court case, or immigration, or the taste of Heineken, are all distinct issues. Each one deserving of intellectual exploration.
There is no need to carefully tip-toe around any issues out of fear it will play into the hands of the hardright - they will constantly replace the post anyway, try to shift what is acceptable, what can be said.

[Fragony]

lol @ Louis as usual

[Beskar]

lol @ Louis as usual

but Louis is right.

[Furunculus]

Don't play the hardright game of letting them decide what is taboo.

lol, and there i was thinking that it was the favoured tactic of the hard left to close down the debate by attacking the person at the focus of the argument they were busy losing? well, that'll show me!

[Fragony]

but Louis is right.

Louis is mostly complicated

[The Wizard]

Please don't be so easily intimidated. Only those who subscribe to hardright anti-intellectualism think that any exploration of who Wilders is and what makes him tick is a beastly leftist personal attack that seeks to destroy Wilders or to avoid the issues.

Don't play the hardright game of letting them decide what is taboo. Wilders is a 'Pied-Noir', plain and simple. He can deny it, his base may declare it taboo, but the fact remains.
Wilders politics, or this court case, or immigration, or the taste of Heineken, are all distinct issues. Each one deserving of intellectual exploration.
There is no need to carefully tip-toe around any issues out of fear it will play into the hands of the hardright - they will constantly replace the post anyway, try to shift what is acceptable, what can be said.

First off, it is precisely that I wish to discuss the far more acute and far more threatening issue of Wilders's insane policy plans and statements that I am intellectual, instead of getting sidetracked musing about his psychological makeups or traumas as a child. You don't need to go that deep to find reasons to oppose and ridicule the man.

Secondly, the man is not a pied-noir. If such a societal group comparable with that one even exists in Holland, it is most certainly not the Indo people but the Moluccans. And Wilders it not a Moluccan.

I am not carefully tiptoeing around anything. I am far more concerned with what the man is saying and doing right now and its implications than I am with his childhood and his hairdo.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Louis is mostly complicated

I am not so complicated. The main misunderstanding is that I simply explore Wilders origins, without mistaking that for the end-all, final word about Wilders that would dismiss him, his ideas and his followers as nothing but colonial revanchism. Whereas I am afraid you think I intended to do just that.

First off, it is precisely that I wish to discuss the far more acute and far more threatening issue of Wilders's insane policy plans and statements that I am intellectual, instead of getting sidetracked musing about his psychological makeups or traumas as a child. You don't need to go that deep to find reasons to oppose and ridicule the man.

Then please do discuss Wilders' insane plans etc. There is no need to accept the hardright's anti-intellectual notion that any debate which does not focus on 'Muslims Muslims Muslims' is sidetracking or avoiding the issues or is said with covert intentions of stifling debate or ridiculing Wilders and his followers.

Secondly, the man is not a pied-noir. If such a societal group comparable with that one even exists in Holland, it is most certainly not the Indo people

This is not what the antropologist Van Leeuwen says:

But more than anything, he [Wilders] was defined by his Indo-roots, she says. Indonesia was a Dutch colony until 1949 and many mixed-race people moved to the Netherlands after the Indonesian independence. Van Leeuwen describes how these people were put in the same 'cultural minority' box with labour immigrants from Turkey and Morocco, whom they felt no connection to at all. More so, they had always felt very patriotic about the Netherlands and harboured strong sentiments against Islam, the dominant religion in their motherland.

Van Leeuwen explains how this group has long been part of extreme-right movements (many supported the Dutch Nazi party NSB in Indonesia in the 1930s) while others belonged to the far-right of the right-wing liberal party VVD. She puts Wilders' statements in the conservative and colonial tradition of this group, which strongly believed in patriotism and "European values".

Andres and Seamus were discussing Wilders hair. It is the most outrageous haircut in international politics. What, I wondered, drives a man to have hair like this if he wishes to be taken seriously? The answer is surprising. It is the object of study, which I linked to.

It is all very interesting and I am a bit dismayed that it should be brushed aside by Wilders' followers as nothing but a beastly leftist attack, or by his opponents that it had better be left unmentioned.

Why do the Dutch posters here get their knickers in a twist over my drawing attention to this side of Wilders? Because the subject is fraught with taboo in Dutchiestan:

Van Leeuwen's analysis goes beyond the personal level: "The fact that Wilders obviously operates in a post-colonial political dimension, without it being recognised, says a lot about how the Netherlands dealt with, and still deals with the colonial past. Keep quiet, deny, forget and look the other way have been the motto for decades. Because of that, no one could imagine that what happened in Indonesia 50 years ago could still have its impact on modern-day politics."

With this level of public debate, small wonder Wilders is about to become the biggest party in the Netherlands.


http://www.nrc.nl/international/arti...anthropologist

[Beskar]

Again, Louis is right on the ball.

It is refreshing everytime Louis posts. like a breath of freshair through the window, after some one let off some gas.

[Fragony]

It's much more simple, they thought we don't vote on an Indo, this is just the left playing it dirty because they are helpless in the debate so they order stuff from knowologues. Same tactics with Hirschi Ali, when she left the socialists she was suddenly sexually frustrated and took that out on the Islam. Standard practice to discredit the person instead of adresing the issues.

[Furunculus]

Again, Louis is right on the ball.

It is refreshing everytime Louis posts. like a breath of freshair through the window, after some one let off some gas.

love that cheer-leading. you should start a fan club or something.....?

[Beskar]

love that cheer-leading. you should start a fan club or something.....?

It is funny because that comment is coming from you. You should see things from this angle when the forum-warriors of the right mobilise for action.

[Furunculus]

It is funny because that comment is coming from you. You should see things from this angle when the forum-warriors of the right mobilise for action.

go on, show me an example of such [edited]

[Ser Clegane]

It would be great if we could return to the actual topic and leave the anally focused jokes to PM discussions.

Thanks

[Furunculus]

np, my apologies.

[Skullheadhq]

It would be fun if we jailed him, we could get a nice riot from that :D

[Fragony]

Not so sure about that, pretty sure there will be when cleared of all charges though

[Furunculus]

It would be fun if we jailed him, we could get a nice riot from that :D

hmmmm, locking up politicians who diagree with the ruling clique, interesting idea, and i think it has been tried before..........

[Hax]

hmmmm, locking up politicians who diagree with the ruling clique, interesting idea, and i think it has been tried before..........

What do you call the Nuremburg trials then? Genocide left aside, weren't they politicians who disagreed with the ruling clique? Hey, forget about politicians, just being of another race makes you a suspect.

[Fragony]

Are we really comparing this with the nurermberg trial

[Furunculus]

What do you call the Nuremburg trials then? Genocide left aside, weren't they politicians who disagreed with the ruling clique? Hey, forget about politicians, just being of another race makes you a suspect.

1. Has he broken a law? If yes then prosecute and jail him.
2. Does he belong to a proscribed political party? If yes then prosecute and jail him.

Your hyperbole doesn't wash, locking up politicans who disagree with the ruling clique is just not cricket!

[Hax]

Are we really comparing this with the nurermberg trial

Yes. I'm discussing the position of politicians who disagree (no matter to what extent this is pursued) with the government in power.

1. Has he broken a law? If yes then prosecute and jail him.

Yes.

[HoreTore]

Are we really comparing this with the nurermberg trial

The far right should be met with debate, not the courts.

We had the racists"immigrationally challenged" run in the election here last year. The result? About zero votes, and both of the parties are now disbanded as they realized they were idiots.

We have no need to fear the racists in our debates, they should be welcomed in. We have plenty of arguments, they have none. Their only way to grow and become a threat, is by being on the outskirts of society, once we let them in, they die.

[Fragony]

They only debate among theirselves, for the right they have newspapers, state-television, schoolbooks, all indoctrination-tools. The mantra is: you don't debate with them, you write about them.

edit: oh and crazy knowologues.

[Skullheadhq]

History in school is indoctrination, however you look at it, it starts with the deification of Athenian 'democracy' and ends with the flaming of fundamentalist (at least in my school books)
Heavily biased, especially in the Netherlands.

Other ideologies than the current one is wrong and extremist, according to school.
So yes, fragony has a point there.