I get most of my information on what these places are like from people who actually deal with these communities daily and live in close proximity to them. I have a coworker whos Mum actually works for the French Government in welfare so I hear all types of stories and case studies on what is going on straight from the horses mouth. I then compare that information to case studies and news reports from as many different sources as possible to form my opinions. When large groups of Muslims live together they do not adjust their beliefs to those of the country they have migrated to. They instead expect the country to support them and adapt to their lifestyle and beliefs. Women are generally treated as second class citizens and expected (not given the option) to stay at home (if you can be bothered go study the ABS statistics on Muslim families in Australia and how many of the mothers are working).How much have you studied them?
Islam is by far the worst religion.I get most of my information on what these places are like from people who actually deal with these communities daily and live in close proximity to them. I have a coworker whos Mum actually works for the French Government in welfare so I hear all types of stories and case studies on what is going on straight from the horses mouth. I then compare that information to case studies and news reports from as many different sources as possible to form my opinions. When large groups of Muslims live together they do not adjust their beliefs to those of the country they have migrated to. They instead expect the country to support them and adapt to their lifestyle and beliefs. Women are generally treated as second class citizens and expected (not given the option) to stay at home (if you can be bothered go study the ABS statistics on Muslim families in Australia and how many of the mothers are working).
There are two types of people in here who try sympathise with the idea that Islam is not a bad religion. Those who are Muslim (no s**t sherlock they aren't going to talk badly about their own religion) and young/deluded teenagers (usually hate the West/USA) who have no idea what the world is like (have not had many experiences/interactions outside of Australia). They feel good defending Islam as if it's some persecuted belief system when in reality it is the fastest growing religion in the world that has evolved at the slowest rate and holds onto homophobic, violent and intolerant ideas. The western media has brainwashed many people into actually believing that we should welcome it with open arms when it is the reason for so much bloodshed, death and violence on such a large scale. They say hang on it is changing and evolving it's just slower than other religions - sorry but I don't see Indonesia legalising homosexuality or the Middle East being peaceful anytime soon. Those excuses ran out a long long time ago. It's time they stopped blaming everyone else for the bloodshed and accepted the religion was created by a pedo and based on war and should not be used as a guide to directly follow. If the majority could take only the 'good' and 'tolerant' parts from the teachings I would be happy - the fact is they can't and too many take the violent, intolerant parts and preach/live by them.
No. See Stalin Vs Trotsky. Mensheviks vs Bolsheviks. You are way off track.They were diametrically opposed man. On one hand you had a Far Right wing Fascist leader and on the other a Far Left wing Communist leader, each with totalitarian control over a nation-state. It was always going to explode in an ideological conflict of absolute barbarity on a never before seen scale.
Come now. I am reliably informed that even if people turn up with no papers at all then there is zero chance they will have any links to terrorism.Even more incredible is that one of them has been previously jailed in Lebanon on terrorist activities. How the hell is he living happily in Sydney. I have zero faith in our immigration system.
Absolute and utter piffle.Just so you're clear Meds, Right wing politics is a system whereby the State favors the status quo over minorities and women. It's features include being reactionary, patriarchal, ethnocentric or downright xenophobic, homophobic, 'traditional', and often militaristic and nationalistic (or at the very least jingoistic).
Hillariously 'reactionary, patriarchal, ethnocentric or downright xenophobic, 'traditional', and often militaristic and nationalistic (or at the very least jingoistic' fits you to a tee.Absolute and utter piffle.
In any event you may want to consider who introduced WAP and Jim Crow laws and which parties abolished slavery.
Somewhere between Adam Smith and Bastiat.Hillariously 'reactionary, patriarchal, ethnocentric or downright xenophobic, 'traditional', and often militaristic and nationalistic (or at the very least jingoistic' fits you to a tee.
Would you consider yourself a leftist or a right winger?
Oh look, another twit that thinks being a Socialist [advocating for State control of the means of production] is determinant of making someone 'left wing'.
They want you to be tolerant of their intolerant oppressive and violent religion - it's hard not to laugh. The problem is the Media actually thinks it makes sense - if we just keep supporting and giving love to Muslims they will suddenly embrace homosexuality, let women work and do what they wish and stop blowing each other up. Yep...I live in Scotland and even though Islamic presence here isn't all that prominent at all it's still very much a sensitive topic. Know of a few people that quietly resent the idea of having those of Islamic faith moving here on the back of what they hear and see happening in England and Ireland. And on the flipside there are those that would quite comfortably pull out the racism card at the mere hint of intolerance towards Islam. Been down to London a few times and certain areas have devolved into what looks like a 3rd world country to be honest then you hear stories of Muslims patrolling streets at night harassing those that have had a Saturday night out on alcohol because it's against their beliefs. Groups of Muslim youngsters hanging out the front of corner shops making disparaging comments towards young females because they don't agree with what they're wearing and in general being intimidating towards other young kids. Have heard/read about unofficial court systems in areas with high concentration of Muslims so they can carry out their own form of justice under Sharia Law. I'm sorry, but tolerance only extends so far. If you come to the UK you adapt to our way of life, not impose your own regressive beliefs and try to shame us if we don't conform.
Which is what I said. Although it's an oversimplification saying the left only care about the working class. The contemporary left care about the disenfranchised generally (ethnic and religious minorities, LGBTI, women etc in addition to the poor).Left, In politics, the portion of the political spectrum associated in general with egalitarianism and popular or state control of the major institutions of political and economic life. The term dates from the 1790s, when in the French revolutionary parliament the socialist representatives sat to the presiding officer’s left. Leftists tend to be hostile to the interests of traditional elites, including the wealthy and members of the aristocracy, and to favour the interests of the working class (see proletariat). They tend to regard social welfare as the most important goal of government.
That's not just the "contemporary left". That's always been what the left is about. The contemporary left has just simplified what it means to be disenfranchised, basing it on primarily on skin colour, religion, gender etc rather than whether an individual is actually disenfranchised or not.Which is what I said. Although it's an oversimplification saying the left only care about the working class. The contemporary left care about the disenfranchised generally (ethnic and religious minorities, LGBTI, women etc in addition to the poor).
Nothing is right wing or left wing in and of itself and I don't think your definition of socialism is accurate. Socialism is public ownership of the means of production vs private ownership of the means of production. Centralists would like that public ownership to be in the hands of the state, but your definition ignores socialist philosophies that believe control should be at the lowest possible level, in the hands of those most directly affected.Right Wingers on the other hand go the other way. They advocate looking after the elites and the privileged (generally the wealthy, white, male hetero, Christian in the West), at the expense of the disenfranchised.
Remember - Socialism is 'control of the means of production by the State (as opposed to control by the private individual).' Nothing more and nothing less. It's neither 'Right wing' or 'Left wing' in and of itself.
Yep. But seizing the means of production doesn't equal socialism. National socialism is not socialism. That's a claim that's usually made by right-wingers trying to blame the left for Hitler.Plenty of leftists advocate for a Socialist system to bring about parity for the disenfranchised and the poor and to even the playing field. That doesnt mean 'left wing politics = socialism' though. There are left wing political ideologies that embrace private control of the means of production, or mixed economies.
Conversely there are plenty of right wingers that embrace socialism as a means to achieve their ends. They advocate for State seizing control of the means of production in order to favor the wealthy and disenfranchise the poor, ethnic minorities, LGBTI and so forth.
See Fascism and Nazism as glaring examples.
Look at Hitler (Right wing socialist). He seized control of the means of production to favor the 'German [male heterosexual] Volk' at the expense of women, the disabled, religious minorities (especially the Jews), leftists, LGBTI and so forth (who were eventually murdered). On the flip side look at Pol Pot (Left wing socialist). He seized control of the means of production and then used it to murder everyone who wasnt a poor peasant.
A State seizing control of the means of production doesnt tell you in and of itself whether that State is 'left wing' or 'right wing'. It's why it seizes control, and what it does with that control that matters.
Obviously not. Not sure if your comment about him wanting to seize the means of production is true or not, but I doubt his goal would be to hand control over to the workers. He's a National Socialist aka a Nazi aka not an actual socialist.Knobs like Blair Cotterel and his Neo-Nazis mates would happily impose a monolithic State with total control of the means of production, then would immediately start rounding up Jews, LGBTI, leftists, feminists, non White people and so forth.
Are you calling him 'left wing'?
The regressive left have this strange selective Disadvantaged/Oppressed Hierarchy where Women/Sexual and Ethnic Minorities/Islam (let's be honest, it's the only religion today that needs constant apologist excuses compared to say Hinduism and other religions) trump the concerns of anybody else.You say the left is about "stronger politics in favor of the disadvantaged in society", and that's correct, but your idea of disadvantaged is to do with skin colour, genitals and sex life. So a straight white male supporting a family from below the poverty line is not disadvantaged, but wealthy women and brown people are. Like I said, hijacked by yuppies who have no real interest in equality at all.
That's the central flaw with Socialism though; you dont hand control of the means of production over to the workers; you hand control over to the State.Determining what is left or right wing is not always simple, but the left's change of focus from being class-based to identity-based is a huge win for the bourgeoisie. The poor unsophisticated peasants of the working class can't hope to keep up with the latest "correct" viewpoints, so they become the enemy.
This is where the truth of heavy government redistribution plans comes out. It's not about the people, it's about getting a small group into power with the support of people who think they are being represented.Do 'the workers' in Cuba, Korea, the former USSR etc control anything, or is everything controlled by a unitary party totalitarian State, often against the wishes and will of the workers?
#OurDiversityisourStrengthIslamophobia is a bulls**t term with the term coming from the Muslim Brotherhood to stifle political discussion, and somehow to conflate a dislike or criticism of Islam as a religion or ideology with the hate or dislike of Muslims as people.
I can't see why someone cannot oppose Islam or Islamism without being described as a hater of Muslims. People don't hate Catholics if they criticise the inner-workings of the Catholic Church for whatever reason, if that's because of child abuse cases or tax-exempt reasons for example.
It seems to imply that people have an irrational fear of Islam when in reality most just dislike it but don't fear it.
I'd rather hear all sides on this. For what it's worth, I think heading down a path of banning Muslim immigration into Australia completely would be dangerous for various reasons, but if we silence one side of the argument who have valid concerns we will go around in circles and get nowhere on this issue.
Frankly, I'm sick and tired of people being called "racists" and "Islamophobes" very loosely and shutting down any chance of a sensible political discussion because a few people are offended.