Time to take on far-right terrorists

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

The sense of too much “other” is a factor for sure, but economics is the more important factor because low skilled and uneducated people simply aren’t participating in the new economy.  This is the opioid demographic.  Low skilled white men who have watched the manufacturing plants close and have seen immigrants buy the vacated homes on the block, and have heard affirmative action rhetoric favouring minorities and women, feel like their place in the world has declined.  Seeing a group of Arabic speaking people huddle together at the soccer field where their kids play is just a reminder of how much times have changed.  

The problem with this argument is that groups of Arabic speaking people are far, FAR more likely to be in the big cities where the new economy is thriving, rather than in the small industrial towns. I agree that the new economy, which is a knowledge economy, is creating most of its jobs in college towns and around big cities, even as the industrial jobs which were the mainstay of the 'heartland' fade away to other countries. But as has been shown in the UK that doesn't produce the range of emotional response from all sectors of society like a threat to the culture and values of people does.

I'm not sure if it was Peterson or Haidt who said it, but to paraphrase, we are tribal by instinct, and we need something to believe in, something greater to give us purpose. People used to find that in God, but for many, that is gone now. There are no clans or tribes any more, and the large, extended families people used to know are often now largely gone, as well. That leaves little except to say you are a "Canadian" or "American" Or "British" or French" and feel a sense of pride in that nation and a feeling of kinship in your fellow citizens. But if you get masses of foreigners pouring in who don't speak your language, don't believe as you believe, don't act, think or dress like you do, that entire feeling of belonging to the nation and kinship for others of your nation is watered down. Threaten that, and people are going to get angry.

[DogOnPorch]

Islamic forces lay siege to Vienna in 1683 in anticipation of DogOnPorch saying unkind things about the warlord Muhammad's iconoclastic take on Judaism. 

[Argus]

43 minutes ago, Rue said:

Islam isn't  the problem any more than Christianity is the problem because the KKK exists or Judaism is the problem because certain Jews applauded killing Yitzhak Rabin and hate Muslims and this is why I continue to make that point. People who used their religion to justify certain beliefs may be a problem. Islam is not a problem for me until someone uses it in a specific way that promotes violence for example.

Rue, you're an educated man. I have no doubt you have read quite a bit about the Koran and the associated religious texts which go with it. You're well aware of the violent antisemitism in it, and of the fact the majority of these texts, by most accounts, deal with how Muslims should treat unbelievers. And very little of that is good and kind.

Now there are similar things in the old testament and in Jewish religious texts too. But both of these religions had a reformation where the interpretations of these words which might have been standard centuries ago began to change. That has not happened with Islam. The interpretations of Islamic law by mainstream religious scholars is the same as it was centuries ago, including death for this that and the other thing. How can you know this and not think that hugely increasing the population of those who believe in this religion does not pose a major challenge to our liberal western values?

[Rue]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

That may well be but I rarely hear anyone saying "Them furiners is gonna take our jobs!" I think people tend to understand that a mass of new people create jobs as well as taking them. All the concerns I hear are about suspicion this particular group, especially Muslims, are not going to assimilate, and that the great mass of people born elsewhere, which is much higher than in most any western country, is going to push aside our culture and values and substitute some amorphous set of values and beliefs which have their origin elsewhere - outside the sphere of liberal western culture. And the suspicion is this new set of values will be hostile to much of what we now believe in.

Actually fear of foreigners taking jobs away from people born in the country is the no.1 negatives stereotypevof f immigrants. However that said that soon wears off and friction comes from other things as well. I don't  disagree I just think there two are linked.

[DogOnPorch]

4 minutes ago, Rue said:

Actually fear of foreigners taking jobs away from people born in the country is the no.1 negatives stereotypevof f immigrants. However that said that soon wears off and friction comes from other things as well. I don't  disagree I just think there two are linked.

 

What is Al Wala' Wal Bara'? Do you have an idea?

[Argus]

11 minutes ago, Rue said:

Actually fear of foreigners taking jobs away from people born in the country is the no.1 negatives stereotypevof f immigrants. However that said that soon wears off and friction comes from other things as well. I don't  disagree I just think there two are linked.

If you look at the analyses of the motivations of Brexit Leave voters you find economics low on the list. In fact, most acknowledge that leaving the EU is actually going to damage the economy. But they're willing to accept that. They left because they didn't want decisions for their 'tribe' made elsewhere, and to be better able to restrict the members of other tribes entering their territory. And it's worth noting that this sentiment occurred despite the fact that most of those who had been entering the UK over the previous few years were white Christians from eastern Europe.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/05/04/leavers-have-a-better-understanding-of-remainers-motivations-than-vice-versa/

 

Edited March 17, 2019 by Argus

[Zeitgeist]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

The problem with this argument is that groups of Arabic speaking people are far, FAR more likely to be in the big cities where the new economy is thriving, rather than in the small industrial towns. I agree that the new economy, which is a knowledge economy, is creating most of its jobs in college towns and around big cities, even as the industrial jobs which were the mainstay of the 'heartland' fade away to other countries. But as has been shown in the UK that doesn't produce the range of emotional response from all sectors of society like a threat to the culture and values of people does.

I'm not sure if it was Peterson or Haidt who said it, but to paraphrase, we are tribal by instinct, and we need something to believe in, something greater to give us purpose. People used to find that in God, but for many, that is gone now. There are no clans or tribes any more, and the large, extended families people used to know are often now largely gone, as well. That leaves little except to say you are a "Canadian" or "American" Or "British" or French" and feel a sense of pride in that nation and a feeling of kinship in your fellow citizens. But if you get masses of foreigners pouring in who don't speak your language, don't believe as you believe, don't act, think or dress like you do, that entire feeling of belonging to the nation and kinship for others of your nation is watered down. Threaten that, and people are going to get angry.

That’s why I think it’s important that Canada’s Foreign Affairs and Immigration departments make it very clear that French and English are the official languages, Catholic and Protestant education is constitutionally protected, Indigenous rights are protected, women’s rights and religious freedom are protected, basically that a certain amount of assimilation to Canadian culture will be required.  The Charter protections are enshrined.  There will be no Sharia law.  What isn’t easy to sort out is exactly what must be protected and how.  

It’s interesting that the most unillingual parts of the country, Quebec and BC , are also the most militantly environmental.  The alt right Italian government is also huge on the environment.  I only point this out because we tend to associate multiculturalism and environmentalism as natural pairings with the progressive centre left or Red Tory, but this shooter in New Zealand was an environmentalist.  I’m realizing that perhaps the biggest concern politically is a Puritanism that puts ideology ahead of people.  Those who support the environment at the expense of resource jobs aren’t so politically distant from people who think millions or even billions of people should disappear to save the planet.  

People’s well-being must be at the centre of public policy.  Our political parties seem to struggle with that.  

[Rue]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

Rue, you're an educated man. I have no doubt you have read quite a bit about the Koran and the associated religious texts which go with it. You're well aware of the violent antisemitism in it, and of the fact the majority of these texts, by most accounts, deal with how Muslims should treat unbelievers. And very little of that is good and kind.

Now there are similar things in the old testament and in Jewish religious texts too. But both of these religions had a reformation where the interpretations of these words which might have been standard centuries ago began to change. That has not happened with Islam. The interpretations of Islamic law by mainstream religious scholars is the same as it was centuries ago, including death for this that and the other thing. How can you know this and not think that hugely increasing the population of those who believe in this religion does not pose a major challenge to our liberal western values?I

 

Muslim terrorists rejoice when some idiot kills Muslims in mosques just as they do Christians and Jews getting shot. It causes Muslims to be afraid of non Muslims making them easier to recruit intonthe extreme Muslim groups and I saw this first hand in Israel with both Israelis and Palestinians depending on who was attacked.

Mainstream Islamic ideology in many countries is at times in direct conflict with Western democratic values yes.

All that said what happened was disgusting. To  shoot at unarmed people let alone ones praying it is low as it gets.

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, Rue said:

 

Mainstream Islamic ideology in many countries is at times in direct conflict with Western democratic values yes.

 

 

At times? Get serious. Islam certainly is serious...why wouldn't Islam dominate if it becomes the protected majority that none can criticize?

And talk of good Muslims is terrific. There are many. There were good Nazis, as well, during WW2. It doesn't mitigate the problem that this sort of thinking must be stamped out. We certainly didn't tolerate it from the Germans.

What's a little Jew hate and infidel killing? It's part of the Islamic faith....that's the message I'm getting from the dazed and confused...punch drunk from so many terrorist attacks that a day when there ISN'T one is a day to be noted.

[Zeitgeist]

14 minutes ago, Argus said:

If you look at the analyses of the motivations of Brexit Leave voters you find economics low on the list. In fact, most acknowledge that leaving the EU is actually going to damage the economy. But they're willing to accept that. They left because they didn't want decisions for their 'tribe' made elsewhere, and to be better able to restrict the members of other tribes entering their territory. And it's worth noting that this sentiment occurred despite the fact that most of those who had been entering the UK over the previous few years were white Christians from eastern Europe.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/05/04/leavers-have-a-better-understanding-of-remainers-motivations-than-vice-versa/

 

I think you’re talking about self-determination.  Brexiteers felt that too much control over Britain’s destiny had been given to Brussels.  That’s a legitimate democratic concern but not quite the same thing as fear of too much cultural influence from certain immigrant groups.  The latter is also a common Brexiter complaint.  I’m just making the distinction.  You’re right that many Brits complain about the high number of Polish worker immigrants.  Remember that they are Catholic not Protestant and they have accents.  That is an example of xenophobia and also economic fear.   Cultural and economic fears are real.  I’d say the latter is legitimate.  The former is where we have to be careful.  Supporting liberal democratic values and the cultures that support democracy are one thing, racism is another. 

[Yzermandius19]

Blaming America for the Islamic terrorists attacking the West, doesn't make any sense. America bombed the shit out of Japan, Germany and Vietnam, yet I don't see that many Japanese, German or Vietnamese extremist groups lashing out and committing terror attacks on those who attacked them, and certainly not on the scale of Muslim extremists, it's not even close.

The Islamic terrorists aren't doing it because America attacked them, that's just an excuse they use to make their cause seem more righteous, but if it was the natural reaction to being attacked by a foreign power, as some posters here are suggesting, then the Vietnamese, Japanese and Germans would be committing most of the terrorist attacks against other western nations, yet they aren't, it's the Muslims.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Saudi Monitor]

I have to say i am really impressed with the genuine empathy shown by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who looks as if she lost her own family members in the attack. Contrast this with the robotic out-of-touch behaviour of Trump. 

May god bless and guide her, great leader indeed.

 

 

[QuebecOverCanada]

8 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Blaming America for the Islamic terrorists attacking the West, doesn't make any sense. America bombed the shit out of Japan, Germany and Vietnam, yet I don't see that many Japanese, German or Vietnamese extremist groups lashing out and committing terror attacks on those who attacked them, and certainly not on the scale of Muslim extremists, it's not even close.

The Islamic terrorists aren't doing it because America attacked them, that's just an excuse they use to make their cause seem more righteous, but if it was the natural reaction to being attacked by a foreign power, as some posters here are suggesting, then the Vietnamese, Japanese and Germans would be committing most of the terrorist attacks against other western nations, yet they aren't, it's the Muslims.

Those pesky Danish people who bombed the sh*t out of the Muslims... clearly deserved their retaliation at Copenhagen.

[Saudi Monitor]

[QuebecOverCanada]

2 minutes ago, Saudi Monitor said:

I have to say i am really impressed with the genuine empathy shown by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who looks as if she lost her own family members in the attack. Contrast this with the robotic out-of-touch behaviour of Trump. 

May god bless and guide her, great leader indeed.

But she didn't lose any of her own family members. She doesn't act like a leader, she's acting like a politician who wants the vote of the feeble, sentimentalist fringe of the population.

She acts so politically correct, and as if there was a problem with anti-islam sentiment in New Zealand. She's giving reasons for both white supremacists and muslims to radicalize themselves.

[bush_cheney2004]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

....This was the demographic who ran to Trump who promised to restore old economy jobs.  His policies support the one percenters more than anyone else.  His tariffs have added costs to domestic manufacturers.  In fairness, however, his protectionism was a response to unbalanced trade flows and weak international rules that mostly allowed the offshoring of middle class manufacturing jobs overseas.  I disagree with his solution.  We need better, fairer international rules that are enforced, not Mercantile protectionism, an approach that is related to another bad policy approach of the populist right: anti-immigration and xenophobia.  

 

 

Great...I meet your usual Trump rant and raise you one Justin Trudeau, whose immigration and refugee policies have inflamed and incited hate groups and their actions in Canada.   Trudeau has ignored the majority polls criticizing massive increases in immigration and "irregular" border crossings.

If you want fairer international rules...start there.

 

 

[Saudi Monitor]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

What you’re saying only adds to this group’s anger and frustration.  The solution isn’t to knock them further into the ground but to lift them up.  Trump understands what rhetoric appeals to the “deplorables”.  He did the wrestling bit and embraces bikers.  His policies have made the one percenters richer and his deregulation of environmental policy will hurt the deplorables first.  The only response is a fair-minded, inclusive, big tent approach that brings diverse groups together without letting the fringe interests dominate the political discourse.  The Dems and Republicans are too far apart right now to achieve this.  In Canada we’re also at an impasse.  We seem unable to develop our resources while also meeting environmental goals.  Our immigration is adding pressure to public services and home prices, even though some of our northern communities don’t have enough people to sustain themselves and need immigrants.  It’s a fight for resources and development, but Quebec and BC don’t want it in their backyards.  These seem to be the fault lines of the new economy.  Yellow Vests versus eco warriors; old economy versus Information Age; old Canada cultural purists versus multiculturalists; protectionists versus Globalists.  We need middle ground.  

Just joking mate

 I understand what you are trying to convey and agree with you. People are dissatisfied with their lives. People are suffering. And they blame the establishment and the  policies pushed by the governments for decades. I blame on the stupid social re-engineering experiments such as feminism, lqbt etc over the last couple of decades which have destroyed the traditional family in the west, Family is an essential component of society and is the building block of civilization.

Secondly, one of the reason for the rise of the far-right and their xenophobia, are their disillusionment with modernity and the loss of sacredness, the bridge that connects the far-right anti-immigrant and racist stance with their care for tradition is actually the loss of identity, values, traditionalism and spirituality.

The problem has never been Islam, it is the foreign policies that caused a endless destabilization of the Muslim world, and the subsequent violent fall out across the world. These foreign adventures does neither serve the average John's or Julie's interests, In fact, it produces more hardship for them.

It's both the domestic and foreign policies produced by system that isn't fit for purpose that are the cause.

And with this in mind, Islam has a different vision of society. 

"O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted" (49:13)

Those ordinary people who are horrified by the massacres in NZ, uncomfortable about the atmosphere of hate, who oppose more intervention in Muslim countries,  and want to improve their society, might actually take a look at the alternative. The secular liberal world has failed to produce over the period it has dominated, the solution is to embrace the truth, Islam.

[Zeitgeist]

28 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Great...I meet your usual Trump rant and raise you one Justin Trudeau, whose immigration and refugee policies have inflamed and incited hate groups and their actions in Canada.   Trudeau has ignored the majority polls criticizing massive increases in immigration and "irregular" border crossings.

If you want fairer international rules...start there.

 

 

Taking well over 20000 Syrian refugees was a noble thing to do.  These people were suffering, caught in the crossfire of US backed rebels, Russian backed government forces, and of course ISIS, the love child of another failed US-led regime change in Iraq.  Trudeau’s mistake was going too heavy on the open immigration rhetoric and failing to back it with the infrastructure and support of the provinces and cities, though he did have much support.  You may think that based on comments by the Opposition and posters on this site, Trudeau lacked a public mandate for his policies on refugees and immigration, which isn’t the case.  

Trump’s attempted Muslim ban was a green light to Islamophobia and right wing extremism.  Whatever you might argue about his true motives and the upside of targeting the followers of Islam, it was irresponsible and wrong.  It’s fine to criticize religions where beliefs or practices are problematic, but his rhetoric was discriminatory and unconstitutional.  He lost a lot of potential followers with that move.  His comments about Mexican illegals, gunboat Mercantilism on trade, and ridiculous actions such as declaring a state of emergency on the border wall, have left much of the world and many Americans cold on Trump.  It’s not virtue but rather fear, hypocrisy and xenophobia that most people associate with Trump.  

I also understand that Trump is in part a symptom of frustration with change.  We do need better, fairer, and stronger international rules on trade, climate change, and human rights.  

Edited March 17, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Rue said:

 

Muslim terrorists rejoice when some idiot kills Muslims in mosques just as they do Christians and Jews getting shot. It causes Muslims to be afraid of non Muslims making them easier to recruit intonthe extreme Muslim groups and I saw this first hand in Israel with both Israelis and Palestinians depending on who was attacked.

Mainstream Islamic ideology in many countries is at times in direct conflict with Western democratic values yes.

All that said what happened was disgusting. To  shoot at unarmed people let alone ones praying it is low as it gets.

I don't think anyone disagrees in it being disgusting to shoot at unarmed people praying. But once that's said and agreed on by all here - and I believe it has been - that doesn't leave anything else to say unless you want to discuss the causes and affects which surround it. Thus I was addressing your statement, specifically "Islam is not the problem any more than Christianity".

Islam IS, in my opinion, a problem for western society.

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

What do you admire most about Islam to assure the Islamophobes that their fears are unfounded?

I don't give a shit about Islamophobia but what I do admire most about Islam is its refusal to submit to Islamophobic hatred. The only thing an Islamophobe can be assured of is that I'll be in their faces whenever it comes to that.

Society's moderates should always take it as a civic duty to be in the face of the extremists in their midst - mostly to assure Muslims we're not all monsters.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

Taking well over 20000 Syrian refugees was a noble thing to do.  These people were suffering, caught in the crossfire of US backed rebels, Russian backed government forces, and of course ISIS, the live child of another failed US-led regime change in Iraq.  Trudeau’s mistake was going too heavy on the open immigration rhetoric and failing to back it with the infrastructure and support of the provinces and cities, though he did have much support.  You may think that based on comments by the Opposition and posters on this site, Trudeau lacked a public mandate for his policies on refugees and immigration, which isn’t the case. 

 

Typical....no mention of the Canadian role in CF-18 bombing in Syria, and other complicity in the war against ISIS.

It's not about getting political points for being noble.    Hell, if 20,000 is good...200,000 Syrians would be better, right ?

Trudeau did not have a public mandate for irregular border crossings....nice try.

 

Quote

Trump’s attempted Muslim ban was a green light to Islamophobia and right wing extremism.  Whatever you might argue about his true motives and the upside of targeting the followers of Islam, it was irresponsible and wrong.  It’s fine to criticize religions where beliefs or practices are problematic, but his rhetoric was discriminatory and unconstitutional.  He lost a lot of potential followers with that move.  His protectionism on trade, comments about Mexican illegals, gunboat Mercantilism on trade, and ridiculous actions such as declaring a state of emergency in the border wall, have left much of the world and many Americans cold on Trump.  It’s not virtue but rather fear, hypocrisy and xenophobia that the most people associate with Trump.  

 

Trump...Trump...Trump...as if none of these issues existed before he became U.S. president.  President Carter's ban on Muslims was hardly a surprise.

Where is your ranting about Obama drone attacks in Muslim nations...or his economic policies ?

Stop pointing at the United States for problems that Canada is also complicit in.....hold your own "leaders" accountable.

Apparently a foreign leader like Trump matters more to you than your own prime minister.

 

 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think you’re talking about self-determination.  Brexiteers felt that too much control over Britain’s destiny had been given to Brussels.  That’s a legitimate democratic concern but not quite the same thing as fear of too much cultural influence from certain immigrant groups.  The latter is also a common Brexiter complaint.  I’m just making the distinction.  You’re right that many Brits complain about the high number of Polish worker immigrants.  Remember that they are Catholic not Protestant and they have accents.  That is an example of xenophobia and also economic fear.   Cultural and economic fears are real.  I’d say the latter is legitimate.  The former is where we have to be careful.  Supporting liberal democratic values and the cultures that support democracy are one thing, racism is another. 

What is a desire for self-determination other than a demand that your tribe control its territory? You don't have a desire for self-determination except where you feel a sense of kinship for people around you but not for those further away. The people of Saskatchewan don't want self-determination because they don't believe they're different from the people in Manitoba and Ontario.

You can't say  people's instinctive territorial feelings are illegitimate when they're instincts as old as time and shared by people across all races, nationalities and ethnicities.That does no damn good whatever. All they'll do is ignore you, much as Europeans are doing to their mainstream political parties. I posted this a couple of years ago and I think it's appropriate to do so again.

Your argument reached me just as I was returning to the work of Karen Stenner, who wrote a book about the forces that tear countries apart. Some people, who she calls “libertarians,” strongly prefer freedom and diversity, she wrote, while others, who she calls “authoritarians,” possess a perhaps innate discomfort with difference. They prize sameness and unity, even if coercion is needed to enforce it. Countries devolve into conflict when the predispositions of the authoritarians are activated.

They hire fascists to do jobs that liberals won’t do.

In her telling, showily, absolutely insisting on unconstrained diversity “pushes those by nature least equipped to live comfortably in a liberal democracy not to the limits of their tolerance, but to their intolerant extremes.” And once authoritarians are activated, the outcome depends in part on how its conservatives react. If they side with the authoritarians, repressive policies follow. But under the right conditions, conservatives can be counted on to rally behind pluralism and tolerance. One condition is that they feel reassured "regarding established brakes on the pace of change, and the settled rules of the game.”

Thus my alarm. When it comes to immigration, many conservatives presently fear that there are no breaks on the pace of change, and that the rules of the game are being broken.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/debating-immigration-policy-at-a-populist-moment/518916/

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Rue said:

...your blood is my blood when this happens and I bow my head in respect.

Spoken like a true Earthling.

[Zeitgeist]

1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Typical....no mention of the Canadian role in CF-18 bombing in Syria, and other complicity in the war against ISIS.

It's not about getting political points for being noble.    Hell, if 20,000 is good...200,000 Syrians would be better, right ?

Trudeau did not have a public mandate for irregular border crossings....nice try.

 

 

Trump...Trump...Trump...as if none of these issues existed before he became U.S. president.  President Carter's ban on Muslims was hardly a surprise.

Where is your ranting about Obama drone attacks in Muslim nations...or his economic policies ?

Stop pointing at the United States for problems that Canada is also complicit in.....hold your own "leaders" accountable.

Apparently a foreign leader like Trump matters more to you than your own prime minister.

 

 

No, Trudeau is a hypocrite like all of us.  We are in bed with the US big time.  We’re no better.  Policy and rhetoric/narratives do matter though because they influence thought and actions.  The irregular border crossings are the result of new refugee/immigration policies in the US.  Canada does have to manage immigration more carefully, but not for the purpose of preventing immigration or discriminating against a religious group.  Safeguarding Canadian values and the economy is the issue.  

[Argus]

23 minutes ago, Saudi Monitor said:

The problem has never been Islam, it is the foreign policies that caused a endless destabilization of the Muslim world, and the subsequent violent fall out across the world.

And yet they have not produced the same violence anywhere else, only in the Islamic world. Perhaps, then, what you're suggesting is Muslims are not capable of governing themselves. Is that it?

Edited March 17, 2019 by Argus