Europe submits voluntarily

[fromderinside]

Europe is importing huge numbers of muslims that certainly have not "been here all along." The ramifications may not be seen for a few years yet but it's in the post.

What I'm saying is that Muslims aren't any more prone to terrorism than any other group. So the fact that we're importing Muslims is a non sequitur.

Its not the groups sir. Its the group's recent radicalization. Be careful out there.

 

[TSwizzle]

Europe is importing huge numbers of muslims that certainly have not "been here all along." The ramifications may not be seen for a few years yet but it's in the post.

What I'm saying is that Muslims aren't any more prone to terrorism than any other group. So the fact that we're importing Muslims is a non sequitur.

And if that were true the security forces in the EU would not be shitting in their pants about when and where the next jihad atrocity will occur. And EU governments are throwing gobs of money at "anti radicalization" programs aimed specifically at, muslims. The longer term ramifications will be a bit more subtle than self detonating muslims though.

 

[DrZoidberg]

What I'm saying is that Muslims aren't any more prone to terrorism than any other group. So the fact that we're importing Muslims is a non sequitur.

And if that were true the security forces in the EU would not be shitting in their pants about when and where the next jihad atrocity will occur. And EU governments are throwing gobs of money at "anti radicalization" programs aimed specifically at, muslims. The longer term ramifications will be a bit more subtle than self detonating muslims though.

Because murder in the name of Islam is the Zeitgeist. But if it wasn't this it'd be some other shit we were murdering each other over. People just love murdering each other. The only requirement is that there's a clear us vs them somehow.

The dangerous fantasy is that if we keep out Muslims that terrorism will stop. No, it won't. People are dicks. BTW, in Sweden neo-Nazi terror is many magnitudes more common than Islamic terror. You can't even compare them, since Islamic acts of terror are incredibly rare here while neo-Nazi attacks are almost daily somewhere. Compared to the neo-Nazis the Islamists are fluffy and cuddly. The idea that the Muslims are the more dangerous party is retarded. I'm not saying that Nazis are worse. I'm saying that it's human nature to kill each other. The various causes they pick are arbitrary, as is the targets. Sweden has more white folks so we get more neo-Nazi terror. It's simply a matter of percentages. But the idea that we're somehow importing a group of people who are more dangerous is retarded.

Also.. in spite of our neo-Nazis Sweden is comparatively safe. It's super safe. We have very little violence all-in-all.

 

[TSwizzle]

And if that were true the security forces in the EU would not be shitting in their pants about when and where the next jihad atrocity will occur. And EU governments are throwing gobs of money at "anti radicalization" programs aimed specifically at, muslims. The longer term ramifications will be a bit more subtle than self detonating muslims though.

Because murder in the name of Islam is the Zeitgeist.

LOL ! That's cool daddy-o. Islamic aggression has been going on for 1,500+ years, it's well beyond Zeitgeist.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Because murder in the name of Islam is the Zeitgeist.

LOL ! That's cool daddy-o. Islamic aggression has been going on for 1,500+ years, it's well beyond Zeitgeist.

We've been over this before. I don't buy it. Islam is just an excuse. But it's never the reason. The real reason is always something mundane and boring, like wanting someone else's stuff or existential anxiety.

 

[TSwizzle]

LOL ! That's cool daddy-o. Islamic aggression has been going on for 1,500+ years, it's well beyond Zeitgeist.

We've been over this before. I don't buy it. Islam is just an excuse. But it's never the reason. The real reason is always something mundane and boring, like wanting someone else's stuff or existential anxiety.

It's written in the manifesto, you know, teh holy koran and the rest of the claptrap that goes with it.

 

[DrZoidberg]

We've been over this before. I don't buy it. Islam is just an excuse. But it's never the reason. The real reason is always something mundane and boring, like wanting someone else's stuff or existential anxiety.

It's written in the manifesto, you know, teh holy koran and the rest of the claptrap that goes with it.

So? My impression of religious people is that they find whatever they're looking for in those books. The New Testament isn't exactly full to the brim of encouragements to chop heads off. Yet, that happened plenty in the name of Jesus. NSDAP may have initially sprung from a Pagan mysticism club, but all it's violence was justified by the Bible. How do we know this? Because Hitler said so in Mein Kampf. I must have missed all the Biblical passages justifying Christian Serbian ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia... yet they used the Bible as justification.

I'll reiterate... so?

 

[TSwizzle]

It's written in the manifesto, you know, teh holy koran and the rest of the claptrap that goes with it.

So?

So it has been a constant for 1,500 years.

 

[Jayjay]

The reason why I put "refugees" in quotes was that the large majority of people coming to Europe are not strictly speaking refugees in the way UNHCR defines it, but simply migrants who are seeking asylum. Now that border controls have been tightened it's not quite as easy to come in, but there are still lots of people getting through that way. At least an order of magnitude or two more than actual refugees.

Where does this belief come from? I've seen it repeated enough times. I wonder if it's knowable? Sounds to me like pure conjecture. Sounds to me we can only know in a couple of years when the history of these events is being written.

The numbers are not controversial. Last year in Sweden there were over 150,000 asylum applications. Meanwhile, Sweden's refugee quota is between 1,700 to 1,900. You can't appeal to the strictness of UNHCR refugee process, when they count for only for a fraction of the incoming migrants.

Last autumn I took a day volunteering at a refugee shelter in Stockholm. The people I talked to (all Syrian) couldn't shut up about how much they wanted peace in Syria so they could go home. I don't believe any of those are economic migrants.

I know we call the Afghans economic migrants because we've decided that Afghanistan is stable and peaceful. But it isn't. Civil war is still full on. That place was never pacified by the Coalition. Regardless what we chose to label them as in practice they are refugees.

As for the Africans that's been a steady stream now for years. There's no surge going on. We haven't suddenly got way more African refugees. I remember it was the same situation in the 90'ies. Nothing has changed. The fact that these keep coming doesn't mean that the Syrian refugees aren't refugees.

I wouldn't mind quotas for Syrian refugees being increased drastically, in exchange for reducing the number of random stragglers who want to cut in line by paying smugglers to get them into Europe. THere are safe zones in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and most of the countries where these folks are coming from.

The number of those refugees makes it easier to hide among them, though. Greece was overwhelmed and couldn't process everyone due to sheer mass, as well as because due to EU rules the people didn't want to apply for asylum in Greece. What is going to happen is that internal border checks are coming back to Europe, sadly. "Papers please!"

It's super easy for a terrorist to hide as a tourist. I doubt it could be easier. At airports we only have "security theatre". Those checks only exist to put people at ease. But as for making us safe they're worthless. How many terrorists do you think they've caught in those screenings? The answer is zero, ever. I googled it... none ever.

Didn't take too long for me to find an example:
Birmingham man arrested at Manchester airport for terror-related offences

A teenager from Birmingham was arrested at Manchester airport on Saturday on suspicion of Syria-related terrorism offences. West Midlands police said the 18-year-old man was held by counter-terrorism officers after returning to the UK.

Tourists have their fingerprints and pictures taken, and if there is a warrant for their arrest they wil get caught. That's why they don't even try. But sneaking in with bunch of refugees who by and large are avoiding any kind of fingerprinting or registration at their country of arrival is simple enough, and once you are within Schengen borders it's just a matter of taking a train or a bus to France or Belgium.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Because murder in the name of Islam is the Zeitgeist.

LOL ! That's cool daddy-o. Islamic aggression has been going on for 1,500+ years, it's well beyond Zeitgeist.

Christian aggression has almost stopped but that is quite recent. This would mean longer than 1500 years.

 

[DrZoidberg]

So?

So it has been a constant for 1,500 years.

It's been constant since the dawn of man. Actually even further back. All primates are cunts to one another with regular tribal warfare. All that changed was the label. Same shit though. Haven't you forgotten why Islam could spread so fast to begin with? Byzantines and Persians had had a long protracted war that was so bloody and vicious that it left both of them utterly destroyed. Islam didn't invent fucking anything nor start a new violent trend.

Liberal democracy and our modern complex industrial economy has brought about stable relative peace in a way we've never seen before. And we know why. Simply put, the greater caloric surplus per capita an economy produces the less violent it is. It's a little bit more complicated. But essentially this is it. Religion, ideology or any faith is utterly irrelevant. It just falls back to human instinct. When basic safety is secure we become less anxious. We worry more about this life than the next. So we fix stuff, instead of breaking them. Religion doesn't make us violent and fuck shit up. When things are violent and stuff is fucked up... then we become religious. You're confusing the symptom with the cause.

 

[Axulus]

If Islam gets it's way it's unlikely there will be a world here in 100 years, at least in anything resembling a technological civilization.

Of course, you could just as well say the same thing about what would happen 'If Christianity gets its way'; It makes me wonder why an American would spend so much effort worrying about what Islam might do in Europe, when he could instead worry about what Christianity is far more likely to do - and in many cases, has already done, or is already doing - in his own backyard.

Radical Christianity in the developed world has been neutered. It is taking its last dying breath. If radical Christian immigrants start flowing en masse from Uganda or the like you might have a point.

The challenge with radical Muslim immigrants in Europe is how quickly they can adopt western liberal democratic values, which Christians already accept to a far larger degree.

 

[Axulus]

So it has been a constant for 1,500 years.

It's been constant since the dawn of man. Actually even further back. All primates are cunts to one another with regular tribal warfare. All that changed was the label. Same shit though. Haven't you forgotten why Islam could spread so fast to begin with? Byzantines and Persians had had a long protracted war that was so bloody and vicious that it left both of them utterly destroyed. Islam didn't invent fucking anything nor start a new violent trend.

Liberal democracy and our modern complex industrial economy has brought about stable relative peace in a way we've never seen before. And we know why. Simply put, the greater caloric surplus per capita an economy produces the less violent it is. It's a little bit more complicated. But essentially this is it. Religion, ideology or any faith is utterly irrelevant. It just falls back to human instinct. When basic safety is secure we become less anxious. We worry more about this life than the next. So we fix stuff, instead of breaking them. Religion doesn't make us violent and fuck shit up. When things are violent and stuff is fucked up... then we become religious. You're confusing the symptom with the cause.

You underestimate the inherent tribalism and bigotry of the human race. Allow a perceived enemy to come in in too great of numbers via immigration, and far right neo-nazi parties get elected into power. This must always be taken into consideration when deciding on what immigration policy a country should adopt.

In the absence of this kind of tribalism and bigotry, we could have a different, more ideal policy.

 

[Axulus]

If the reality is that for every 100,000 Muslim immigrants you accept in, you earn one additional terrorist attack killing at least 10 or more people (over the next 20 years), is that an acceptable cost? You'll find that a vast majority of people in the society will say "no", and you'll flood the right wing with all kinds of support as a result if you adopt too liberal of an immigration policy. It doesn't matter how irrational, bigoted, racist and wrong you think humanity is, the reality is that being too liberal on immigration will give the right wing immense support and power. We have to take that downside into account whenever we decide on the ideal immigration policy. Is giving the right wing such power an acceptable cost to our preferred immigration policy? I'm not so sure anymore.

 

[Axulus]

There seems to be an extreme naivety on the far left. They think that all they need to do is call their right-wing opponents racist, evil, xenophobic, idiotic bigots deserving of nothing more than censorship, and then they can pat themselves on the back for standing up to it, all the while the numbers of supporters of such right-wing viewpoints continue to increase in numbers.

 

[whichphilosophy]

There seems to be an extreme naivety on the far left. They think that all they need to do is call their right-wing opponents racist, evil, xenophobic, idiotic bigots deserving of nothing more than censorship, and then they can pat themselves on the back for standing up to it, all the while the numbers of supporters of such right-wing viewpoints continue to increase in numbers.

Our main problem is border controls has been perverted into racism. Some who want restrictions are racist but most are not.

How can a Briton born in Nigeria or India be racist if they want limits on immigration. Similarly black candidates who stood for the UKIP were called racists by hecklers.
In fact there is a trend now not to distinguish between asylum seekers and economic migrants. Allowing floods of people to enter Europe from failed economic states brings problems both to the country of origin and the host country. Skilled people leaving such a country create a brain drain once the numbers leaving are large. Some are in fact highly skilled and they cannot always get the type of job they hope for. The other problem is when criminals (who of course usually have money) will enter Europe. This includes gangs from Morocco, Bulgaria and Romania.

If you want to see draconian immigration policies then go to the UAE or India. In the UAE someone who resigns from the job is allowed one month before getting the bum's rush if they do not leave 'sensibly.' A foreigner who has worked in the UAE even for 30 years, gets the bum's rush once his last contract has finished and if he does not leave within a month.

In the UAE by law local citizens have special HR people in major companies to whom they can talk to directly even before sending in a CV. In Europe we would call this racist. However we are also told that foreign people come to do the jobs British people cannot do. That in itself is a racist statement.

 

[bilby]

Of course, you could just as well say the same thing about what would happen 'If Christianity gets its way'; It makes me wonder why an American would spend so much effort worrying about what Islam might do in Europe, when he could instead worry about what Christianity is far more likely to do - and in many cases, has already done, or is already doing - in his own backyard.

Radical Christianity in the developed world has been neutered. It is taking its last dying breath. If radical Christian immigrants start flowing en masse from Uganda or the like you might have a point.

The challenge with radical Muslim immigrants in Europe is how quickly they can adopt western liberal democratic values, which Christians already accept to a far larger degree.

Uganda?

I'm worried about Utah.

And Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Missouri...

Ted Cruz is in the running to get his hands on the world's largest nuclear arsenal, and you think I should worry about Uganda??!?

Shit, half the reason for the radical nature of Ugandan Christianity is American missionaries stoking the fire.

 

[Axulus]

Radical Christianity in the developed world has been neutered. It is taking its last dying breath. If radical Christian immigrants start flowing en masse from Uganda or the like you might have a point.

The challenge with radical Muslim immigrants in Europe is how quickly they can adopt western liberal democratic values, which Christians already accept to a far larger degree.

Uganda?

I'm worried about Utah.

And Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Missouri...

Ted Cruz is in the running to get his hands on the world's largest nuclear arsenal, and you think I should worry about Uganda??!?

Shit, half the reason for the radical nature of Ugandan Christianity is American missionaries stoking the fire.

Why would you worry about an insignificant threat (Ted Cruz) in it's last dying breath?

https://electionbettingodds.com/

Also, reread my post. I said only worry about Christianity (and the associated right wing support that will gather) if immigrants from places like Uganda are arriving by the hundreds of thousands. Is that happening? No.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Of course, you could just as well say the same thing about what would happen 'If Christianity gets its way'; It makes me wonder why an American would spend so much effort worrying about what Islam might do in Europe, when he could instead worry about what Christianity is far more likely to do - and in many cases, has already done, or is already doing - in his own backyard.

Radical Christianity in the developed world has been neutered. It is taking its last dying breath. If radical Christian immigrants start flowing en masse from Uganda or the like you might have a point.

The challenge with radical Muslim immigrants in Europe is how quickly they can adopt western liberal democratic values, which Christians already accept to a far larger degree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army

The only weapon that works against radicalised Christianity is a functioning economy. Wherever you fix that radicalisation becomes increasingly rare.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's been constant since the dawn of man. Actually even further back. All primates are cunts to one another with regular tribal warfare. All that changed was the label. Same shit though. Haven't you forgotten why Islam could spread so fast to begin with? Byzantines and Persians had had a long protracted war that was so bloody and vicious that it left both of them utterly destroyed. Islam didn't invent fucking anything nor start a new violent trend.

Liberal democracy and our modern complex industrial economy has brought about stable relative peace in a way we've never seen before. And we know why. Simply put, the greater caloric surplus per capita an economy produces the less violent it is. It's a little bit more complicated. But essentially this is it. Religion, ideology or any faith is utterly irrelevant. It just falls back to human instinct. When basic safety is secure we become less anxious. We worry more about this life than the next. So we fix stuff, instead of breaking them. Religion doesn't make us violent and fuck shit up. When things are violent and stuff is fucked up... then we become religious. You're confusing the symptom with the cause.

You underestimate the inherent tribalism and bigotry of the human race. Allow a perceived enemy to come in in too great of numbers via immigration, and far right neo-nazi parties get elected into power. This must always be taken into consideration when deciding on what immigration policy a country should adopt.

In the absence of this kind of tribalism and bigotry, we could have a different, more ideal policy.

This isn't how it works. Tribalism is what we get when civic institutions aren't working. Everybody strives for safety in life. If you can't get it from society in the form of a fat pay check, legal protection and political representation you're going to find it elsewhere, ie your super duper extended family, which is what a tribe is. And the price you pay for being in a tribe is that family goes before any other consideration.

The only way to break the hold of tribalism is to fix all those other things. Once you do tribalism just dissolves. So first, fix security and the economy, then democracy, and we won't even need to bother with breaking the grip of tribalism. It'll fix itself. How do we know this? Because this is what happened in the west. It's always the same story.

For the same reason we know that we don't have to care about Middle-Easterners coming here from a tribal background. Give it a generation and whatever residual tribal bullshit lingers goes away. How do we know this? Because this is how every immigrant group works. Just ask a Middle-Eastern immigrant. It's all the same story. They quickly realise that they don't need their tribe, and then stop caring about it.