Shanemac requests you put your scientific arguments here

Hobart · 05-09-2003 02:12PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
Now we find the true colours emerging, bonkey is a transnatonal progressive.

I presume you meant transnational progressive
:rolleyes:

He has just condemned himself and i wish it upon him.

Where?

Japan and iceland are in bonkeys book ww) monsters ww) .

Maybe I'm missing something here. But How? Are you trying to say that both Iceland and Japan are mono-cultures? I hope your not.

Bonkey's disrespect for people

Where has he shown disrespect for anybody? Pot.... Kettle FFS.

is borne out by his view that monoculture is no good.

but is it any good? Show me an example of where it has worked?

His dreams, possibly for the unification of man through self loathing and unrelatenting altruism speak to us all. After all how could they not, Bonkey wishes us all to immediately jump on the train of cometing ethnic interest groups, twirling... twirling .. towards freedom!

OOOOOOOkaaay! Obviously Bonkey has written about this subject elsewhere as I see no reference to your rant in his simple straightforward statement. Then again I might not have your vision

Abolish the borders then and let the hordes of north african muslim nutters into the camp of the saints, after all they'll surely come to embrace our tolerant ways and repect for dignity and equality even though they might secretly want to create a worldwide ummah and enslave mankind to the will of Allah!

Why stop there? Lets open the doors to all the stable bible bashing, god fearing, incest loathing religons of the world? Do the Muslims of Africa have a patent out on nuttiness? Does nuttiness know skin colour?

Shalom!

DadaKopf · 05-09-2003 02:59PM

“I Hate World Music”
by David Byrne

The New York Times,
October 3, 1999

I hate world music. That’s probably one of the perverse reasons I have been asked to write about it. The term is a catchall that commonly refers to non-Western music of any and all sorts, popular music, traditional music and even classical music. It’s a marketing as well as a pseudomusical term — and a name for a bin in the record store signifying stuff that doesn’t belong anywhere else in the store. What’s in that bin ranges from the most blatantly commercial music produced by a country, like Hindi film music (the singer Asha Bhosle being the best well known example), to the ultra-sophisticated, super-cosmopolitan art-pop of Brazil (Caetano Veloso, Tom Zé, Carlinhos Brown); from the somewhat bizarre and surreal concept of a former Bulgarian state-run folkloric choir being arranged by classically trained, Soviet-era composers (Le Mystére des Voix Bulgares) to Norteño songs from Texas and northern Mexico glorifying the exploits of drug dealers (Los Tigres del Norte). Albums by Selena, Ricky Martin and Los Del Rio (the Macarena kings), artists who sell millions of records in the United States alone, are racked next to field recordings of Thai hill tribes. Equating apples and oranges indeed. So, from a purely democratic standpoint, one in which all music is equal, regardless of sales and slickness of production, this is a musical utopia.

So Why Am I Complaining?

In my experience, the use of the term world music is a way of dismissing artists or their music as irrelevant to one’s own life. It’s a way of relegating this “thing” into the realm of something exotic and therefore cute, weird but safe, because exotica is beautiful but irrelevant; they are, by definition, not like us. Maybe that’s why I hate the term. It groups everything and anything that isn’t “us” into “them.” This grouping is a convenient way of not seeing a band or artist as a creative individual, albeit from a culture somewhat different from that seen on American television. It’s a label for anything at all that is not sung in English or anything that doesn’t fit into the Anglo-Western pop universe this year. (So Ricky Martin is allowed out of the world music ghetto — for a while, anyway. Next year, who knows? If he makes a plena record, he might have to go back to the salsa bins and the Latin mom and pop record stores.) It’s a none too subtle way of reasserting the hegemony of Western pop culture. It ghettoizes most of the world’s music. A bold and audacious move, White Man!

There is some terrific music being made all over the world. In fact, there is more music, in sheer quantity, currently defined as world music, than any other kind. Not just kinds of music, but volume of recordings as well. When we talk about world music we find ourselves talking about 99 percent of the music on this planet. It would be strange to imagine, as many multinational corporations seem to, that Western pop holds the copyright on musical creativity.

No, the fact is, Western pop is the fast food of music, and there is more exciting creative music making going on outside the Western pop tradition than inside it. There is so much incredible noise happening that we’ll never exhaust it. For example, there are guitar bands in Africa that can be, if you let them, as inspiring and transporting as any kind of rock, pop, soul, funk or disco you grew up with. And what is exciting for me is that they have taken elements of global (Western?) music apart, examined the pieces to see what might be of use and then re-invented and reassembled the parts to their own ends. Thus creating something entirely new. (Femi Kuti gave a great show the other night that was part Coltrane, part James Brown and all African, just like his daddy, Fela Kuti, the great Nigerian musical mastermind.)

To restrict your listening to English-language pop is like deciding to eat the same meal for the rest of your life. The “no-surprise surprise,” as the Holiday Inn advertisement claims, is reassuring, I guess, but lacks kick. As ridiculous as they often sound, the conservative critics of rock-and-roll, and more recently of techno and rave, are not far off the mark. For at it’s best, music truly is subversive and dangerous. Thank the gods.

Hearing the right piece of music at the right time of your life can inspire a radical change, destructive personal behavior or even fascist politics. Sometimes all at the same time.

On the other hand, music can inspire love, religious ecstasy, cathartic release, social bonding and a glimpse of another dimension. A sense that there is another time, another space and another, better, universe. It can heal a broken heart, offer a shoulder to cry on and a friend when no one else understands. There are times when you want to be transported, to get your mind around some stuff it never encountered before. And what if the thing transporting you doesn’t come from your neighborhood?

Why Bother?

This interest in music not like that made in our own little villages (Dumbarton, Scotland, and Arbutus, Md., in my own case) is not, as it’s often claimed, cultural tourism, because once you’ve let something in, let it grab hold of you, you’re forever changed. Of course, you can also listen and remain completely unaffected and unmoved — like a tourist. Your loss. The fact is, after listening to some of this music for a while, it probably won’t seem exotic any more, even if you still don’t understand all the words. Thinking of things as exotic is only cool when it’s your sister, your co-worker or wife; it’s sometimes beneficial to exoticize that which has become overly familiar. But in other circumstances, viewing people and cultures as exotic is a distancing mechanism that too often allows for exploitation and racism.

Maybe it’s naive, but I would love to believe that once you grow to love some aspect of a culture — its music, for instance — you can never again think of the people of that culture as less than yourself. I would like to believe that if I am deeply moved by a song originating from some place other than my own hometown, then I have in some way shared an experience with the people of that culture. I have been pleasantly contaminated. I can identify in some small way with it and its people. Not that I will ever experience music exactly the same way as those who make it. I am not Hank Williams, or even Hank Jr., but I can still love his music and be moved by it. Doesn’t mean I have to live like him. Or take as many drugs as he did, or, for that matter, as much as the great flamenco singer Cameron de la Isla did.

That’s what art does; it communicates the vibe, the feeling, the attitude toward our lives, in a way that is personal and universal at the same time. And we don’t have to go through all the personal torment that the artist went through to get it. I would like to think that if you love a piece of music, how can you help but love, or at least respect, the producers of it? On the other hand, I know plenty of racists who love “soul” music, rap and rhthym-and-blues, so dream on, Dave.

The Myth of the Authentic

The issue of “authenticity” is such a weird can of worms. Westerners get obsessed with it. They agonize over which is the “true” music, the real deal. I question the authenticity of some of the new-age ethnofusion music that’s out there, but I also know that to rule out everything I personally abhor would be to rule out the possibility of a future miracle. Everybody knows the world has two types of music — my kind and everyone else’s. And even my kind ain’t always so great.

What is considered authentic today was probably some kind of bastard fusion a few years ago. An all-Japanese salsa orchestra’s record (Orquestra de la Luz) was No. 1 on the salsa charts in the United States not long ago. Did the New York salseros care? No, most loved the songs and were frankly amazed. African guitar bands were doing their level best to copy Cuban rumbas, and in their twisted failure thay came up with something new. So let’s not make any rules about who can make a specific style of music.

Mr. Juju himself, King Sunny Adé, name-checks the country and western crooner Jim Reeves as an influence. True. Rumor has it that the famous Balinese monkey chant was coordinated and choreographed by a German! The first South African pop record I bought was all tunes with American car race themes — the Indy 500 and the like. With sound effects, too! So let’s forget about this authenticity bugaboo. If you are transported by the music, then knowing that the creators had open ears can only add to the enjoyment.

White folks needed to see Leadbelly in prison garb to feel they were getting the real thing. They need to be assured that rappers are “keeping it real,” they need their Cuban musicians old and sweet, their Eastern and Asian artists “spiritual.” The myths and clichÚs of national and cultural traits flourish in the marketing of music. There is the myth of the untutored, innocent savant whose rhymes contain funky Zen-like pearls of wisdom — the myth that exotic “traditional” music is more honest, more soulful and more in touch with a people’s real and true feelings than the kid wearing jeans and the latest sports gear on Mexican television.

There is a perverse need to see foreign performers in their native dress rather than in the T-shirts and baggies that they usually wear off stage. We don’t want them looking too much like us, because then we assume that their music is calculated, marketed, impure. Heaven forbid they should be at least as aware of the larger world as we are. All of which might be true, but more important, their larger awareness might also be relevant to their music, which in turn might connect it to our own lives and situations. Heaven forbid.

DadaKopf · 05-09-2003 03:01PM

[continued]

La Nueva Generación

In the last couple of years, there have been any number of articles in newspapers and magazines about how Latin music in particular was finally going to become hugely popular in the U.S. of A. Half — yes, half — of the current top 10 singles in Britain, that hot and sweaty country, are sort of Latin, if you count Geri Halliwell’s “Mi Chico Latino,” and why not? The others are watered-down remakes of Perez Prado’s hits from the 50’s and 60’s. The Buena Vista Social Club record is the No. 1 selling record, in any category, in funky Germany. Les Nubians, a French-African group, is getting played on urban (translate as “black”) radio in America. So is this a trend or what? Are these more than summer novelty tunes for anglos? Are we really going to learn to dance, or is this some kind of aberration?

But what about the alterna-Latino bands that are touring the United States and Europe in increasing numbers. The Columbian band Bloque (which, I confess, is on my label) was named best band of the year by a Chicago critic; Los Fabulosos Cadillacs won a Grammy last year. Both bands, and many, many others, mix the grooves of their neighborhoods with the sounds and attitudes of the North American tunes they also grew up with. They are a generation with a double heritage, and their music expresses it.

It’s tough for this bunch to crack the American market: they’re not always cute, safe or exotic. Their music is often more innovative than that of their northern counterparts, which is intimidating. And as cool as they are, they insist on singing in their own language, to an audience that identifies completely with them, thereby making it more difficult to gain a foothold in the States.

These bands are the musical equivalent of a generation of Latin American writers, including Gabriel García Marquez, Isabel Allende, José Amado and Mario Vargas Llosa, that was referred to as the Boom. These musicians are defining their generation, finding a unique voice, and will influence countless others outside their home countries. Here, I believe, is where change will happen. Although they don’t sell very many records yet, these and others (for things analogous to this are happening everywhere, in Africa, in Morocco, in Turkey) will plant the seeds, and while I enjoy hearing Ricky Martin’s merengue on the radio, these others will change my life.

from David Byrne's (ex-Talking Heads) website, which is fun.

No 'better', just 'different'. I think it's relevant to the cultural side of the argument.

Giblet · 05-09-2003 06:21PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
you need a fact to disprove your "fact"?

Observations VS fact

WHICH IS WHICH.....

TuathaDeDanaan · 08-09-2003 02:28AM

You wish people to present a fact to counter an observation, im not interested in your opinion, "stormfront corrupts the mind".

I could easily flip it and say.

"This thread reminds of Amway, or some kind of Pyramid scheme.

If you disagree with the people flogging their "wares" they immediatly scould you and call you an idiot. With no basis of course, it's all part of the training.

Boards corrupts the mind, they feed you with facts, and teach (lead by example) you to scould anyone who disagrees with you.

I'm waiting for some kind of "fact" that disputes this"

Bonkey doesnt like monocultures. although he doesnt state it explicitly that he believes multiculture to be superior to monoculture he leans in that direction.

Belief in restrictring immigration but to ensure a multiculture(by not appeasing monoculturalists) , um why bother aim at restricting at all then?

lands of tolerance was in reference to peaceful multicultures. switzerland is not even on the same page as those who advocate mass immigration of non westerners.

Where people say, give me an example of a monoculture that was of any worth? Like implying to say its not enough to say the european nations of the 19th/20th century are not adequate enough, the question is to prove that a multicultural society can be anything more then a transitory state to something else(yugoslavia), a bloodbath(rwanda) or a status quo of powerbrokering between the majority/minority(US).

In the other tread it seems that objective truith is really whats a stake here, nobody can make a value judgement on whether something is better then something else, unless it opposes that world view in which case it must be attacked. ALL cultures are equally valid, moral relativism is the stated view that there is no valid good viewpoint.

bonkey · 08-09-2003 06:34AM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
Bonkey doesnt like monocultures. although he doesnt state it explicitly that he believes multiculture to be superior to monoculture he leans in that direction.

OK...thats the second time you have both misquoted me and put words in my mouth.

Read what I wrote. I said that I belive monocultures (more correctly - people who believe in a single culture's superiority.....monoculturalists, perhaps) are not good to have within a multicultural framework. I also said I did not believe that meant they should excluded.

IS that so hard to undertstand, or do you need me to rephrase it in simpler words so you might stop misquoting me?

why bother aim at restricting at all then?

For practical reasons that have nothing to do with multiculturalism. Ireland, for example, could not withstand economically an influx of 20,000,000 immigrants in one year, regardless of what culture they were (oine you approved of or not), so ultimately some practical limit must be set.

switzerland is not even on the same page as those who advocate mass immigration of non westerners.

Whats that Cyndi Lauper song again? "And I see your true colours shining through" or something, wasnt it. "Non-westerners" ????

You clearly havent studied the demographics of Switzerland before making that statement either, have you.

Where people say, give me an example of a monoculture that was of any worth? Like implying to say its not enough to say the european nations of the 19th/20th century are not adequate enough,

None of them were monoclutures, so its not even an implication that they weren't enough. Its a fact.

jc

TuathaDeDanaan · 08-09-2003 08:40AM

Listen your definition of monculturalism is flawed , look it up on dictionary.com, nothin to do with superiority. If you mean something else say something else. Racial supremacy has nothing to do with monculturalism. yeah i agree that racial supremacists arent great things to have in a multiculture.. see my bit about switzerland below

According to you, none of the great nations of europe of the 19th century were monocultural eh.

This is where we part ways i cannot argue with someone who has to deconstruct everything, soem people argue, ireland is not a monoculture because of the travellers, the japanee are not a monoculture because the hairy Ainu still have a tiny bit of thier culture left, that portugal or spain is a confedracy of groups. With such thinking I could divide up the members of my own famliy to those who speak irish and those who dont. multiculturalism for multiculturalism sake eh is whats required? you dont seem to recognise irish culture as a coherant collective and this being a good.

The amount of immigration you want is the amount thats physically possible to settle in ireland in a given year , given the restriction of some economic criteria you havent mentioned. hmmm yeah.

You also notice about switzerland "tolerance" laws like this...
This is recent law mind, multiculture is not tolerant of individual opinion which must be leftwing opinion or face the consequences.
So criticise immigration which is in effect discrimination and be jailed...

In effect since January 1, 1995, Switzerland's new Anti-Racism Law reads as follows:

Whoever publicly incites hatred or discrimination against a person or a group of persons on the basis of their race, ethnicity or religion,

or whoever publicly promotes an ideology that systematically disparages or slanders members of a race, ethnic group or religion,

or whoever organizes, supports or participates in a propaganda action with this same goal,

or whoever publicly through word, writing, illustration, gesture, act of violence, or in any other way disparages or discriminates against a person or a group of persons on the basis of their race, ethnicity or religion, in a way that offends their human dignity or, for any one of these reasons, denies, flagrantly whitewashes [gröblich verharmlost] or seeks to justify, genocide or other crimes against humanity,

or whoever withholds, on the basis of race, ethnicity or religion, a service or product from a person or a group of persons that is offered to the public at large,

will be punished by [up to three years] imprisonment or a fine

Silent Bob · 08-09-2003 09:43AM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
So criticise immigration which is in effect discrimination and be jailed...

Perhaps you think this because you cannot criticise immigration without generalisations and attacking ethnicities.

There is nothing in that law that prevents you from criticising immigration (the process) and the effect it has on a country, it does make it illegal for you to criticise immigrants as a result of their race/ethnicity though.

TuathaDeDanaan · 08-09-2003 10:11AM

If i said islam was backward and we shouldnt allow muslim immigration I would be jailed or failing that perhaps shot by some leftie nut job. Imagine being jailed for having an opinion.

Silent Bob · 08-09-2003 10:57AM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
If i said islam was backward and we shouldnt allow muslim immigration I would be jailed or failing that perhaps shot by some leftie nut job. Imagine being jailed for having an opinion.

Opinion is fine under that law. Inciting hatred is not.

And why should you want to disallow muslim immigration, how is it different to, say, American immigration?

Attack the process if you must, not the people.

p.pete · 08-09-2003 11:08AM

Thats kind of how I feel about it Silent Bob. If we had no restrictions whatsoever then our population could jump from 5m to 20 m which is obviously crazy.

If however we were to let the population go from 5m to 6 or 7 million what difference does it make where they come from and the colour of their skin. Obviously the contribution that they are going to bring is relevant - what education, experience and skills do they have.

The more diverse their backgrounds the better imho.

Hobart · 08-09-2003 11:14AM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
If i said islam was backward and we shouldnt allow muslim immigration I would be jailed or failing that perhaps shot by some leftie nut job. Imagine being jailed for having an opinion.

Depends where you say it but we should not outlaw the incitement laws. What you said is not having an opinion. It is incitment to hate. Big difference.

[EDIT] And Silent Bob got there before me!![/EDIT]

bonkey · 08-09-2003 12:16PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
If i said islam was backward and we shouldnt allow muslim immigration I would be jailed or failing that perhaps shot by some leftie nut job.

Well, firstly....getting shot by some nutcaase for any reason is hardly relevant to the law.

Secondly, you clearly don't know about (or don't understand) the situation in Switzerland if you believe this law prevents people speaking out about immigration. For example, I humbly suggest you learn a little bit about political parties such as SVP or the Swiss Democrats and their stances on immigration before making such obviously uneducated statements.

Thirdly, even if this were the case, it still doesn't refute my basic underlying proposition that Switzerland is an example of successful multiculturalism.

If the "cost" of being successful is simply (as you seem to be inferring) a case of passing laws to shut up the complainers, then surely that is indicative that the problem lies with those complaining about multiculturalism (i.e. you and your ilk) rather than the cultures themselves.

Conversely, if the problem of multiculturalism does not lie with its complainants, then stifling complaints in Switzerland - even if it were true - would not have led to a successful multicultural nation.

So, at best your point (if true) would imply that you are the problem. The alternate is that the point makes itself irrelevant to the success or otherwise of multiculturalism in Switzerland. In either case, its factually incorrect anyway.

But please...continue. I'm amused no end as to how educated you would appear to be about multiculturalism in Switzerland. It surely adds strength to any claim you have about how considered and informed your opinion on the subject really is.

jc

TuathaDeDanaan · 08-09-2003 02:01PM

So on the basis of switzerland your classic successful multiculturalism, we have to accept mass third world immigration as the swiss germans italians and french are able to overcome thier cultural "differences". No im not up to speed on the ins and outs of swiss politics, i could have googled some basic political stuff but what would i be saying, the absense of race riots amoung the germans and italians shows we should allow in anybody regardless. Listen anyway high IQ highly educated christians living in one of the richest countries in europe is not whats going to be the result of mass immigration to the rest of europe. jc...

p.pete, allowing in a large ethnic group legitimises more immigrants. This is called an unprincipled exception when you leave in a million, they'll have to have the right to be reunited with thier families if you oppose this then you will be the racist. see california, 50% hispanic now.

Hobert, How can you legislate against people you disagree with, if had my way i'ld have all the anarchists and anti-globalisation crowd who were protesting in dublin arrested for inciting civil disorder. sure people can say stupid things, doesnt warrent being locked up for it though. Inciting hatred is a very broad turm and is pure big brother. It amazes be as well the double standard that operates in such laws muslims in france can openly call for the destruction of israel yet people do get fined and locked up for holocaust revisionism if they are white.

Al-Muhajiroun's hate though is quite ok..

if you want to read how they'll overthrow your goverment to forment a worldwide islamic revolution check it out
http://www.obm.clara.net/aboutalm/west.html

I dont think the swiss multiculture was based on immigration from all over the place was it, the people there have actually some connection to each other..

p.pete · 08-09-2003 02:12PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan

p.pete, allowing in a large ethnic group legitimises more immigrants. This is called an unprincipled exception when you leave in a million, they'll have to have the right to be reunited with thier families if you oppose this then you will be the racist. see california, 50% hispanic now.

That's not quite what I meant but of course your entitled to your own interpretation.

Naturally if we put adds up in Chinese newspaper saying "come to Ireland - 1m places available" we would not only fill those places but we would then have those 1m turn around saying what about my children, spouse, relatives - 1m would become 3/4 million and yes the situation would be a mess.

In my post I said that the more diverse the backgrounds of the people coming in the better. This would prevent the whole ethnic grouping thing where we have other cultures in our society but they don't interact and just stay seperated.

Also I don't think it would be such a good idea for us to increase our population in a short period of time. It makes more sense to make it a more gradual and controlled process.

TuathaDeDanaan · 08-09-2003 02:20PM

Thats what we had before, the level of immigration was low enough that the people were assimilated and intermarried. The immigration rates are too high now for this too happen.

Also an addendum about hate speech. Ranter Oriana Fallaci and former film goddess Brigitte Bardot are both being charged with incitment to hatred for complaining about the islamification of mainland europe. For some reason saying a religion is bad is “racism,” saying you’d rather it wasn’t dominant in your country is “xenophobia,” and everyone knows that such things must extirpated at all costs. If that means bringing a distinguished 73-year-old woman with cancer into court as a criminal because someone thinks she said the wrong thing, so be it.

p.pete · 08-09-2003 02:23PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
If that means bringing a distinguished 73-year-old woman with cancer into court as a criminal because someone thinks she said the wrong thing, so be it.

Some of the Nazi war criminals were quite distinguished - do you have a point or are you just trying to make an emotional argument?

TuathaDeDanaan · 08-09-2003 02:31PM

Im just complaining that ulititarian pragmatism is overcoming common sense here. Nazi war criminals who were involved in a war of racial expansion and mass genocide are not comparible in this instance. Criticism of immigration policy doest lead to the gas chambers. c'mon man.

GuanYin · 08-09-2003 02:41PM

Immigration policies should be uniform for all non-nationals. Did they criticise the actual immigration policy or just how it applied to a certain nationality/religion.

If it was just the policy, then perhaps they were heavy handed, if she specifically cited a race/religion for specific inclusion/exclusion from/for this policy, then yes, she was out of order.

bonkey · 08-09-2003 03:09PM

So, we started with....

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
Give me your examples of the lands of tolerance!!! I demand them.

Now that one has actually been supplied to the extent that TDD can't just dismiss it out of hand on any reasonable grounds, we get :

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
... the absense of race riots amoung the germans and italians shows we should allow in anybody regardless. Listen anyway high IQ highly educated christians living in one of the richest countries in europe is not whats going to be the result of mass immigration to the rest of europe.

So, your basic answer is now that "well, ok, it might work somewhere else, but thats different because they're more tolerant than us.

You seemed to be implying initially that these lands of tolerance didn't exist. Now that you can't actually argue one of them away, you just want to dismiss it away instead.....and still without understanding the basics of what it is you are dismissing.

Thats all I wanted to show in the first place : you're say something doesn't/can't work without actually researching where it has worked and why it has worked there, but will dismiss those successes as "not relevant" for rasons that are apprenatly equally as shallowly researched.

I dont think the swiss multiculture was based on immigration from all over the place was it, the people there have actually some connection to each other..

You think wrong....again.

Switzerland has one of the highest Pakistani and Indian populations per capita in Europe. It has the highest Tamil poopulation, as well as massively significant numbers of other cultures such as Turks, 'slavs, etc. etc. etc.

Approximately 1 in 8 Swiss residents are non-swiss, and approximately 1 in 16 (i.e. half of the immigrants) are not classed in one of the four "native" ethnic groups (German, French, Italian, and Romansch).

So, that would be approximately 1,000,000 foreigners, of which 500,000 are not of the same ethnicity as the natives. There are an estimated 40,000 asylum seekers per year (obviously excluding economic migrants).

But please....feel free to continue showing that your dismissal of Switzerland and its success is based on such solidly researched material.....

jc

p.pete · 08-09-2003 03:12PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
Im just complaining that ulititarian pragmatism is overcoming common sense here. Nazi war criminals who were involved in a war of racial expansion and mass genocide are not comparible in this instance. Criticism of immigration policy doest lead to the gas chambers. c'mon man.

Your ability to use big words is almost as great as your ability to miss the point.

I was merely questioning your argument for somebody so distinguished to get called into a court of law. There is obviously a large gap to be bridged to get from merely criticising a policy (which is making the coments sound very mild indeed) to gas chambers. Crimes should be punished in light of how serious the crime is and if the courts are just then she will get what she deserves and no more.

What Sykeirl says is absolutely true. It is important to have policies in place and for them to be applied equally to all. Obviously by virtue of the fact we are in the EU other EU citizens have easy access to move to Ireland. Beyond agreements such as this however I don't feel it should be any easier for an American or Australian to move to Ireland than a chineese boat person or an iraqi muslim.

BuffyBot · 08-09-2003 03:30PM

if you want to read how they'll overthrow your goverment to forment a worldwide islamic revolution check it out

A small minorty in a huge majority. It's like saying all Irish national supported the IRA - yet another ill-informed, sweeping generalisation.

p.pete · 08-09-2003 03:37PM

Originally posted by BuffyBot
yet another ill-informed, sweeping generalisation.

I'm not convinced. Some of these sweeping generalisations seem more sinister than ill-informed. Naturally they are false but I think the source of a lot of these comments can be from clever and twisted minds.

Naturally I'm not calling people like tutha clever and twisted, he only gets his ideas from sources of this nature. The problem is that when ill-informed people listen to sweeping generalisations they can seem plausable - next thing you know there is another and another tutha posting sweeping generalisations. The whole thing can get ugly and the next thing you know there is a streetful of Nazi's holding protests about God knows what.

GuanYin · 08-09-2003 03:47PM

The irony of it all is that neither shanemac nor tuatha have managed to make one credible argument for their case.

By credible I mean well constructed factual argument with data from a reliable unbiased source to back it up.

Not only has he avoided this, but seems to abhorr the notion of it, as he has ignored or dismissed all well constructed factual arguments based on reliable unbiased sources, that have been levelled against him.

I'm wondering if, in 10 points, he can actually construct a decent argument with unbiased evidence to back up his points (ie. none of this: "everybody knows [insert ethnic minority] have a lower IQ, its proven in the stormfront big-book of science") that don't rely totally on heresay, conjecture or unsubstantiated opinion.

Hows that for a challenge?

p.pete · 08-09-2003 04:01PM

Sykeirl, I don't think that they will be able to achieve this but when did narrow-mindedness ever need to be backed up by facts?

GuanYin · 08-09-2003 04:32PM

Who said anything about science (except me when I used it in the example).

Population statistics, crime levels, unbiased historical accounts and of course science can all be used to make a case for an argument. The fact is all tutha has done is voice his very strong opinion, some stormfront (or whatever he claims to be from)rhetoric and link to articles that either a) he didn't read or understand properly, or b) come from a totally biased politically motivated source.

Lets see if he can make any semblence of an argument using unbiased sources, as he sure as hell hasn't made a decent one without them.

bonkey · 08-09-2003 05:19PM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
Listen anyway high IQ highly educated christians living in one of the richest countries in europe is not whats going to be the result of mass immigration to the rest of europe.

You know, it occurred to me on the way home that Ireland has a highly educated, highly christian society....and given that I very much doubt TDD can produce a single figure showing a significant IQ level between the Swiss and the Irish, that would mean that the only real difference would be that the Swiss have - on average - a higher standard of living.

(Incidenally, Swiss university attendance would be one of the lowest in Western Europe....whereas Irish would be one of the highest. So lest TDD decide that "high IQ" meant "highly educated", lets just put that one to rest before he has a chance to get it wrong again)

Now, by saying mass immigration is ok for the Swiss, but not for the Irish on these grounds would boil down purely and solely to the concept that "it works where people are rich enough".

Funnily, that would fly in the face of all the "it just doesn't work because of the nature of some cultures" argument which TDD has been falling back on quite frequently.

jc

p.pete · 08-09-2003 09:20PM

Originally posted by sykeirl
Who said anything about science (except me when I used it in the example).

Apologies, you're absolutely correct, post edited.

TuathaDeDanaan · 09-09-2003 01:25AM

Ok you are so into valid legitimate sources i get my information about switzerland from
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/peo_eth_gro&id=sz
which is refered from the Cia factbook.
Since I cant get a source more recent then 2002 which states that 7% of the population are non german/italian/french. This roughly matches your analysis of about a 1/16 being no eu nationals in switzerland, considering that much of this increase took place recently and its anti-descimination laws its hardly fair to call it a atypical example of multicultural bliss.

Prior to the 1960 muslims were rare within switzerland.

Although you call switzerland a land of tolerance i dont see how it differs from other countries except for that fact it has intolerance laws. I did not say the swiss were more tolerant, they exacted intolerance legislation which shows they thought they would have a problem or did have a problem

Sykierl of course believes that immigration policies should be equal for all nationals entering. He'ld like to think others from his non-irish ancestry side could enter ireland im sure. If you want to believe in cultural equality keep deluding yourself.

Buffybot i made no ill informed generalisation, I linked to muslim fanatics in england who want to overthrow the government if i wanted to generalise i would have linked to the muslim council of britain as well.

About Narrow mindedness, you are so openminded you support the implimentation of thoughtcrime legislation.

Population statistics, crime levels, unbiased historical accounts and of course science can all be used to make a case for an argument.

Yah they can its called reason.

Bonkey
I dont know what you are on about in that last comment.

Now, by saying mass immigration is ok for the Swiss, but not for the Irish on these grounds would boil down purely and solely to the concept that "it works where people are rich enough".

Well ah the far right is present in switzerland, hmm land of tolerance..

http://www.hri.ca/fortherecord2002/engtext/vol6eng/switzerlandtr.htm

I'm wondering if, in 10 points, he can actually construct a decent argument with unbiased evidence to back up his points (ie. none of this: "everybody knows [insert ethnic minority] have a lower IQ, its proven in the stormfront big-book of science") that don't rely totally on heresay, conjecture or unsubstantiated opinion.

sykierl, am i that silly. Its well established that there are IQ differences between racial groups. If you cant accept that then whats the point in me making other points. The argument over Iq is how much of these Iq differences are created by the environment and how much of them are genetic. Pure Leftists and communists will argue that all IQ differences can be explained by the environment while pure racial supremacists will argue that they are purely affected by genetics. You havent told me what your ancestry is either..

GuanYin · 09-09-2003 07:38AM

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
Sykierl of course believes that immigration policies should be equal for all nationals entering. He'ld like to think others from his non-irish ancestry side could enter ireland im sure. If you want to believe in cultural equality keep deluding yourself.

I'm not bothered who enters the country or not to be honest. I just don't see why non-whites should be stopped over white, which is what you seem to think is acceptable.

Originally posted by TuathaDeDanaan
sykierl, am i that silly. Its well established that there are IQ differences between racial groups. If you cant accept that then whats the point in me making other points. The argument over Iq is how much of these Iq differences are created by the environment and how much of them are genetic. Pure Leftists and communists will argue that all IQ differences can be explained by the environment while pure racial supremacists will argue that they are purely affected by genetics. You havent told me what your ancestry is either..

Ahhh, back to your old ways. Its well established where? By whom? I've never seen anything bar "racist propaganda" even suggesting it, never mind it being well established. Again, can yo actually back up this remark with some unbiased published scientific references or is this "sure everyone knows" type facts?

I'll accept it when you back up your claim with peer reviewed unbiased reference, if you can't provide that, then whats the point in you making the point?

IQ can be influenced by genetics, as I said before, but not in the way you are suggesting. Can you show me a published paper from a respected peer reviewed journal that backs up your claim?

I don't see what my ancestry has to do with this argument at all, but if its any consolation to you, on my last IQ test I got 140.

Shanemac requests you put your scientific arguments here

Comments