bubblypop wrote: » You said the best culture is the culture that brought about human rights, so I'm asking you, when did human rights start? What culture brough about human rights?
Cordell wrote: » It is not relevant for this discussion who brought them on a good while ago, what is important is who respects them. And that is us in the western culture. Or you will be like: now you behead people for blasphemy but that's grand, a millennia ago your culture was superior.
Wibbs wrote: » More who are conflating people and "races" with culture. I thought that was verboten? Ad for good reasons. Though they are obviously coming from very different places I have long held the view that in one respect the right on and the right wing have one thing in common; they're both completely obsessed with "race" and skin colour and both label people accordingly just from a different angle. Ironies all over the place.
Wibbs wrote: » And how did such laws come about? relativism debates? No. They came about because cultures made judgements and pretty damned strident ones that said nope this is an inferior way of thinking and doing and we must enact rules against such thinking and doing to make a better, more superior society.
storker wrote: » Yet the very people who made that declaration regularly made quite shocking criticisms and insults of groups like the (UK) police the police or Americans in general and other pet targets of the "politically correct". I pointed out that such utterances were racist by the contributors' own definition, but strangely, I never got a response.
storker wrote: » On a university discussion board I was once part of, it was declared that criticism of any group was racist, and the targets' actual race or the size of the group didn't matter. Yet the very people who made that declaration regularly made quite shocking criticisms and insults of groups like the (UK) police the police or Americans in general and other pet targets of the "politically correct". I pointed out that such utterances were racist by the contributors' own definition, but strangely, I never got a response.
bubblypop wrote: » Lol! You bring up a subject and then you decide it's not relevant. Hilarious
Cordell wrote: » The subject is relevant, the side subject you keep going on about isn't. The subject I brought up and your question have nothing in common. You're trying everything but admitting that 3rd word cultures don't respect human rights.
storker wrote: » Imagine if in the 19th century, the northern U.S. states had said "It's not for us to judge the culture of slavery in the south. Their culture is just as good as ours. To say otherwise would be supremacist."
bubblypop wrote: » I was never asked to admit that 3rd world countries don't respect human rights. There are many countries that do not respect human rights, I'm well aware of that, and I don't agree with their stance. You, stated that you believe the culture that created human rights is the best culture, but when asked about that, that's not relevant. I'm starting to think perhaps your posts are not relevant.
Cordell wrote: » Alright then, is the culture that respects the human rights the most superior to all others?
I can certainly understand relativism of this nature as a genuine philosophical debate
Cordell wrote: » But this is not one of those, here we're trying to determine if the immigration from certain cultures presents any danger for Europe. Or, since the danger has already presented itself, we're trying to get at least some agreement that it was a mistake.
Deleted User wrote: » Looks like Macron is in real trouble in France, will be interesting to see if he can turn it around before next years presidential election.
Was it disappointment for Marine? Was it Macron's failure? Was it centre-right poised for presidential challenge? Was it Socialists and Greens show left-wing vote still strong?
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » How is Le Pen and her racist party doing? To quote the BBC, the headline today could be any one of.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57546011
Deleted User wrote: » Why are you so angry? It's bad for Macron because he is the President and the major player not just in France but probably the EU at this stage.. Le Pen is just a challenger who will probably never have enough support to get over the line. Your obsession with seeing racism everywhere isn't healthy.
Deleted User wrote: » Yes, the turnout was shocking and isn't good for democracy. I'd vote in every election no matter how bad I felt the candidates on offer were, I think it's vitally important. Maybe the French are completely disillusioned with it all.
Deleted User wrote: » Dunno much about French politics, but with Irish politics, TBH I rarely vote for any of the existing parties. I don't see any substantial difference between them, and I don't trust them to represent the issues I care about. I've seen too many parties promise various agendas, and then do everything but that, once they get into power. I suspect that there's many people similar to myself when it comes to voting and politics. We don't trust our politicians, and voting them in incurs a responsibility for what they do while in power. Yes, I know the flip side argument about not voting, but it doesn't change my views. (As for spoiling my vote, TBH it's not something I've ever considered... hmm.. something to think about)
[Deleted User] wrote: » I thought we'd be ok in Ireland with participation rates but I've just checked the turnout at the last election and I'm seeing 62.9%. That's very disappointing.
MikeOxsgreen wrote: » And wasn't it the first Saturday vote to allow students etc. vote. No doubt the covids played a part, but there is something wrong with democracy if people can't be ars3d voting
MikeOxsgreen wrote: » No doubt the covids played a part, but there is something wrong with democracy if people can't be ars3d voting
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » Yeah is western democracy on the decline Peter?
MikeOxsgreen wrote: » Spoiling your vote is pointless. It might raise a smile at the polling centre, but thats it. (In Ireland) Vote for those you hate the least if there's no one you like. Let your vote do as much damage as you can, if not support for a candidate. These were regional assemblies, probably about as useful as our own.
Deleted User wrote: » I thought we'd be ok in Ireland with participation rates but I've just checked the turnout at the last election and I'm seeing 62.9%. That's very disappointing. I can't understand why almost 40% of people wouldn't vote, even if you hate them all equally, spoil your vote or something.
Deleted User wrote: » I'm basically on the exact same page as you. I find that none of them really represent me on issues that I find important, one of the major ones being immigration. I usually find someone though that I can vote for, more often than not an independent candidate who might be focusing on one or two smaller specific issues. I've stated it before but Macron wouldn't be someone who appeals to me on a whole number of levels but if we had a politician in Ireland who had similar proposals on immigration that he has put forward they would receive my vote.
Deleted User wrote: » TBF, there's plenty wrong with democracy. The fact that FF continue to exist as a party after all the shenanigans they've been involved in, even just during my lifetime (mid 40s), reinforces the impression that democracy is really messed up. The Banking crash, the completely useless and incredibly expensive tribunals, and the total lack of accountability proved that to me. It's all a game for the politicians, one in which they've had decades to slowly shift the rules to be in their favor.
Deleted User wrote: » That's true as well about voting down the list, I've made a personal choice though to never vote for a Sinn Fein candidate, even if it is the last preference. It's just a personal thing with me, I understand younger people are turning to them now and I understand why but for me, I'll never write any number after one of their candidates. I also have no interest in debating that and I'm sure they're not worried about never receiving my vote anyway