The End of Tolerance

[Fade the Butcher]

Liberalism will go down in history as the great superstition of our times.

MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569485/site/newsweek/)

The world has long looked upon the Dutch as the very model of a modern, multicultural society. Open and liberal, the tiny seagoing nation that invented the globalized economy in the 1600s prided itself on a history of taking in all comers, be they Indonesian or Turkish, African or Chinese.

How different things look today. Dutch borders have been virtually shut. New immigration is down to a trickle. The great cosmopolitan port city of Rotterdam just published a code of conduct requiring Dutch be spoken in public. Parliament recently legislated a countrywide ban on wearing the burqa in public. And listen to a prominent Dutch establishment figure describe the new Dutch Way with immigrants. “We demand a new social contract,” says Jan Wolter Wabeke, High Court Judge in The Hague. “We no longer accept that people don’t learn our language, we require that they send their daughters to school, and we demand they stop bringing in young brides from the desert and locking them up in third-floor apartments.”

What’s going on here? Weren’t the Dutch supposed to be the nicest people on earth, the most tolerant nation in Europe, a melting pot for minorities and immigrants since the Renaissance? No longer, and in this the Dutch are once again at the forefront of changes in Europe. This time, the Dutch model for Europe is one of multiculturalism besieged, if not plain defunct. . . .

[Starr]

We no longer accept that people don’t learn our language, we require that they send their daughters to school, and we demand they stop bringing in young brides from the desert and locking them up in third-floor apartments.”

So if they speak the language, dress like us and they try to live by our rules, everything will be peachy?

[Felix the Cat]

The final paragraphs bear reading -

But if Europeans aim to build multiethnic societies that play by their rules, they'll also have to get their heads around the fact that this new world will be multireligious, too—a fact that poses awkward challenges. Over much of Europe, for example, established Christian churches enjoy special state privileges and subsidies. Most mosques, by contrast, are hidden in converted shops or tenement apartments. In Copenhagen, a 15-year plan —to build a national mosque has become mired in red tape and local opposition. A German state recently passed a law banning a hijab in schools—but not yarmulkes or nun's habits. A minister in Baden-Wurttemberg last month resigned over an offensive remark about the local bishop. It's hard to imagine this happening had the aggrieved party been an imam.

Until such double standards can be abolished and a new equality established, Europe's new toughness will feel like forced integration. "It's a form of creating a second-class citizenship," says Tariq Modood, director of the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship in Bristol. "All the burden of change is placed on the immigrant." And if that's not to be the case, then Europeans will almost certainly have to accord Muslim faiths the same status accorded Christianity—including, perhaps, a media that voluntarily refrains from publishing needlessly offensive images of the Prophet, not under duress from abroad but out of greater respect for local religious sensibilities.

[Pablo Escobar]

It's a start.

[Gorilla]

I like the Dutch precedent. Nothing outlandish or unrealistically revolutionary, but sensible, and pragmatic.

[Starr]

Until such double standards can be abolished and a new equality established, Europe's new toughness will feel like forced integration. "It's a form of creating a second-class citizenship," says Tariq Modood, director of the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship in Bristol. "All the burden of change is placed on the immigrant." And if that's not to be the case, then Europeans will almost certainly have to accord Muslim faiths the same status accorded Christianity—including, perhaps, a media that voluntarily refrains from publishing needlessly offensive images of the Prophet, not under duress from abroad but out of greater respect for local religious sensibilities.

The only real hope I see in any of this is that these attitudes will keep out some of the immigrants. It sounds like people, generally are growing tired of the immigrants and their "ways" and what they bring with them. but yet, they are still operating under the assumption that "we are all the same" and if only they would be and act more like us.
Trying to take the jungle out of the nigger, so to speak.

[Fade the Butcher]

It's a step in the right direction. The demise of multiculturalism heralds the end of indifference and multiculturalism. The eventual demise of integration will open the door to more revolutionary measures.

[Felix the Cat]

This situation is unstable and unlikely to last long

The reason these policies are not "revolutionary" is because Muslims have not yet reacted to these attacks on their freedom

It's only a matter of time before they pull some spectacular stunt in retaliation. Events will then move quickly

(The burning of the reichstag by that stupid Dutch communist springs to mind...)

[Starr]

A step(small) in the right direction? I suppose so.
By feeling that they must force these people to integrate, at least it is a breakaway from the idea that all cultures are equal.

[Nordicist]

I oppose any moves to assimilate or integrate Third Worlders. On the contrary, I want them to be and feel as different and isolated as possible. When the time comes to finally deport these racial intruders and invaders it will be easier to identify them. It's utter folly to introduce measures that will facilitate their permanent status in the Netherlands. It will just be so much harder to show them the exit door if they feel that the Netherlands is home in some way.

This whole thing is just mad. But you know, if a flamboyant homosexual like Pim Fortuyn is all that the Dutch are able to produce after decades of mass immigration, ethnic dislocation, Muslim terror on their own soil, and multicultural tyranny...they deserve all they're getting now and more.

Liberalism will go down in history as the great superstition of our times.

MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569485/site/newsweek/)

[Pablo Escobar]

A step(small) in the right direction? I suppose so.


Well, yes. There will be a transition time from present to a more ethnically aware future Europe.

Nothing can happen immediately. If you believe in immediate solutions,
you become Glenn Lindstedt :D

[Vindex]

I have a theory that because of the blood spilling in the second war most of the best of the European Nations where killed and the lower types where left behind at home to breed. Probably some of the best of the natural Elite of the Dutch where killed on the Russian front. Accounting for there strange passive wimpy behaviour. And decades of materialism/liberal lukewarmism.


I oppose any moves to assimilate or integrate Third Worlders. On the contrary, I want them to be and feel as different and isolated as possible. When the time comes to finally deport these racial intruders and invaders it will be easier to identify them. It's utter folly to introduce measures that will facilitate their permanent status in the Netherlands. It will just be so much harder to show them the exit door if they feel that the Netherlands is home in some way.

This whole thing is just mad. But you know, if a flamboyant homosexual like Pim Fortuyn is all that the Dutch are able to produce after decades of mass immigration, ethnic dislocation, Muslim terror on their own soil, and multicultural tyranny...they deserve all they're getting now and more.

[Pablo Escobar]

I have a theory that because of the blood spilling in the second war most of the best of the European Nations where killed and the lower types where left behind at home to breed. Probably some of the best of the natural Elite of the Dutch where killed on the Russian front. Accounting for there strange passive wimpy behaviour. And decades of materialism/liberal lukewarmism.

Ur teory sux. LOLOL!

Seriously, it does. It could've potentially had some merit if the percentage of men who were killed in war was 100%, and the war lasted for several generations.

[Janus]

I have a theory that because of the blood spilling in the second war most of the best of the European Nations where killed and the lower types where left behind at home to breed. Contraselection has plagued Europeans since their inception; the Schutzstaffel ("SS") is a good example.

[Pablo Escobar]

Contraselection has plagued Europeans since their inception; the Schutzstaffel ("SS") is a good example.

Try to look at it rationally.

Most of the soldiers who fought in the war survived.
Most of the 'brave warriors' who did die in the war also had fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters.

The process which resulted in Europe of today
has everything to do with economic, political and cultural circumstances,
and ZERO to do with some mythical 'bravery gene' which was 'lost during ww2'.

[Excorcism]

This situation is unstable and unlikely to last long

The reason these policies are not "revolutionary" is because Muslims have not yet reacted to these attacks on their freedom

It's only a matter of time before they pull some spectacular stunt in retaliation. Events will then move quickly

(The burning of the reichstag by that stupid Dutch communist springs to mind...)

I have no clue who thought up the idea that conservative Sunni Islam would be entirely compatible with European culture.

[Stanley]

"It's a form of creating a second-class citizenship," says Tariq Modood, director of the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship in Bristol. "All the burden of change is placed on the immigrant."Which is perfectly appropriate, Mr. Modood. Why should the natives change at all? Moreover, why would you want the Netherlands to be more like the hellhole from which you fled?

[Janus]

It could've potentially had some merit if the percentage of men who were killed in war was 100%, and the war lasted for several generations. World War I attracted millions of young men to their deaths, as did World War II.

The types that are seen as ideal in warfare, i.e. athletic, idealistic, Romantic, ambitious, etc. form the foundation of European civilization; their inevitable absence in the after-math of warfare is therefore inductive to the decline of European civilization.

"Industrialization", the decline of Religion, and the rampant-egalitarianism that naturally results from warfare has exacerbated this phenomenon by preventing the nations of Europe from replenishing its supply of these "high-quality" individuals.Most of the soldiers who fought in the war survived. Those individuals whom are "brave" and "noble" are not the individuals whom are the mostly likely to survive; the "idealism" and "Romanticism" that is often the cause of war is thus diminished, allowing for the return to political-equilibrium. Most of the 'brave warriors' who did die in the war also had fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters. This would not have prevented decline; sexual recombination plays an important role in the propensity of a population toward evolutionarily-instable mechanisms such as the aforementioned.The process which resulted in Europe of today
has everything to do with economic, political and cultural circumstances,
and ZERO to do with some mythical 'bravery gene' which was 'lost during ww2'. I doubt it. The severity of conflicts usually dictates the degree to which populational-decline ensues; this is known in phylogeny as the "bottleneck effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck)"

[Pablo Escobar]

World War I attracted millions of young men to their deaths, as did World War II.

Yep. It did. However, it didn't erradicate entire genetic lineages
which carried some mysterious gene which prevents the society from sliding into multi-culturalism.


The types that are seen as ideal in warfare, i.e. athletic, idealistic, Romantic, ambitious, etc. form the foundation of European civilization; their inevitable absence in the after-math of warfare is therefore inductive to the decline of European civilization.

What about nations which had no victims in WW1 and WW2?

If your theory is true, then, it's fair to assume that the nations which
by some chance avoided being wholesale butchered during the world wars,
would've preserved their best of the best. So, we can therefore assume
they still have their ubermensch lineages.

Ireland, Sweden, Belgium, Croatia, Baltic states, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Denmark... etc. etc.

this is known in phylogeny as the "bottleneck effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck)"

I'm arguing that there's no relation between a bottleneck effect of DNA,
and the events which shaped Europe after WW2.

Even the bottleneck isn't so pronounced, because the wars lasted
only several years.

[Felix the Cat]

What about nations which had no victims in WW1 and WW2?

If your theory is true, then, it's fair to assume that the nations which
by some chance avoided being wholesale butchered during the world wars,
would've preserved their best of the best. So, we can therefore assume
they still have their ubermensch lineages.
I have strong doubts (http://www.thephora.net/forum/showpost.php?p=49146&postcount=28) about the war-causes-leftism theory

I'm still interested in hearing alternative explanations

[Gleb]

Russia, f.e., was in a state of almost continous war for 400-500 years during 12-17 centuries with the east, west and south, sometimes simultaneously and only grew stronger after such an experience. Men who go to war, most of the time, have kids already, so I do not think wars can cause some kind of genepool decline.

[Janus]

Yep. It did. However, it didn't erradicate entire genetic lineages
which carried some mysterious gene which prevents the society from sliding into multi-culturalism. It diminished them and in many cases eradicated them.

The same types that are the most susceptible to warfare are the most common to have few or no offspring; this is the process that is today being exacerbated by "Industrialization" and "multiculturalism".What about nations which had no victims in WW1 and WW2?

If your theory is true, then, it's fair to assume that the nations which
by some chance avoided being wholesale butchered during the world wars,
would've preserved their best of the best. So, we can therefore assume
they still have their ubermensch lineages.

Ireland, Sweden, Belgium, Croatia, Baltic states, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Denmark... etc. etc. I believe that is a safe assumption.I'm arguing that there's no relation between a bottleneck effect of DNA,
and the events which shaped Europe after WW2.

Even the bottleneck isn't so pronounced, because the wars lasted
only several years. The principles of "Industrialization" are applicable to warfare; the use of complex-machinery multiplies the potential force that is available to each belligerent.

This is extremely-pronounced in the creation of the "father (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Man)" and the "son (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_boy)". Time is nearly irrelevant in modern warfare; it is force that should be considered. :)

[Janus]

I'm still interested in hearing alternative explanations "Leftism" is also the result of "K selection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-selection)". The altruistic-tendencies that are beneficial in homogenous populations are selected for to such an extent that they become nondiscriminant ("Confounding Factors of Hamilton's Rule (http://math.berkeley.edu/~levine/hamiltonpaper.pdf)").

This liability becomes apparent in societies that are heterogenous; also, the introversion and individualistic-tendencies that results from "K selection" lower the comparitive group-cohesion of populations that reside in high-latitudes.

[Pablo Escobar]

It diminished them and in many cases eradicated them.

You can't diminish a lineage. You either completely destroy it, or not.
As I said, most of the soldiers who fought in the war survived it,
those who died still had their sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters which carry the same DNA as they did.



The same types that are the most susceptible to warfare are the most common to have few or no offspring;

Any proof of that?

this is the process that is today being exacerbated by "Industrialization" and "multiculturalism". I believe that is a safe assumption. The principles of "Industrialization" are applicable to warfare; the use of complex-machinery multiplies the potential force that is available to each belligerent.

We were talking about the 1939-1945.


This is extremely-pronounced in the creation of the "father (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Man)" and the "son (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_boy)". Time is nearly irrelevant in modern warfare; it is force that should be considered. :)

I was talking about DNA.

Anyway, I think I've proven you wrong enough times. G night.

[Empress Cheesatine]

It's a step in the right direction. The demise of multiculturalism heralds the end of indifference and multiculturalism. The eventual demise of integration will open the door to more revolutionary measures.

I dont think multiculturalism is on the demise. There is a certain amount of awakening among ordinary people, obviously, but they can only do so much considering that in much of "free" Europe there are laws in place essentially outlawing rebellions against multicult, even simple published complaints about it, such as with Brigitte Bardot in France.

Europeans need to overturn such laws and begin to demand free expression and representation.

[Dan Dare]

....Weren’t the Dutch supposed to be the nicest people on earth, the most tolerant nation in Europe, a melting pot for minorities and immigrants since the Renaissance?

Only if you think the Renaissance started in 1968.

[Petr]

Liberalism will go down in history as the great superstition of our times.
I otherwise agree, but I detest the enlightenment-talk about "superstitions". I'd prefer terms like "senselessness" or "idiocy."

Jabbering about "superstitions" is a way for superficially educated people to feel superior.

When you look down to it, we all have beliefs that could be easily classified as superstitions, like your veneration of Platonic forms.


Petr

[Petr]

I have strong doubts[/URL] about the war-causes-leftism theory
If by "leftism" one means collectivism, then it's pretty much correct. The First World War gave birth to the Soviet Union, and "the war is the health of the state" is a common libertarian truism.

http://www.bigeye.com/warstate.htm


Petr

[Crowley]

Too little, too late.

[Petr]

Too little, too late.
This is defeatism. :nono: It's a start.


Petr

[ironweed]

I have a theory that because of the blood spilling in the second war most of the best of the European Nations where killed and the lower types where left behind at home to breed.

Well, a country like Sweden doesn't really fit into your theory, does it? The Swedes sat on the sidelines yet places like Malmo turn into multicultural paradises. And I believe similar things have gone in Switzerland, Ireland and Spain, though not to the same extent.

[Kodos]

Those individuals whom are "brave" and "noble" are not the individuals whom are the mostly likely to survive; the "idealism" and "Romanticism" that is often the cause of war is thus diminished, allowing for the return to political-equilibrium.

Why are idealism and romanticism desirable characteristics at all? Romantics are always nothing but trouble and idealists almost always are.

[1-800]

Why are idealism and romanticism desirable characteristics at all? Romantics are always nothing but trouble and idealists almost always are.

Because people who are coolly pragmatic and cynical don't write things like:

So We'll Go No More A-Roving

So we'll go no more a-roving
So late into the night,
Though the heart still be as loving,
And the moon still be as bright.

For the sword outwears its sheath,
And the soul outwears the breast,
And the heart must pause to breathe,
And love itself have rest.

Though the night was made for loving,
And the day returns too soon,
Yet we'll go no more a-roving
By the light of the moon.

[scop]

Because people who are coolly pragmatic and cynical don't write things like:

So We'll Go No More A-Roving

So we'll go no more a-roving
So late into the night,
Though the heart still be as loving,
And the moon still be as bright.

For the sword outwears its sheath,
And the soul outwears the breast,
And the heart must pause to breathe,
And love itself have rest.

Though the night was made for loving,
And the day returns too soon,
Yet we'll go no more a-roving
By the light of the moon.

Exactly, cynics and pragmatists often overlook the beauty of life, a sad state of affairs, give me Shelly over any one of them.

[Fade the Butcher]

Why are idealism and romanticism desirable characteristics at all?

Idealism inspires progress.