Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"we tried Anarchy, but no-one would follow the damn rules"

:)

pwnt.

Share this post


Link to post

wait are you serious? no luxuries? saracen you're a dumbass XD we couldn't live five minutes without luxuries XDDD be it soda or broadband... or television... or chocolate o_o

Share this post


Link to post

In fact all those things you deem luxuries Mina would still be available. The lack of media, computers internet etc. is an Anarcho-primitive point of view, and Anarcho-primitives wish to wipe out all technology. Any other type of anarchy however would still create these products or services on the provision that they are free for the people and are of a non-profit nature.

 

However Car production would be shut down, and bicycle production increased. Importing of games developed in other countries would cease unless the other country it's coming from is also an Anarchy state, However it also means torrenting would be legal, freedom of information, freedom to share, we can take what we want, when we want without repercussions. The list can go on and on...

 

The great thing is though, withoutcapitalism, it means we can work when we want to, and all the hard work we do will go directly back into the community instead of just benefitting a fat cat boss, and lining his pokets with money... but then again, there won't be any money. Capitalism creates crime, it creates greed, it creates war, with anarchy to kill all that, it will also kill the brainwashing from the state that makes you believe you need money to survive.

 

Afterall, would you rather be an upstanding citizen who gets equal liberty, food and personal sense of pride, or would you rather have little rights, struggle hard to work for your money, which brings little food to the table, and feel morally drained cos the government screws you over by taxing you for everything but the air you breathe?

 

I know what I prefer.

Share this post


Link to post
Afterall, would you rather be an upstanding citizen who gets equal liberty, food and personal sense of pride, or would you rather have little rights, struggle hard to work for your money, which brings little food to the table, and feel morally drained cos the government screws you over by taxing you for everything but the air you breathe?

 

Ok liberty in all forms may not be equal in its current state but we still have far more individual liberty than we would in an anarcho communist state of being. The ability to own something is one of the primary facets of personal liberty. The manifesto speaks of not having to worry if you cannot afford a house because you are free to move into wherever you want. At the same time it also talks of your ability to live privately in a home if you wish. There is no way this privacy could exist as anyone would be free to enter this house and live there without your consent as you have no form of ownership. Thus the only way this could actually work the way the manifesto indicates is via the use of force.

 

 

We will re-organise industry so that we only produce what is socially-useful.

 

There will be no place for useless work such as the production of consumer goods for profit, the maintenance of social control, because these 'normal' aspects of society will be irrelevant after the Revolution. Each person will therefore have more time on their hands, but this is fundamentally different to 'unemployment' because no one will be 'employed'. This is because society is easily capable of producing enough for its needs but not its greed, the concept of having to work for a wage - or else starve and become homeless - will become redundant. The nature of work will in itself be more enjoyable, because, unlike under Capitalism it will have a point to it and because we will work in ways which maximise fulfilment, not profit. Less pleasant but none the less necessary tasks will be shared out entirely equally and the rest of our time can be spent in enjoyable and creative pursuits.

 

Sorry Saracen, but what this is saying is that instead of industry producing all the wants of a society (eg coffee, alcoholic drinks, fizzy drinks, games, tv etc.) we will be focusing on what is needed for a society, not just the products manufactured by by big faceless multinationals to satisfy our greed.

 

The problem with this line of thinking is that people do want these items and are willing to spend the money they 'worked tirelessly for at the hands of their capitalist slavedrivers'. Sure many of these items were created purely to make money, and thus are not "socially-useful", but the fact remains that they are obviously worth the money because millions of people continue to buy them even though they are not needed.

 

This belief that capitalism must be eliminated is not actually an anarchist aim and does not come from anarchistic ideals. This is coming from the the communist side of this branch of anarchism. True anarchist beliefs support the idea of private ownership free from the control and influence of a ruler. Many even support the idea of free market capitalism free from restrictions and taxation imposed by governments, thus removing government control of the people and allowing this individual liberty.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

am i the only one that realises if you don't have to work, no-one will work? and we can't all do the jobs we want to. otherwise all the men in the world would be game makers or game testers. sure, you might get an odd one every so often who wants to do something else like bakery or cooking... but too few of them. and we need a money system to stop people abusing trust. otherwise you could just walk into a restaurant (or anarchial equivalent foodplace) and just continuously take take take. the system is bound to failure. like alpha said, we have hella good rights at the moment. we have the best rights in the world, uk and america. (possibly NZ and the aussies. i'm a lil slack on their laws) but none the less we have an amazing freedom of rights... sure every so often something might happen that makes you think the government is oppressive but if you actually look at it, it's usually for our own good. like parents telling you to eat your greens. may not like it but it's healthy. sure, something like ID cards would be tracking us all and "constricting our rights" but unless you're doing something illegal, why would that matter? for the good people out there it helps us. it tracks the criminals and keeps things in order. and cameras everywhere? unless you're vandalizing or killing, raping or thieving it's a good thing. and in an anarchial society what would stop those things happening? someone out there would do it. you put a law down and someone else would rebel against the law.

Share this post


Link to post
However Car production would be shut down, and bicycle production increased. Importing of games developed in other countries would cease unless the other country it's coming from is also an Anarchy state, However it also means torrenting would be legal, freedom of information, freedom to share, we can take what we want, when we want without repercussions. The list can go on and on...

I like this line. Another anarchy state, so there will be other states that have government most likely?

 

Then anarchy would ultimately fail since I would place bets that the organized nation could easily conquer anarchy lands thus defeating the point of anarchy...

 

People form governments by default, hell even the noble native americans had tribe leaders. No group that I know have has ever lived long under anarchy.

Share this post


Link to post

Anarchy would end up creating more problems than Capitalism ever has. Yes, there is open greed in Capitalism. However, greed is one of the primary traits of a human being. There's no possible way to eliminate greed. As for crime, Capitalism also has a hand in creating crime. There are always people who want want they can't have, so they resort to thievery and crime to take it. Anarchy would only change the reasoning behind this crime, if you could even call it that in this state of government you like so much. You fail to notice the good points of Capitalism: It creates prosperity. It creates competition between corporations and therefor advancement. It creates jobs and ways to put and keep food on your table. It creates ways for people to be successful with hard work. Yes, poor people suffer. I'd rather have one group suffering under Capitalism than all groups suffering under Anarchy.

Share this post


Link to post

No form of government is perfect, only people who think which is best. that's why different country have different form of government which portray the different mentality of humans in different region.

Share this post


Link to post

the only reason the russians fail is cos they can't decide what they want xD some want capitalism, some want marxism, some want communism... there is everything there from hippies to neo nazis, same as every other country. only difference there is there isn't a main governing power to decide what the country will be as a whole o.o

anyway. i agree with blackout and mckay. we need capitalism... it's what has made us so successful. as mckay said, without competition there would be no advancement. if there is no advancement we'd still be living in caves. check your history. every single country, people or tribe in the world have some sort of political alignment other then anarchy... that is why they survive. the only anarchists out there appear to tear down a government then disappear when a new government is set up which agrees with their point of view. there is no such thing as true anarchy working. and your little cult is just as bad... i want no part of it and i'm pretty sure no-one else here does either.

or rather let me rephrase myself... you want to tear down the government? i'm an anarchist. i rebel against your tearing down the government. i want to be safe and warm and be able to own my own things and live in peace. i don't want people busting in my door and staying for as long as they please. i don't want people stealing my shizz because they want it and i have no legal possession rights over my stuff. if you try and convert this country, me and all the other peace loving britons will fight you every step of the way, along with the government, police and army. we're happy with our lifestyles. when we want a change, we vote in a new governmental power. we don't tear down life as we know it.

Share this post


Link to post

Firstly, Paragraph's Mina, it makes it easier to read.

 

we need capitalism... it's what has made us so successful. as mckay said, without competition there would be no advancement. if there is no advancement we'd still be living in caves.

Always concerned about technology Mina. People lived without computers, games etc in their homes in the past. No Mina, you need capitalism because the system is based on greed and the need to look out for yourself, your personal possessions and financial welfare. This sentence displays to me, your absolute dependence on the system, and without it, you become nothing, which is quite sad. Also, you mention competition and advancement. Competition is about making the most money, and again it boils down to greed, it is not for the benefit of anyone but the people at the top of the Hierarchy, the ruling class, those that make life harder for the average Joe.

 

Plus competition doesn't equal advancement. War in any form, equals advancement. A government's desperation to stay ahead of another government is the key to advancement. Without world war 1, world war 2, and especially the cold war, I probably wouldn't be typing this now, in fact, the internet probably wouldn't exist, and if it did, right now it'd probably still be part of a military network in the states somewhere, and at best, we'd be using 14.4 dial up modems right now.

 

check your history. every single country, people or tribe in the world have some sort of political alignment other then anarchy... that is why they survive. the only anarchists out there appear to tear down a government then disappear when a new government is set up which agrees with their point of view.

 

I had to laugh hard at this. What you're saying effectively is that the survival of our species is based on a system of political leadership. Nature and evolution determines survival Mina... Sure throughout very early human history and in natural habitats of animals in the wild, there are leaderships, but they are all through the Alpha male. Basic laws of human and animal nature can be enough to lead any species. But really, humans having independent and intelligent thought is what has caused the general populace to believe that they cannot survive without bricks, mortar, metal and machine around them.

 

If you were to chuck everyone into a jungle and told them to survive for a whole 6 months with only the clothes on their back. A good 90% of people would fail. Many wouldn't cope. However about 5% of the population never put in that position before will dig deep to find their true human instinct, and would probably survive. The other 5% of the population are those who know of the skills, to be one with nature, will snare, kill and hunt to be able to live comfortably. My point is dependance.... if Capitalism was to fail... the world economy to completely collapse, everything worthless, what system can go in place that can ensure the survival of 90% of those people who will fail in the concrete jungles? Without Anarchy, I can't think of any. Let's think of it metaphorically, Capitialism is Hugh Hefner, Anarchy is Crocodile Dundee.

there is no such thing as true anarchy working. and your little cult is just as bad... i want no part of it and i'm pretty sure no-one else here does either.

 

A cult, really... my god, should you get Anonymous on me next, have a whole load of people with V masks turn up on my doorstep. The fact is I'd let them in and give em all a beer, because unlike Scientology Mina, Anarchy and Activism isn't a cult. A portion of computer Hackers, people at 4chan and such are politically aligned to the left, and many of the people who protested against Scientology were Anarchists or Activists calling for the abolition of a system and the lack of freedom that very cult brings. Anarchy isn't a cult Mina.

 

or rather let me rephrase myself... you want to tear down the government? i'm an anarchist. i rebel against your tearing down the government. i want to be safe and warm and be able to own my own things and live in peace. i don't want people busting in my door and staying for as long as they please. i don't want people stealing my shizz because they want it and i have no legal possession rights over my stuff. if you try and convert this country, me and all the other peace loving britons will fight you every step of the way, along with the government, police and army. we're happy with our lifestyles. when we want a change, we vote in a new governmental power. we don't tear down life as we know it.

 

This quote just sums up your lack of understanding on the subject, basing your opinion on the interpretations of others who have taken part in this thread. People won't bust down your door and stay as long as they please. The manifesto says you can live privately if you wish, but it also says that you can move about as you please if you don't have somewhere to live. In an anarchy people will find buildings that are not used, and they can be converted to suitable places to live... Banks, police stations, derelict buildings, unused accomodation, these are the places which are actually ideal for people to move in and out as they please, and it will not affect those who live in their own places. The difference is, if you see a bigger empty house, and wish to live there, a family could move there without the need to go through any legal channels and stake their right to claim for that building if they so wish. The property thing wouldn't exist, it's based on a society where you choose to share if you so wish.

 

Do something for me Mina visit this link on the Freecycle network... this is what the manifesto means by the taking of property and posessions. The actual Freecycle group initiative was started by American Anarchists who wanted "Strategies for Sustainable Living Beyond Capitalism", and ironically the Freecycle system works around the globe now. I use it all the time. In fact a lot of Average Joe publics do.... this is basic Anarchism at work, this is the example you're looking for, and as such, it is very heavily supported by thousands of town and city communities around the world.

 

Oh and voting is a farce. Each government is the same no matter what crap they throw out there. Choice is not voting, Bush didn't win the last election, he has never been a legal president of the United States.... The so called freedom of choice in a democratic world is put there to make you believe you have a choice... But you watch... if Barack Obama makes president of the United States, that will be through public choice in the eyes of the media, but he will not put his so-called "change" into practice. He wants to disarm America, stop terrorism peacefully without war, and pull troops out of Iraq. But everyone with sense knows that won't happen. Even as a leader he will be forced to keep Bush's Legacy going and so will McCain if he wins... Truth is, regardless who the next president is, they will be the ones to lead the West into a War with Iran, that's if Bush doesn't start the job before he stands down. If choice existed, then it would be the choice of the public to decide the fate of the nation and whether to go to war with a nation, not the governments.

Share this post


Link to post
If choice existed, then it would be the choice of the public to decide the fate of the nation and whether to go to war with a nation, not the governments.

I am so sick of socialists trying to claim that we are living in a dictatorship because they disagree with a choice an elected leader has made. We vote to elect a leader to lead the nation and make the right decisions for the nation. Some of these decisions will be unpopular with a portion of the population as it is impossible to please everyone. Mina is right, if people wanted a change, they have the right to vote for who they want. The reason you don't see any communists running for the US presidency is because they would never be elected by the populace in the first place (I would have used Britain as an example here but for all i know there may have been some far left wing candidates in the past).

 

The difference is, if you see a bigger empty house, and wish to live there, a family could move there without the need to go through any legal channels and stake their right to claim for that building if they so wish. The property thing wouldn't exist, it's based on a society where you choose to share if you so wish.

Here is where things get either very contradictory or violent (or both). You say someone is able to stake their right to claim the building if they so wish, and they can chose to share it with other people if they wish. Essentially what you are suggesting is a form of possession of this home (the big evil this new society you are proposing is eliminating) but without the legal backing which confirms this ownership. Now without no system in place to publicly recognize this form of ownership someone who does want to live in this place would be able to (by force if they are so inclined) as you would have no legal right to that house.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's quite reasonable for Mina to refer to your group as a cult.

 

dictionary.com

 

cult –noun

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

3. the object of such devotion.

4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

7. the members of such a religion or sect.

8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.

–adjective 9. of or pertaining to a cult.

10. of, for, or attracting a small group of devotees: a cult movie.

 

In summary, you describe yourselves as a minority group that doesn't believe in the status quo.

 

(Your first response will probably be to rebut the religious references, but religious activities apply to more activities, objects and practices that apparently are concerned with the afterlife. You can follow sport religiously, or a TV show, or a political ideal in the same manner.)

 

I think you are false because of your foundational principle - "anarchy is order without control". This is a false and corrupt use of the definition. When you refuse to acknowledge this, it calls into question the rest of your 'doctrine', and I find it hard to take the debate seriously... in fact I'm incredulous every time I think about this thread.

 

Anarchy is akin to confusion, chaos, turmoil.

Anarchy is absolute violence, absolute destruction and absolute terrorism.

Anarchy is repugnant, ugly, hideous and monstrous.

 

I used to think this thread was funny. Because I would shake my head in disbelief as I listened to you talk up the topic.

But the thought there is a secret society out there plotting this - is not funny at all... and kinda frightening.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

When Anarchism is millions strong around the globe, it cannot pertain to be a cult. Anarchists are not in a small minority.... Neo Nazism is more a cult than anything. Our principles are mostly in line with what the public want anyway. Equality is a huge goal in the struggle against capitalism despite if you believe or not. There's an Anarchist community Cafe in the city of Bristol, I attend quite a bit, because their aims and principles are of an appealing nature. And this area of Bristol is a heavy Anarchist supported area. Their mission is simple: To Provide a welcoming space within the local community that encourages mutual aid, empowerment, self-organisation, sustainability and resistance to oppression. It will do so by making available its resources, facilities & information, and through its own non-hierarchical, not-for-profit self-management.

 

The Aims and principles are as follows:

  1. To provide space, resources & facilities for the local community on a not-for-profit basis, ensuring no one is excluded due to limited finances.
  2. To provide a space that is welcoming to everyone, irrespective of their ethnicity, colour, age, ability, gender or sexual orientation; and to actively work to break down barriers between people.
  3. To promote the practice of living in an environmentally & ecologically sustainable way; both through education & information, and by creating living examples of this through the co-op's work.
  4. To create within the co-op a series of autonomous collectives, that take responsibility for running certain functions/services of the co-op, ie., Café, Library, Infoshop, Bike Workshop, maintenance, IT, finance.
  5. To provide affordable, self-managed housing for co-op members, dependant on the co-op's available space, finances and agreement.
  6. To encourage non-hierarchical ways of organising, via self-organisation, co-operation and shared responsibility; and to promote autonomy, solidarity and mutual aid.
  7. To provide a space that encourages free-thinking, radical critiques and creativity; and the exploration & development of radical political & social solutions to the challenges of modern day society.
  8. To be a base, space and contact for local and grassroots campaigns; and to act as a tool for social change by promoting a range of activities, such as film & music nights, info-sharing, exhibitions, meetings and actions.
  9. To work collectively with other likeminded individuals, co-ops, groups and networks, locally and nationally.
These are the true foundational principles within an Anarchist Society. It must work as well, because over 40,000 people go to this cafe and social centre alone every year, and the numbers are increasing annually in each of the 18 centres around the UK. Even the police and local community are happy with it since it promotes a peaceful centre of political thought and ideology.

 

It's an unknown truth that around 88% of all Anarchists are actually non-violent. The more people who realise this fact, in conjunction with the above principles will encourage less people to vote for a government and bring about social change and revolution. Those Anarchists who are violent go under a single banner known only as the Black Bloc and make up the rest of the violent Anarchists who take the front line at demonstrations and cause all those things that you regard Anarchy to be. This global group are around a million strong, but do not represent the majority. But of course the media make you believe that every Anarchist is like this... as they say, control the media, control the mind. But hence it's not a cult... because the above aims and principles are not false or unorthodox, and Anarchists don't live outside normal society, we embrace the community, not shun it. Plus Anarchists are not a small group of devotees... There's an estimated 17.5 million Anarchists around the globe, I wouldn't call that small by any stretch of the imagination... So your dictionary definition (which is a weak way to support an argument) is void in relation to this subject.

Share this post


Link to post

i agree with Gben. to think he's actually out there trying to destroy my lifestyle scares the bejesus out of me. yes, i COULD survive in the wild. i know the skills. it doesn't mean i want to though. i don't want to have a basic lifestyle like that. sure, crocodile dundee is pretty cool and all but it'd much rather live without risk and in easy access comfort. and let's face it, the majority of people would choose hefner everytime. he has a whole mansion of women XD

simple fact is people don't want randomness in their lives. they WANT security, they want a constant. the only people who are happy with randomness live in vans and get herded out of the town by the local police XD; but for the MAJORITY of people we like living in comfort. do you honestly expect people to give up all they love for a "simple" lifestyle? at what point does it stop? internet? no. mobile phones? normal phones? music? games? television? how many people do you know that would willingly give up their creature comforts just so you can be happy.

stop trying to convert me. it ain't gonna happen. the only reason you are an "anarchist" is because you're going through a midlife crisis. don't ruin your own life and everyone else's just because of some pathetic whelm to be a hero. nothing good ever came of hero chasers o.o

that is, unless you're trying to be the next hitler. in which case feel free to give me your address. i promise i won't report you to MI5 ^-^

 

okie having just read your new post which you posted at the same time as me, now i'm even more scared having realised just how many of you there are. if you want to live in peace, fine. just don't go screwing with my shizz. i don't want my life upset in any way, shape or form. you overthrow the government and tear down everything i believe in i promise i will go out and kill every anarchist i come across. i love my lifestyle and i will do anything to defend it.

Edited by Mina Synd

Share this post


Link to post

A minor point Saracen - my issue is not with your social agenda. My issue is with the SPIN on anarchy.

 

It's an ironic use of picture in your signature Saracen... it doesn't seem to match your 'prose'.

Share this post


Link to post

No King, I can't live privately if I wish if someone came in, threw me out of my house, and took it for their own. The good people may try to be nice, but there are alot more terrible people than there are good people. Very few people would help simply because there's nothing to gain.

 

In addition, all those aims and principles are bound to fail unless there are a group of people who run and organize those things. People aren't going to make things for the community out of the goodness of their hearts.

Share this post


Link to post

exactly. people are greedy, and nothing is gonna change that anytime soon x3; what saracen invisions is a perfect society where nothing can go wrong and everything is how they want it. but does this group give agendas on how stuff would be supported? if we are abolishing things like money and such, how are the public buildings people would live in be maintained? i mean normal things like decorating and minor DIY the people living there could do... but sooner or later the buildings would begin to fail structurally. it's possible there may be some people who wanna be structure engineers out there... but once again it falls back to the issue of something for nothing.

it's all well and dandy to imagine a star trek style perfect future but let's face it, it's not gonna happen anytime soon... and definately not under something like this

Share this post


Link to post

If there is so many of you why haven't you been banding together and boycotting ****? or in the case of the black bloc blowing up various government buildings and members?

Share this post


Link to post

good question o.O for anarchists they're not very good at causing anarchy XD; maybe they're waiting for tiberium to fall from the sky or something XD;;

Share this post


Link to post

If this was the real world, mina would be on the receiving end of a high five, right about now :P

Share this post


Link to post
If there is so many of you why haven't you been banding together and boycotting ****? or in the case of the black bloc blowing up various government buildings and members?

If they band together and form a group, I don't really consider that anarchy anymore.

 

When Anarchism is millions strong around the globe, it cannot pertain to be a cult. Anarchists are not in a small minority.... Neo Nazism is more a cult than anything.

I doubt that about the Neo-Nazis. I am very interested in The Third Reich and WWII Deutsche items, so since that I've met quite a few Neo-Nazis. Just because they aren't public doesn't mean they don't hold that belief, many are closest Nazis. I even took a hard look at myself one day because of my interested; luckily I found several good reason that I am just not a holder in those beliefs (though some points of National Socialism, the unracist and totally retarded ones, make good points, but doesn't every ideology make good points, at least one or two?)

 

Anarchism is doubtfully a million strong, as Neo-Nazis aren't. No one, or hardly no one is a "Neo-Nazi" anymore. People are Neo-Nazis mostly because they believe in White Unity, Power, Supremacy, etc. Real fundamentalist Nazis are very rare (belief in death of all cripples, etc etc) and hell, most Neo-Nazis are white gang members calling themselves Nazis or "punks" who just want to be different (and hell, I've been called a Neo-Nazis because of my interests, though can't blame people for assuming)

 

Anarchists for the most part are the same way. Mostly teenagers to younger adults that wanna be "different" than the rest. Do they know what they're really supporting? Doubtfully and nor would they support it, they just join the forums and discussions to be cool or make friends. That is my belief, as the only few anarchist (I might consider you one Saracen, but the way you kind of change your views a lot, you'd have to stick to your guns for a long time for me to be convinced) I've met are just that, few. The rest are mindless drones supporting a cause that meant to end the mindless drones.

 

---

 

Governments will fail time to time, revolutions will occur, but government will never die completely. As long as their is more than 1000 humans on the face of this Earth living side by side, there will be a leader or a council or a parliament or a senate or a dictator.

 

edit: Also I am finding it kind of weird Saracen that you're pumped up for RA3. Of course everyone should, but it's a product of capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post

to be honest i'm a slight nazi. i do have a facination with WW2 and the nazi regime... but i also have strong beliefs about society and such. i wouldn't go so far as to have people killed, but having all the foreigners who don't intend to fit in would be good o.o rather then changing the uk to fit them, they should change to fit the uk. it's only fair. maybe it's racism, but i stand up for my country...

Share this post


Link to post
maybe it's racism, but i stand up for my country...

No, no my dear. There's no maybe about. That's flat out racism. There shouldn't be an issue with another culture being around. No one said you had to partake in it, or even like it. You can't force people to change because it's an inconvenience. That's rather hypocritical at its very core and a tad self-centered. Don't go that route.

Share this post


Link to post
to be honest i'm a slight nazi. i do have a facination with WW2 and the nazi regime... but i also have strong beliefs about society and such. i wouldn't go so far as to have people killed, but having all the foreigners who don't intend to fit in would be good o.o rather then changing the uk to fit them, they should change to fit the uk. it's only fair. maybe it's racism, but i stand up for my country...

No, no my dear. There's no maybe about. That's flat out racism. There shouldn't be an issue with another culture being around. No one said you had to partake in it, or even like it. You can't force people to change because it's an inconvenience. That's rather hypocritical at its very core and a tad self-centered. Don't go that route.

I don't see how it's racist to want immigrants to conform to the country they came to.

 

Islam is taking a big hold in Europe and we're seeing what is happening now. Very conflicting views. While they're many Muslims that have conformed to Western culture (I have 3 Muslims friends here that are very Westernized), many are not. Instead of trying, they're trying to install governments that favor Muslims and Islam. They do not fit into the ideas of the West, why should they be allowed to stay?

 

But that's when you're crossing into a line. How do you know what Muslim is a radical, Western hating one? Do you try and pick? Do you deport them all? How do you know?

 

As for other cultures, really, have there been many other outbursts? Here in US at least, I've never seen Asians, Blacks, Mexicans, etc fight to change the government to fit them.

 

Asians have not done much against our values. Blacks, yea the racism thing, but have they called for a new government and death of whites or something? No, only for the few wackos, but there are many wackos on the white side too. What about Mexicans? They only want fairer immigration here, but are they trying to change our values? Not one bit.

 

All these minorities here have conformed and meshed into our society - radical Muslims have not and will not. They want the society to flip in favor of them.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×