Chat Forum
It is currently Sat Dec 07, 2019 1:49 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 255 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:
I'm not against ethnic pluralism, if done right - i.e. without identity politics. The question then becomes whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of ethnic pluralism. I would say that to some extent it is, but it can be managed, or at least I would prefer to try to mitigate it before embracing it and moving to conflict (accelerationism, I think). Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict. Either way, aside from a few states, ethnic pluralism is a fact in the west. The question is how to deal with that. All forms of identity politics, right and left, are inevitable paths to conflict from here. I may be the most naive person here in hoping that we can find a civilised way out of identity politics, if only we were willing to try. I guess I'm pretty black-pilled on the question of time, though.


This quote is pulled out by the alt right all the time: "In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” Lee Kuan yew, who knew a little about these things. This is one of the key predictions: the increased ethnic plurality of Western countries dooms the democratic plurality of their electoral systems. And all sorts of global implications floe downstream from that.

Well, that's the definition of identity politics, innit. It could be otherwise, if we had the will to dismantle identity politics. Unfortunately, we appear to be feeding it, and it's become a giant overfed tantrumming toddler.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33872
pontifex wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:
I'm not against ethnic pluralism, if done right - i.e. without identity politics. The question then becomes whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of ethnic pluralism. I would say that to some extent it is, but it can be managed, or at least I would prefer to try to mitigate it before embracing it and moving to conflict (accelerationism, I think). Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict. Either way, aside from a few states, ethnic pluralism is a fact in the west. The question is how to deal with that. All forms of identity politics, right and left, are inevitable paths to conflict from here. I may be the most naive person here in hoping that we can find a civilised way out of identity politics, if only we were willing to try. I guess I'm pretty black-pilled on the question of time, though.


This quote is pulled out by the alt right all the time: "In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” Lee Kuan yew, who knew a little about these things. This is one of the key predictions: the increased ethnic plurality of Western countries dooms the democratic plurality of their electoral systems. And all sorts of global implications floe downstream from that.

Well, that's the definition of identity politics, innit. It could be otherwise, if we had the will to dismantle identity politics. Unfortunately, we appear to be feeding it, and it's become a giant overfed tantrumming toddler.


I guess Lee Kuan yew concluded it was hard wired in and governed accordingly. He uttered some astonishingly Un-pc things over the years about the different populations of Singapore. The alt - right argument seems to be that Europe went through hundreds of years of conflict and more to shuffle itself into nation states where pluralistic democracy based on issue and not identity could drive governance and now we're fcking it up again by adding unneeded complexity to the system. There are only about 20 functioning pluralistic state entities in the World, and they hold together most of what paases as international governance. Lose those 20 and the whole system goes down the gurgler.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 3:29 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
There is a big, big incentive for sub-populations to practice parochial altruism within larger polities that don't practice parochial altruism.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 4:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5496
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
I remember when being Alt-right was cool, but it's so mainstream now, I've sold my beige chinos and stopped listening to Taylor Swift.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 4:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26133
Location: Chickenrunning...
houtkabouter wrote:
I remember when being Alt-right was cool, but it's so mainstream now, I've sold my beige chinos and stopped listening to Taylor Swift.


I wondered when you'd show up on this thread. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 9:18 pm
Posts: 2503
pontifex wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:
I'm not against ethnic pluralism, if done right - i.e. without identity politics. The question then becomes whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of ethnic pluralism. I would say that to some extent it is, but it can be managed, or at least I would prefer to try to mitigate it before embracing it and moving to conflict (accelerationism, I think). Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict. Either way, aside from a few states, ethnic pluralism is a fact in the west. The question is how to deal with that. All forms of identity politics, right and left, are inevitable paths to conflict from here. I may be the most naive person here in hoping that we can find a civilised way out of identity politics, if only we were willing to try. I guess I'm pretty black-pilled on the question of time, though.


This quote is pulled out by the alt right all the time: "In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” Lee Kuan yew, who knew a little about these things. This is one of the key predictions: the increased ethnic plurality of Western countries dooms the democratic plurality of their electoral systems. And all sorts of global implications floe downstream from that.

Well, that's the definition of identity politics, innit. It could be otherwise, if we had the will to dismantle identity politics. Unfortunately, we appear to be feeding it, and it's become a giant overfed tantrumming toddler.


Is there any country where racial groups have almost no bias towards a certain political party? My guess if there was would be somewhere in South America, but I doubt there is.

Just because you take a chicken and put it in a kennel, it doesn't become a dog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 10571
houtkabouter wrote:
I've sold my beige chinos


They will make a nice boat sail.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 4:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7253
englishchief wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:
I'm not against ethnic pluralism, if done right - i.e. without identity politics. The question then becomes whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of ethnic pluralism. I would say that to some extent it is, but it can be managed, or at least I would prefer to try to mitigate it before embracing it and moving to conflict (accelerationism, I think). Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict. Either way, aside from a few states, ethnic pluralism is a fact in the west. The question is how to deal with that. All forms of identity politics, right and left, are inevitable paths to conflict from here. I may be the most naive person here in hoping that we can find a civilised way out of identity politics, if only we were willing to try. I guess I'm pretty black-pilled on the question of time, though.


This quote is pulled out by the alt right all the time: "In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” Lee Kuan yew, who knew a little about these things. This is one of the key predictions: the increased ethnic plurality of Western countries dooms the democratic plurality of their electoral systems. And all sorts of global implications floe downstream from that.

Well, that's the definition of identity politics, innit. It could be otherwise, if we had the will to dismantle identity politics. Unfortunately, we appear to be feeding it, and it's become a giant overfed tantrumming toddler.


Is there any country where racial groups have almost no bias towards a certain political party? My guess if there was would be somewhere in South America, but I doubt there is.

Just because you take a chicken and put it in a kennel, it doesn't become a dog.


No, but if you raise animals around other species they will often start to behave like them - the difference between just being in a country and becoming part of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:09 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
penguin wrote:
englishchief wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:
I'm not against ethnic pluralism, if done right - i.e. without identity politics. The question then becomes whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of ethnic pluralism. I would say that to some extent it is, but it can be managed, or at least I would prefer to try to mitigate it before embracing it and moving to conflict (accelerationism, I think). Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict. Either way, aside from a few states, ethnic pluralism is a fact in the west. The question is how to deal with that. All forms of identity politics, right and left, are inevitable paths to conflict from here. I may be the most naive person here in hoping that we can find a civilised way out of identity politics, if only we were willing to try. I guess I'm pretty black-pilled on the question of time, though.


This quote is pulled out by the alt right all the time: "In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” Lee Kuan yew, who knew a little about these things. This is one of the key predictions: the increased ethnic plurality of Western countries dooms the democratic plurality of their electoral systems. And all sorts of global implications floe downstream from that.

Well, that's the definition of identity politics, innit. It could be otherwise, if we had the will to dismantle identity politics. Unfortunately, we appear to be feeding it, and it's become a giant overfed tantrumming toddler.


Is there any country where racial groups have almost no bias towards a certain political party? My guess if there was would be somewhere in South America, but I doubt there is.

Just because you take a chicken and put it in a kennel, it doesn't become a dog.


No, but if you raise animals around other species they will often start to behave like them - the difference between just being in a country and becoming part of it.


How often is often? For colonial era indigenes 'often' means never.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5496
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Sandstorm wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
I remember when being Alt-right was cool, but it's so mainstream now, I've sold my beige chinos and stopped listening to Taylor Swift.


I wondered when you'd show up on this thread. :)


I'm offended by that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33872
houtkabouter wrote:
Sandstorm wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
I remember when being Alt-right was cool, but it's so mainstream now, I've sold my beige chinos and stopped listening to Taylor Swift.


I wondered when you'd show up on this thread. :)


I'm offended by that.


Can I just say that I haven't owned a pair of beige chinos since the dotcom bubble went tits up in 2000, and I will never stop listening to the sainted Taylor Swift. The video to Wildest Dreams is an alt-right neo-colonialist orientalist classic,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Santa wrote:

How often is often? For colonial era indigenes 'often' means never.
That's because there was no ethos of assimilation, since the invaders assumed that their value system and way of life was superior to that of those they were invading. White supremacy and all that. You could argue that any group will think that way about their own culture, maybe. I'm not convinced they always will. But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone. We won't find out (arguably, anew) whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of pluralism, since identity politics - of all shades - is a currently consequence of identity politics, and I guess also the sense that there's blood in the water.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33872
This is a great alt-right story:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-i ... 1526662047

So much good stuff in there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5496
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Seneca of the Night wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
Sandstorm wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
I remember when being Alt-right was cool, but it's so mainstream now, I've sold my beige chinos and stopped listening to Taylor Swift.


I wondered when you'd show up on this thread. :)


I'm offended by that.


Can I just say that I haven't owned a pair of beige chinos since the dotcom bubble went tits up in 2000, and I will never stop listening to the sainted Taylor Swift. The video to Wildest Dreams is an alt-right neo-colonialist orientalist classic,

Never gonna give her up.

That’s beautiful Sen, very nouveau droite. You rose up from the dead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:18 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:

How often is often? For colonial era indigenes 'often' means never.
That's because there was no ethos of assimilation, since the invaders assumed that their value system and way of life was superior to that of those they were invading. White supremacy and all that. You could argue that any group will think that way about their own culture, maybe. I'm not convinced they always will. But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone. We won't find out (arguably, anew) whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of pluralism, since identity politics - of all shades - is a currently consequence of identity politics, and I guess also the sense that there's blood in the water.


I agree. I was simply challenging the view that assimilation often happens. It often doesn't happen. And many of the mechanisms that used to be available to make it happen are now illegal.

And the other point is that given enough numbers it definitely doesn't happen. Or at least not in ways that indigenous populations would like.

Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33872
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:

How often is often? For colonial era indigenes 'often' means never.
That's because there was no ethos of assimilation, since the invaders assumed that their value system and way of life was superior to that of those they were invading. White supremacy and all that. You could argue that any group will think that way about their own culture, maybe. I'm not convinced they always will. But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone. We won't find out (arguably, anew) whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of pluralism, since identity politics - of all shades - is a currently consequence of identity politics, and I guess also the sense that there's blood in the water.


I agree. I was simply challenging the view that assimilation often happens. It often doesn't happen. And many of the mechanisms that used to be available to make it happen are now illegal.

And the other point is that given enough numbers it definitely doesn't happen. Or at least not in ways that indigenous populations would like.

Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.


Dear old Henry Ford used to send company inspectors around to the homes of his employees to ensure they were behaving 'American' and blending in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 10:49 am
Posts: 1484
Location: Sunny Plymouth
I'm not Alt right but the only thing that offends me is how shit the left are at meme's.

this thread being a prime example.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33872
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:

How often is often? For colonial era indigenes 'often' means never.
That's because there was no ethos of assimilation, since the invaders assumed that their value system and way of life was superior to that of those they were invading. White supremacy and all that. You could argue that any group will think that way about their own culture, maybe. I'm not convinced they always will. But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone. We won't find out (arguably, anew) whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of pluralism, since identity politics - of all shades - is a currently consequence of identity politics, and I guess also the sense that there's blood in the water.


I agree. I was simply challenging the view that assimilation often happens. It often doesn't happen. And many of the mechanisms that used to be available to make it happen are now illegal.

And the other point is that given enough numbers it definitely doesn't happen. Or at least not in ways that indigenous populations would like.

Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.


As for this, touch this rail you die.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33872
TokenSarriesFan wrote:
I'm not Alt right but the only thing that offends me is how shit the left are at meme's.

this thread being a prime example.


No love for Taranaki Snapper's craft?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 9:18 pm
Posts: 2503
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:

How often is often? For colonial era indigenes 'often' means never.
That's because there was no ethos of assimilation, since the invaders assumed that their value system and way of life was superior to that of those they were invading. White supremacy and all that. You could argue that any group will think that way about their own culture, maybe. I'm not convinced they always will. But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone. We won't find out (arguably, anew) whether identity politics is an inevitable consequence of pluralism, since identity politics - of all shades - is a currently consequence of identity politics, and I guess also the sense that there's blood in the water.


I agree. I was simply challenging the view that assimilation often happens. It often doesn't happen. And many of the mechanisms that used to be available to make it happen are now illegal.

And the other point is that given enough numbers it definitely doesn't happen. Or at least not in ways that indigenous populations would like.

Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.


As for this, touch this rail you die.


Because they are deluded and have been fed leftist propaganda from birth. The only 'contentious' topic is who is paying/forcing the propaganda at the top level.

The contemporary right has much deeper debates and meaning to its views. The contemporary left is based on 'how quickly can we destroy God (almost done), the family (done) and community (done).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Santa wrote:



Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.



Not an easy question to answer. I'd just blame the Germans, but I guess it goes deeper than that - part of it is not only guilt, but embarrassment, which is subtly different. Certainly, state liberalism, a universalist philosophy, doesn't really have the tools to prevent the outbreak of identity politics. People living in a liberal system might be able to, however, in a way perfectly consistent with liberal philosophy. Unfortunately, it's not clear we all still live in a universalist, liberal system.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:07 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:



Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.



Not an easy question to answer. I'd just blame the Germans, but I guess it goes deeper than that - part of it is not only guilt, but embarrassment, which is subtly different. Certainly, state liberalism, a universalist philosophy, doesn't really have the tools to prevent the outbreak of identity politics. People living in a liberal system might be able to, however, in a way perfectly consistent with liberal philosophy. Unfortunately, it's not clear we all still live in a universalist, liberal system.


I refer you to my post about parochial altruism. Think if it this way: Universalists distribute to groups other than themselves. Parochial altruists don't. Who benefits most when both of those are in play in the same system?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:



Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.



Not an easy question to answer. I'd just blame the Germans, but I guess it goes deeper than that - part of it is not only guilt, but embarrassment, which is subtly different. Certainly, state liberalism, a universalist philosophy, doesn't really have the tools to prevent the outbreak of identity politics. People living in a liberal system might be able to, however, in a way perfectly consistent with liberal philosophy. Unfortunately, it's not clear we all still live in a universalist, liberal system.


I refer you to my post about parochial altruism. Think if it this way: Universalists distribute to groups other than themselves. Parochial altruists don't. Who benefits most when both of those are in play in the same system?

Sure. Also the Hawk-Dove game. We could, maybe, try to get people think of themselves as primarily as individuals, as citizens of a nation-state first, and maybe some other non-ethnic social groupings, based on interest or something else. That is of course a bit naive, but something in that direction seemed possible in the past. A bit hard now though, since saying "I don't see things in terms of race" is itself considered hatespeech.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:



Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.



Not an easy question to answer. I'd just blame the Germans, but I guess it goes deeper than that - part of it is not only guilt, but embarrassment, which is subtly different. Certainly, state liberalism, a universalist philosophy, doesn't really have the tools to prevent the outbreak of identity politics. People living in a liberal system might be able to, however, in a way perfectly consistent with liberal philosophy. Unfortunately, it's not clear we all still live in a universalist, liberal system.


I refer you to my post about parochial altruism. Think if it this way: Universalists distribute to groups other than themselves. Parochial altruists don't. Who benefits most when both of those are in play in the same system?

Sure. Also the Hawk-Dove game. We could, maybe, try to get people think of themselves as primarily as individuals, as citizens of a nation-state first, and maybe some other non-ethnic social groupings, based on interest or something else. A bit hard now though, since saying "I don't see things in terms of race" is itself considered hatespeech.


Very difficult when some cultures fundamentally require the subsumation of the individual to the group.

I recall reading an MA dissertation by a Maori student qhich made the claim that as a collectivist culture Maori do not have I-dentity they have we-identity. I thought that was brilliant in a demented kind of way.

Moreover as long as the prevailing attitude is that it is wrong to challenge those cultural predispositions your idea is a pipe dream.


Last edited by Santa on Mon May 21, 2018 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:



Should we perhaps ask ourselves why the only people who want these hyperpluralistic societies are Western liberals.



Not an easy question to answer. I'd just blame the Germans, but I guess it goes deeper than that - part of it is not only guilt, but embarrassment, which is subtly different. Certainly, state liberalism, a universalist philosophy, doesn't really have the tools to prevent the outbreak of identity politics. People living in a liberal system might be able to, however, in a way perfectly consistent with liberal philosophy. Unfortunately, it's not clear we all still live in a universalist, liberal system.


I refer you to my post about parochial altruism. Think if it this way: Universalists distribute to groups other than themselves. Parochial altruists don't. Who benefits most when both of those are in play in the same system?

Sure. Also the Hawk-Dove game. We could, maybe, try to get people think of themselves as primarily as individuals, as citizens of a nation-state first, and maybe some other non-ethnic social groupings, based on interest or something else. A bit hard now though, since saying "I don't see things in terms of race" is itself considered hatespeech.


Very difficult when some cultures fundamentally require the subsumation of the individual to the group.

I recall reading an MA dissertation by a Maori student qhich made the claim that as a collectivist culture Maori do not have I-dentity they have we-identity. I thought that was brilliant in a demented kind of way.

There is of course that. Given time, that could also be digested by a liberal society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Quote:
Moreover as long as the prevailing attitude is that it is wrong to challenge those cultural predispositions your idea is a pipe dream.

That's what I'm saying.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:29 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
Moreover as long as the prevailing attitude is that it is wrong to challenge those cultural predispositions your idea is a pipe dream.

That's what I'm saying.


Use simpler words please.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
Moreover as long as the prevailing attitude is that it is wrong to challenge those cultural predispositions your idea is a pipe dream.

That's what I'm saying.


Use simpler words please.


Quote:
But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone.


Quote:
Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict.


I'm not sure why that's too verbose. It may be a little indirect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:37 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9039
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
Moreover as long as the prevailing attitude is that it is wrong to challenge those cultural predispositions your idea is a pipe dream.

That's what I'm saying.


Use simpler words please.


Quote:
But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone.


Quote:
Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict.


I'm not sure why that's too verbose. It may be a little indirect.


I was being silly. And of course I possess the great failing of the majority of boredies in only being interested in my own thoughts about stuff.

Anyway we in the West are no strangers to thoughtless collectivism. We even see it on this very bored: the swarm, the anti-Trumpists, the band of lower and middle class Aussies who resent your intelligence and social background...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Santa wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
Moreover as long as the prevailing attitude is that it is wrong to challenge those cultural predispositions your idea is a pipe dream.

That's what I'm saying.


Use simpler words please.


Quote:
But they certainly will when the destination culture is busy denigrating itself so as not to offend anyone.


Quote:
Mass migration, as currently being undertaken (i.e. the rapid increase of ethnic pluralism without an ethos of assimilation *gasp*), combined with identity politics (where the unit of power is the group, not the individual), is a recipe for conflict.


I'm not sure why that's too verbose. It may be a little indirect.


I was being silly. And of course I possess the great failing of the majority of boredies in only being interested in my own thoughts about stuff.

Anyway we in the West are no strangers to thoughtless collectivism. We even see it on this very bored: the swarm, the anti-Trumpists, the band of lower and middle class Aussies who resent your intelligence and social background...

I don't think they resent me, that's just one way among many to have a go at me, and I guess it's fair enough, given that I am admittedly verbose and it's an obvious point to attack. The problem is, I'm not afraid to admit it's a characteristic, perhaps a flaw, that I have. If it were someone else, they'd be having a go at them about some other weak point they'd identified, probably calling them stupid or something. And to be fair, I've only noticed one or two take that line with me, and there's obvious insecurities there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 36974
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
So how do we tell the alt right from the right and the far right and the reactionaries and the racists and the religious nutters on bored.
Is there an agorithm or something?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
c69 wrote:
So how do we tell the alt right from the right and the far right and the reactionaries and the racists and the religious nutters on bored.
Is there an agorithm or something?

Another quality contribution. Cheers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 36974
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
pontifex wrote:
c69 wrote:
So how do we tell the alt right from the right and the far right and the reactionaries and the racists and the religious nutters on bored.
Is there an agorithm or something?

Another quality contribution. Cheers.

That's quite an insecure reply tbh.
If you don't know the answer don't reply.
I don't care a jot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:08 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10388
I am alt-right and I'm offended by the way Allah provides through the pocket of the taxpayer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
c69 wrote:
pontifex wrote:
c69 wrote:
So how do we tell the alt right from the right and the far right and the reactionaries and the racists and the religious nutters on bored.
Is there an agorithm or something?

Another quality contribution. Cheers.

That's quite an insecure reply tbh.
If you don't know the answer don't reply.
I don't care a jot.

Cheers again for that. I really enjoyed reading it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 36974
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
Nicely passive aggressive :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
c69 wrote:
Nicely passive aggressive :thumbup:

You're onto me. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 36974
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
I await a response where you claim victory and that you have handed me my arse on a plate ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2706
c69 wrote:
I await a response where you claim victory and that you have handed me my arse on a plate ;)

I think you've already sat on the plate, mate.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 36974
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
8) then the pic


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 255 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bert, bimboman, earl the beaver, frankster, holbob, Lazer, lorcanoworms, malky, Monk Zombie, Mr. Very Popular, Nolanator, Plato'sCave, Santa, SEAsianExpat, Short Man Syndrome, Tecumseh, themaddog, topofthemoon, Winnie, wreckthehouse and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group