The Failed policy of Multiculturalism



  • http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/uk-muslim-ghettoes-warning/
     
    The UK and indeed the rest of Europe are in big trouble IMO.
    The youth are flocking to the more radical form of Islam, and whilst it is the norm for the youth to head towards more radical ideologies when younger and when they get older and wiser they move away... I see that as less likely in this situation as the ideology is so pervasive. It isnt like Socialism which most intelligent people slowly grow out of as they learn the way the world operates.



  • Would be interesting to watch that program when it airs. I saw a piece on 60 minutes last night about Belgium. What a fucking mess that is. It's nothing new though. This from 2013:
     
    Belgium Will Become an Islamic State

    "We are elected Islamists but above all we are Muslims," Ahrouch said. "Islam is compatible with the laws of the Belgian people. As elected Muslims, we embrace the Koran and the tradition of the Prophet Mohammed. We believe Islam is a universal religion. Our presence on the town council will give us the opportunity to express ourselves," said Ahrouch, who refuses to shake hands or make eye contact with females in public.

    Speaking to a reporter from Radio Té©vision Belge Francophone (RTBF), the public broadcasting service of the French-speaking part of Belgium, Ahrouch said: "The agenda is still the same, but our approach is different now. I think we have to sensitize people, make them understand the advantages to having Islamic people and Islamic laws. And then it will be completely natural to have Islamic laws and we will become an Islamic state."
     
    The reporter interjected: "An Islamic State in Belgium?" Ahrouch replied: "In Belgium, of course! I am for the Sharia. Islamic law, I am for it. It is a long-term struggle that will take decades or a century, but the movement has been launched."

    Also: Brussels, Belgium sending a warning sign to the Western world
     
    :think:



  • Multiculturalism has always created more issues than it has solutions.  It's no co-incidence that the countries with the least engaging immigration policies (nordic countries, finland, japan, singapore etc) have some of the strongest education results across the globe.
     
    Personally, i'm starting to go all redneck as I'm sick of the religon bullshit.  The stance which countries take based on their chosen religons about things is just getting out of control.
     
    I'm coming around 100% to the idea that if you want Sharia law, then fuck off back to a country where Sharia law is in place.
     
    Tolerance is just another word for agreeing to something you don't want to.  And that always ends in tears.
     
    EDIT: Caveat - except in marriage.  But that's a different topic for another thread for another day!



  • Laws
     
    Define what is and is not acceptable and then enforce them properly and consistently
     
    That's what Islamic countries do. It doesn't really matter what you've decided are acceptable laws to your country - just be defined by them and don't pander to willing law breakers.
     
    I use Islamic countries as an example because they wouldn't allow non conformist ghettoes or terrorist movements opposed to the ruling ideology. It's not really a case of what ideology is better, just stick to the ones your people have and want to continue.
     
    Living in a country with a corrupt policing and legal system, it's clear that law enforcement is the key to getting humans to live together harmoniously. Singapore and Japan both seem to achieve this - you don't fuck around with the police or courts in those countries. Similarly I've worked in Brunei which has Sharia law, peaceful and safe as - the citizens are fine with it
     
    No need to take sides or debate who is better just adopt a "this is acceptable/unacceptable" stance and stay consistent with it across all members of your society.
     
    If you don't like it then face the consequences or move elsewhere
     
    It's the basis of families communities and all groups of humans



  • Multiculturalism has always created more issues than it has solutions.  It's no co-incidence that the countries with the least engaging immigration policies (nordic countries, finland, japan, singapore etc) have some of the strongest education results across the globe.
     
    Personally, i'm starting to go all redneck as I'm sick of the religon bullshit.  The stance which countries take based on their chosen religons about things is just getting out of control.
     
    I'm coming around 100% to the idea that if you want Sharia law, then fuck off back to a country where Sharia law is in place.
     
    Tolerance is just another word for agreeing to something you don't to.  And that always ends in tears.

    I know you were just being flippant.. but
    you are not going red neck. I object to the normalisation of multiculturalism. Not wanting your country to be consumed by another culture or religion is not red neck. Not liking a religiion and not respecting a religion does not make you an Islamophobe.
    I am scared of the willingness of some politicians and officials to appease Islam. I am more of an 'appeasement- a-phobe'
     
    However I do think that the worm is turning, just that politicians and media are slow to pick up on it. The back lash is starting to occur.



  • Too little too late.



  • Multiculturalism has always created more issues than it has solutions.  It's no co-incidence that the countries with the least engaging immigration policies (nordic countries, finland, japan, singapore etc) have some of the strongest education results across the globe.
     
    Personally, i'm starting to go all redneck as I'm sick of the religon bullshit.  The stance which countries take based on their chosen religons about things is just getting out of control.
     
    I'm coming around 100% to the idea that if you want Sharia law, then fuck off back to a country where Sharia law is in place.
     
    Tolerance is just another word for agreeing to something you don't want to.  And that always ends in tears.
     
    EDIT: Caveat - except in marriage.  But that's a different topic for another thread for another day!

    Word. The last thing the world needs is more countries fucked up by the oppressive, backward, women-hating Sharia laws loved by weak-minded men.



  • there is always someone ready to say hey you cant do that in your own country, we can make you better so do it this way or else....and then it starts.



  • I pointed out on an earlier thread the best comparison I've read is if a country accepted a large number of white expat South Africans move there and they set up enclaves populated pretty much entirely by them , ignored the rule of law and basic human rights in that country while holding pro apartheid marches the exact same fuckwits who have been talking appeasement and playing down the behavior of Muslims would be utterly outraged .
    I'm still baffled by the German governments behaviour and their attempts at covering up things like the New Year's Eve attacks . They are also surrounded by countries like Poland and Austria who are less inclined to care what the world thinks of them so I expect more walls and border controls to keep the ferals in Germany etc and probably more wailing in the media when Germany " less enlightened" neighbours start deporting ferals . No doubt just like they did in September they'll find some outrage involving a child being kicked out , fixate on it for a cycle or two to give Facebook and the Twitter loseratti a chance to pick it up . Like I said though I really don't think those countries will give a fuck.



  • Laws
     
    Define what is and is not acceptable and then enforce them properly and consistently
     
    That's what Islamic countries do. It doesn't really matter what you've decided are acceptable laws to your country - just be defined by them and don't pander to willing law breakers.
     
    I use Islamic countries as an example because they wouldn't allow non conformist ghettoes or terrorist movements opposed to the ruling ideology. It's not really a case of what ideology is better, just stick to the ones your people have and want to continue.
     
    Living in a country with a corrupt policing and legal system, it's clear that law enforcement is the key to getting humans to live together harmoniously. Singapore and Japan both seem to achieve this - you don't fuck around with the police or courts in those countries. Similarly I've worked in Brunei which has Sharia law, peaceful and safe as - the citizens are fine with it
     
    No need to take sides or debate who is better just adopt a "this is acceptable/unacceptable" stance and stay consistent with it across all members of your society.
     
    If you don't like it then face the consequences or move elsewhere
     
    It's the basis of families communities and all groups of humans

    Good post and I take your point, however I don't think you would have found Brunei particularly peaceful if you were female. Sharia law is completely fucked up (unless you are male, in which case, go Sharia law!).



  • Good post and I take your point, however I don't think you would have found Brunei particularly peaceful if you were female. Sharia law is completely fucked up (unless you are male, in which case, go Sharia law!).

    Thing is though NQ, in my limited (yet real) experience, media Sharia law and "on the ground Sharia law" are pretty different.
     
    There is nothing different to for the lives of Brunei women to Indonesian women. They have high position jobs, drive cars, move around freely, wear scarves or not. There is no evidence that they're being discriminated, in my experience with companies - opposite actually, they get afforded real respect. I visited extensively before and after Sharia law was introduced. No discernable change whatsoever
     
    For Brunei citizens all medical and education is free. You want to get a heart bypass in Sydney? The Sultan will pay everything. You want to do a PHD at Berkeley? He'll pay. No income tax either. And you get a house. Now this is because of huge oil wealth (diminishing though) but the point is....
     
    Don't believe all you hear or see on media (as we all know, but the Islam thing gets afforded particular hysteria)
     
     
    and yes the idea of stringent Sharia law is ridiculous and the attitudes towards women are preposterous but it's men in high positions of power (who know better, make no mistake), that enforce this bollocks purely so that they can live it up drinking and rooting and spending...
     
    and the west and those "disgusted" with Sharia law suck it up so that business doesn't suffer. i.e. Yanks/Brits and Saudis



  • The thing is though Siam, is that ANY sort of law which is sexist, racist, homophobic etc etc, is vastly outdated and should not be tolerated.
     
    From my readings of it (which I'm the first to admit, are media driven and subsequently, fuck all), it has elements of all.



  • The thing is though Siam, is that ANY sort of law which is sexist, racist, homophobic etc etc, is vastly outdated and should not be tolerated.
     
    From my readings of it (which I'm the first to admit, are media driven and subsequently, fuck all), it has elements of all.

    100% true MR
     
    But fuck we're a lloooonng way off sorting all this shit out properly and I like to reinforce that the average little person is pretty cool (in fact usually bloody nice) amongst all these complete cuntwads lauding it over them



  • 100% true MR
    But fuck we're a lloooonng way off sorting all this shit out properly and I like to reinforce that the average little person is pretty cool (in fact usually bloody nice) amongst all these complete cuntwads lauding it over them

    Have a read of the link in bsgs post, it doesn't seem like it's just a few ferals lauding it over them and the survey was done on person not on the phone or net.



  • Have a read of the link in bsgs post, it doesn't seem like it's just a few ferals lauding it over them and the survey was done on person not on the phone or net.

    Mate, I'm not going to form opinions based on a commercial TV channel's survey of 1000 people. A TV Channel that highlights My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding as a must watch doco
     
    I've lived in situations described by media which are so off the mark it's disturbing. Not saying the stuff above isn't real, but more I'm saying I can't form a credible opinion by just reading that



  • I think the involvement for a former Labour immigration minister gives it credibility , he's from the opposite side of parliament you'd expect to be discussing this .



  • and yes the idea of stringent Sharia law is ridiculous and the attitudes towards women are preposterous but it's men in high positions of power (who know better, make no mistake), that enforce this bollocks purely so that they can live it up drinking and rooting and spending...

    Unfortunately it's not the Bruneian moving to Europe seeking to implement Sharia law, it's the Arabs. The religion is just a convenient crutch for their misogynistic views.



  • Unfortunately it's not the Bruneian moving to Europe seeking to implement Sharia law, it's the Arabs. The religion is just a convenient crutch for their misogynistic views.

    Agree completely
     
    It's appalling behaviour from "leaders" which results in innocent people being victimised (on both sides) but scant attention is paid to those at the top.
     
    I prefer to label the behaviour of  individual people rather than the ideology they purport to represent. Deal with individual behaviour, not social groups
     
    No idea if I'm right or wrong, but as I said earlier - define behavioural parameters then adjudicate objectively.



  • Mate, I'm not going to form opinions based on a commercial TV channel's survey of 1000 people. A TV Channel that highlights My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding as a must watch doco
     
    I've lived in situations described by media which are so off the mark it's disturbing. Not saying the stuff above isn't real, but more I'm saying I can't form a credible opinion by just reading that

    Well if all else fails you reel out the ad hominum argument aye..... although even by the appeasers standards you have outdone yourself discounting a face to face survey because the channel that commissioned it also shows a few rubbish programs.
     
    I have spent plenty of time in Sharia law countries and my impression is completely and utterly different to yours. You appear to have spent your time in countries with strong western expat enclaves. Go walk the streets of Peshawar or Tehran.. and then get back to me about easy going Sharia law is.



  • I prefer to label the behaviour of  individual people rather than the ideology they purport to represent.

    I think that is the path that has been trialed and shown to fail.. with obvious reasons.
    It is like treating individual Nazis whilst not criticising the Nazi ideology.
     
    The findings of that study move towards disproving the message that it is a nothing to do with the ideology.
     
    There is nothing wrong with criticising an ideology. The fact that some seem to think there is, just shows far we have fallen.





  • Well if all else fails you reel out the ad hominum argument aye..... although even by the appeasers standards you have outdone yourself discounting a face to face survey because the channel that commissioned it also shows a few rubbish programs.
     
    I have spent plenty of time in Sharia law countries and my impression is completely and utterly different to yours. You appear to have spent your time in countries with strong western expat enclaves. Go walk the streets of Peshawar or Tehran.. and then get back to me about easy going Sharia law is.

    Channel 4 exists to achieve viewer ratings. I have no confidence that they'll provide an unbiased view of things. They might but one TV show isn't going to change my central belief that the terrorist organisations define a social group. My own first hand experiences dispute that
     
    You don't know where I've been and claiming in one sentence that you know more than me about my experiences isn't going to wash.
     
    I've never stated that ideologies shouldn't be criticised.
     
    I can't see any evidence proving that pointing out their flaws changes anything (yanks still eat too much and Hindus still don't eat beef), yet month after month you shriek at us telling us we're apologists because we're trying to make a sensible solution to these criminal behaviours that plague the world.
     
    We get it, you think Islam is a load of rubbish and is destructive to societies. How is spouting that going to change things? People have been spouting that for centuries and the religion is growing. Enough already.
     
    I'm looking to a solution that will stop the terror. I think (an opinion) that a good start is to deny them the security blanket of the religion and objectively label their behaviour not the ideology they purport to represent. First hand friendships and relationships with muslims tells me that the terrorists do not represent the religion and the religion is not going to "submit". So just like David Gray or John Key or Quade Cooper or you for that matter, doesn't define all NZers I think it's reasonable to explain that
     
    People will always move location, sometimes en masse so multiculturalism simply isn't going away. My solution is to look at individual behaviour and deal with that - a far more realistic notion than your solution to ban immigration, multiculturalism or have people eat bacon sandwiches. I said REALISTIC, so by all means continue to call me an apologist while you spout completely unrealistic and absurd ideas to wipe out a complex situation in 5 minutes.
     
    I don't know about the Nazi study but it would seem that going after and punishing the leaders seemed to stop the movement and those indoctrinated saw the manipulation and folly they were exposed to...sounds like a plan to me



  • But then you are just fighting fires all the time without addressing the wider issue. Yes punish the criminals, but when you have people following an ideology that specifically states that all infidels must be killed, then that is a big problem and that ideology has to be challenged. Also, when you just punish those committing acts of terror they often become martyrs which only strengthens the ideology.
    These nutters don't "purport" to represent their ideology, they do represent it to the letter. That's the problem. The whole goal of Islam is literally to take over the world. It's fucking ridiculous. Islam has since it's creation been a tool to manipulate and control people through fear. You take that away and these nutters become just nutters with little power or control over others. You cannot separate Islam from acts of terror, they go hand in hand.



  • But then you are just fighting fires all the time without addressing the wider issue. Yes punish the criminals, but when you have people following an ideology that specifically states that all infidels must be killed, then that is a big problem and that ideology has to be challenged. Also, when you just punish those committing acts of terror they often become martyrs which only strengthens the ideology.
    These nutters don't "purport" to represent their ideology, they do represent it to the letter. That's the problem. The whole goal of Islam is literally to take over the world. It's fucking ridiculous. Islam has since it's creation been a tool to manipulate and control people through fear. You take that away and these nutters become just nutters with little power or control over others. You cannot separate Islam from acts of terror, they go hand in hand.

    wow. Your opinion fair enough then



  • Channel 4 exists to achieve viewer ratings. I have no confidence that they'll provide an unbiased view of things. They might but one TV show isn't going to change my central belief that the terrorist organisations define a social group. My own first hand experiences dispute that

    So you are saying that Channel 4 and the polling done... and the left wing commentator and former head of the Human rights and equality commission in the UK are all biased.... based on? Seems like you are actually just sticking your fingers in your ears and singing LALALALA

    I'm looking to a solution that will stop the terror. I think (an opinion) that a good start is to deny them the security blanket of the religion and objectively label their behaviour not the ideology they purport to represent. First hand friendships and relationships with muslims tells me that the terrorists do not represent the religion and the religion is not going to "submit". So just like David Gray or John Key or Quade Cooper or you for that matter, doesn't define all NZers I think it's reasonable to explain that

    Your first hand friendships and relationships with Muslims do not tell you that the terrorists don't represent Islam. They tell you that the terrorists do not represent all Muslims.

    I've never stated that ideologies shouldn't be criticised.

    errrr.... how about this quote below from you then?? Cause it sure sounds like you are saying the Islam ideology should not be criticised.

    We get it, you think Islam is a load of rubbish and is destructive to societies. How is spouting that going to change things? People have been spouting that for centuries and the religion is growing. Enough already.

    I can't see any evidence proving that pointing out their flaws changes anything (yanks still eat too much and Hindus still don't eat beef), yet month after month you shriek at us telling us we're apologists because we're trying to make a sensible solution to these criminal behaviours that plague the world.

    Yes I criticise the ideology alot. So what? I do think you are an apoloigist for the Islamic religion and its effects. You even now rail against it being criticised. If you believe a religion keeps promoting fucked up horrible dogma... you should stop criticising it after awhile? Why?

    People will always move location, sometimes en masse so multiculturalism simply isn't going away. My solution is to look at individual behaviour and deal with that - a far more realistic notion than your solution to ban immigration, multiculturalism or have people eat bacon sandwiches. I said REALISTIC, so by all means continue to call me an apologist while you spout completely unrealistic and absurd ideas to wipe out a complex situation in 5 minutes.

    Why is it an accepted and irreversible norm for mass immigration of Muslims to the west? Why cannot NZ simply stop Muslim immigration? It may be to late for Europe to stop the invasion, but should they just capitulate and let a political religion take over?
    And no your look at individual behavior is not more realistic, because you are ignoring the underlying ideology and refusing to see any links.

    I don't know about the Nazi study but it would seem that going after and punishing the leaders seemed to stop the movement and those indoctrinated saw the manipulation and folly they were exposed to...sounds like a plan to me

    So arrest a few Immans for practising a religion that preaches death to  homosexuals and slavery of women?
    Ok. Seems a bit harsh.. but if that is your idea.



  • if you believe what you said, you'd be dead already

    Nonsense, I never said ALL Muslims will committ acts of terror. I understand that many choose to interpret the Quran differently, but at the end of the day they are following an ideology that is in direct conflict with freedom of speech and thought. It must be difficult for them to reconcile their beliefs with the values of Western society, and the fact is a lot of them have shown empathy for the extremist nutjobs. They take personal offense at their ideology being questioned, and believe that there should be some form of punishment for doing so.
    With the way things are going now if I lived in Europe there is every chance I will be killed by people preaching Islam. Thank fuck I live in NZ.



  • So you are saying that Channel 4 and the polling done... and the left wing commentator and former head of the Human rights and equality commission in the UK are all biased.... based on? Seems like you are actually just sticking your fingers in your ears and singing LALALALA 
     
    no I didn't, I didn't say anything of the sort. I'm choosing not to watch one  fricken commercial TV show - what's with the infantile lalalala stuff??
     
     
    Your first hand friendships and relationships with Muslims do not tell you that the terrorists don't represent Islam. They tell you that the terrorists do not represent all Muslims.
     
    Pedant
     
    errrr.... how about this quote below from you then?? Cause it sure sounds like you are saying the Islam ideology should not be criticised.
     
     
    Criticising religion has been done for centuries and has achieved nothing. It's a pointless exercise which galvanises a religion. That's pragmatism, not being an apologist. Choosing not to criticise something does not mean that you fully support it
     
     
     
     
    Yes I criticise the ideology alot. So what? I do think you are an apoloigist for the Islamic religion and its effects. You even now rail against it being criticised. If you believe a religion keeps promoting fucked up horrible dogma... you should stop criticising it after awhile? Why?
     
    Why does it have to be one or the other? Critciser or apologist. Criticising a religion has been about as effective as praying for it to go away. I'd much rather understand why non muslims seek to become terrorists than criticise the peaceful majority among a social group
     
     
    Why is it an accepted and irreversible norm for mass immigration of Muslims to the west? Why cannot NZ simply stop Muslim immigration? It may be to late for Europe to stop the invasion, but should they just capitulate and let a political religion take over?
    And no your look at individual behavior is not more realistic, because you are ignoring the underlying ideology and refusing to see any links.
     
     
    Why can't I be an All Black??? Theoretically you can but realistically it's not going to happen so stop banging on about it
     
     
    So arrest a few Immans for practising a religion that preaches death to  homosexuals and slavery of women?
    Ok. Seems a bit harsh.. but if that is your idea.
     
    Leaders of terrorism - why do you insist on specifics for some points and then make up generalisations for others?
     
    You're one weird fella. You realise that by "your rules" for debating topics, it's ok to flay people for what they haven't actually said? You're the one using a ww2 scenario for a world not at war



  • "Why does it have to be one or the other? Critciser or apologist. Criticising a religion has been about as effective as praying for it to go away. I'd much rather understand why non muslims seek to become terrorists than criticise the peaceful majority among a social group"
    I have to strongly disagree with that. Religion only began to lose its very strong grip on the western world when people began to question it and openly oppose it. How is that supposed to occur with Islam when everyone freaks out at the very thought of criticising it, not to mention the utterly absurd argument that criticising Islam equates to racism.



  • Actually Siam you said that that you had no confidence they could provide an unbiased view. Based on precisely nothing. And your justification for saying they would be biased... they have some crap TV shows and are commercial. 
    You bought up bias, nobody else. I can only assume you did this in some pathetic attempt to discredit the findings and the presenter... who I would suggest knows far more on this topic (from both sides) than either of us
     
    Pedant? Because I proved you contradicted yourself in your own post? Tough, if you are going to show such muddled thinking, blame nobody but yourself. 
     
    Are you seriously saying that criticism of religion has not achieved anything??  Wow....  guess the changes in the Christian religion went right past you.
     
    You seem to have an incredibly appeasing attitude to Islam, how evil does an ideology have to get before you would criticise it? Or would you never criticise an ideology because you think it is pointless? Would you criticise the Nazi doctrine and ideology?
     
    And why would you rather see why non Muslims become terrorists? Was that a typo?
     
    As for arresting Immans.... do you not agree with arresting people who say that Homosexuals should be killed? I thought would fit right in with your idea of not criticising the ideology.. just those that push (and lead) the hateful parts?
     
    I would argue that the lack of inspection and crticism of Islam is the exact reason why most of the radicalisation is happening.



  • Firstly, this thread is incorrectly named isn't it? Lets call a spade a spade - it's an anti Muslim/Islam thread. I bet all of us on here live in pretty successful multicultural societies.
     
    The UK and indeed the rest of Europe are in big trouble IMO.

    The article you posted wasn't near as alarming as you're making out. 
     
    4% of those surveyed said they had some sympathy with people who took part in suicide bombings, or commit terrorist acts as a from of political protest.  96% didn't have any sympathy and we don't even know why the 4% had sympathy or for what aspect of anything.
     
    A 1/4 said that they can understand why British girls become Jihadi brides. What the fuck does that even mean, it doesn't mean shit, it doesn't mean they favour it, it just means they think they know why - and likely they probably have no clue anyway.
     
    Only 47% agreed that Muslims should do more to tackle extremism. So what, most Muslims are likely just getting on with their lives like the rest of us. Being from the same broad cultural group doesn't mean you know have to keep that group in line. It's like when a Maori child is killed it's always 'whats the Maori community going to do about it?", fuck off, I don't bash kids, why should I have to do something about it just because I'm Maori, I'd like to do something about it because I'm human and hate kids being abused and killed, but because I'm Maori. White males are more likely to be convicted for being pedophiles, yet all white males aren't held to account for them.
     
    52% think homosexuality should be illegal, bigoted pricks, but our generation lived in a time were it was illegal to be gay in NZ. Some will come around, some wont, no different than other population groups. 39% believe wives should obey their husbands, pricks again, but hardly damning, we could have an influx to NZ of Southern Baptists with similar views. 31% in favour of polygamy, weirdos - from the comments on here having one whinging wife is more than enough, but at any rate not likely to happen anytime soon. 
     
     
    Multiculturalism has always created more issues than it has solutions.  It's no co-incidence that the countries with the least engaging immigration policies (nordic countries, finland, japan, singapore etc) have some of the strongest education results across the globe.

    Singapore is a multicultural country with a large number of Malay, Chinese, and Indians contributing to those education results. Also, odd that you mention nordic countries when Sweden is often one of the places mentioned as a place that's apparently lost control when this thread repeats itself under a different title every month or so. 
     
     
    I'm coming around 100% to the idea that if you want Sharia law, then fuck off back to a country where Sharia law is in place.

    Wouldn't most people be behind that idea? That's probably one of the least radical comments you've ever made on the Fern.

    I think that is the path that has been trialed and shown to fail.. with obvious reasons.
    It is like treating individual Nazis whilst not criticising the Nazi ideology.
     
    The findings of that study move towards disproving the message that it is a nothing to do with the ideology.

    What study are you talking about here? The one you posted in that article? They didn't really move towards disproving anything. 
     
    Furthermore, comparing Nazi ideology and Nazi Germany with Islam is not even close to apples with apples. One was an ideology that dominated a nation state, the other is a religion that is practiced in many different forms (even though you have a belief that it can only be practiced one way) throughout the world.

    There is nothing wrong with criticising an ideology. The fact that some seem to think there is, just shows far we have fallen.

    Has anyone actually said that? I'll quite happily criticise aspects of Islam - and Christianity too for that matter, and Judaism, etc, however I'm not going to criticise all people who follow any of those ideologies in their own way by the actions of some.

    It's appalling behaviour from "leaders" which results in innocent people being victimised (on both sides) but scant attention is paid to those at the top.
     
    I prefer to label the behaviour of  individual people rather than the ideology they purport to represent. Deal with individual behaviour, not social groups
     
    No idea if I'm right or wrong, but as I said earlier - define behavioural parameters then adjudicate objectively.

    Agree with that, although I'm happy to deal with social groups (e.g. Muslim terrorists) when they're specific - as opposed to Muslims full stop. 
     
    I have no issue with the law being outlined to all new immigrants to NZ, and if they break that law then they can get locked up and/or sent back to where they came from. I don't care if they're white South African, Muslim, Chinese, British, Hindu or whatever.

    Nonsense, I never said ALL Muslims will committ acts of terror. I understand that many choose to interpret the Quran differently, but at the end of the day they are following an ideology that is in direct conflict with freedom of speech and thought. It must be difficult for them to reconcile their beliefs with the values of Western society, and the fact is a lot of them have shown empathy for the extremist nutjobs. They take personal offense at their ideology being questioned, and believe that there should be some form of punishment for doing so.

    That's a cop out, there are ideologies in the West that are in conflict with freedom of speech and thought, and those people have to reconcile their beliefs with modern western society too. Also, your final comments highlight the fact that the loudest voices are the ones that get heard. There's a bunch of Muslim people who have no empathy whatsoever for extremist nutjobs, but that doesn't sell newspapers or draw in viewers. About 1of the 10 or so links on the first Google page about this poll focus on the fact that 96% of Muslim's polled have no sympathy for terrorists while the rest focus on homosexuality and sharia law. 
     
    To illustrate the loudest noise point again, such is the noise that the anti-Islam brigade on here make, a casual viewer of this forum would think this was the main belief around here, but really it just gets so tiresome that posters with different views just can't be fucked most of the time - this is about the 3rd iteration of this same thread in about the same amount of months and it's the first time I can really be bothered to contribute anything substantial. TBH I find some of the reactionary stuff on here to be comical. Hell, even Enoch Powell would crack up at some of the end of civilisation comments on this thread.



  • Actually Siam you said that that you had no confidence they could provide an unbiased view. Based on precisely nothing. And your justification for saying they would be biased... they have some crap TV shows and are commercial. 
    You bought up bias, nobody else. I can only assume you did this in some pathetic attempt to discredit the findings and the presenter... who I would suggest knows far more on this topic (from both sides) than either of us

    See this is why it's so tiresome talking with you. And probably why others don't join in.
     
    You expect so much clarity and evidence and explanation from others but then you just twist or lie or obfuscate what people quite reasonably offer
     
    I stated several times that the reason I don't want to read the article or watch the show is because it comes from a company whose sole existence relies on ratings. My opinion is not based on "precisely nothing" as you assert
     
    You throw around the word "pathetic" in order to solely denigrate people. You even admit that you don't know how reliable the source is. 
     
    I said I'd rather SEEK to understand why non muslims become terrorists. What's so difficult about that?
     
    You spoil this place for others



  • Firstly, this thread is incorrectly named isn't it? Lets call a spade a spade - it's an anti Muslim/Islam thread. I bet all of us on here live in pretty successful multicultural societies.
     
    The article you posted wasn't near as alarming as you're making out. 
     
    4% of those surveyed said they had some sympathy with people who took part in suicide bombings, or commit terrorist acts as a from of political protest.  96% didn't have any sympathy and we don't even know why the 4% had sympathy or for what aspect of anything.
     
    A 1/4 said that they can understand why British girls become Jihadi brides. What the fuck does that even mean, it doesn't mean shit, it doesn't mean they favour it, it just means they think they know why - and likely they probably have no clue anyway.
     
    Only 47% agreed that Muslims should do more to tackle extremism. So what, most Muslims are likely just getting on with their lives like the rest of us. Being from the same broad cultural group doesn't mean you know have to keep that group in line. It's like when a Maori child is killed it's always 'whats the Maori community going to do about it?", fuck off, I don't bash kids, why should I have to do something about it just because I'm Maori, I'd like to do something about it because I'm human and hate kids being abused and killed, but because I'm Maori. White males are more likely to be convicted for being pedophiles, yet all white males aren't held to account for them.
     
    52% think homosexuality should be illegal, bigoted pricks, but our generation lived in a time were it was illegal to be gay in NZ. Some will come around, some wont, no different than other population groups. 39% believe wives should obey their husbands, pricks again, but hardly damning, we could have an influx to NZ of Southern Baptists with similar views. 31% in favour of polygamy, weirdos - from the comments on here having one whinging wife is more than enough, but at any rate not likely to happen anytime soon. 
     
     
    Singapore is a multicultural country with a large number of Malay, Chinese, and Indians contributing to those education results. Also, odd that you mention nordic countries when Sweden is often one of the places mentioned as a place that's apparently lost control when this thread repeats itself under a different title every month or so. 
     
     
    Wouldn't most people be behind that idea? That's probably one of the least radical comments you've ever made on the Fern.
     
     
    What study are you talking about here? The one you posted in that article? They didn't really move towards disproving anything. 
     
    Furthermore, comparing Nazi ideology and Nazi Germany with Islam is not even close to apples with apples. One was an ideology that dominated a nation state, the other is a religion that is practiced in many different forms (even though you have a belief that it can only be practiced one way) throughout the world.
     
     
    Has anyone actually said that? I'll quite happily criticise aspects of Islam - and Christianity too for that matter, and Judaism, etc, however I'm not going to criticise all people who follow any of those ideologies in their own way by the actions of some. 
     
     
    Agree with that, although I'm happy to deal with social groups (e.g. Muslim terrorists) when they're specific - as opposed to Muslims full stop. 
     
    I have no issue with the law being outlined to all new immigrants to NZ, and if they break that law then they can get locked up and/or sent back to where they came from. I don't care if they're white South African, Muslim, Chinese, British, Hindu or whatever.
     
     
    That's a cop out, there are ideologies in the West that are in conflict with freedom of speech and thought, and those people have to reconcile their beliefs with modern western society too. Also, your final comments highlight the fact that the loudest voices are the ones that get heard. There's a bunch of Muslim people who have no empathy whatsoever for extremist nutjobs, but that doesn't sell newspapers or draw in viewers. About 1of the 10 or so links on the first Google page about this poll focus on the fact that 96% of Muslim's polled have no sympathy for terrorists while the rest focus on homosexuality and sharia law. 
     
    To illustrate the loudest noise point again, such is the noise that the anti-Islam brigade on here make, a casual viewer of this forum would think this was the main belief around here, but really it just gets so tiresome that posters with different views just can't be fucked most of the time - this is about the 3rd iteration of this same thread in about the same amount of months and it's the first time I can really be bothered to contribute anything substantial. TBH I find some of the reactionary stuff on here to be comical. Hell, even Enoch Powell would crack up at some of the end of civilisation comments on this thread.

    Extremely well said Neps. It turns out I agree with you (that's not special in of itself) but I applaud the way you've articulated your views



  • "Why does it have to be one or the other? Critciser or apologist. Criticising a religion has been about as effective as praying for it to go away. I'd much rather understand why non muslims seek to become terrorists than criticise the peaceful majority among a social group"
    I have to strongly disagree with that. Religion only began to lose its very strong grip on the western world when people began to question it and openly oppose it. How is that supposed to occur with Islam when everyone freaks out at the very thought of criticising it, not to mention the utterly absurd argument that criticising Islam equates to racism.

    I'd argue it wasn't so much criticism rather education, enlightenment and the realisation that alternative views exist and demonstrable methods lead to behaviour change
     
    It might be splitting hairs but standing and yelling "you're fucking wrong!" doesn't achieve a lot in humans. Offering evidence based alternatives is the way to affect what people believe in my opinion. 
     
    A lot of us believed homosexuality was wrong or that black people were all theives. Criticism of our views didn't affect us as much as evidence and explanation that our ideas were flawed
     
     
    It's my belief that that method altered our perceptions of colour, equality and sexuality throughout history. Wiping out ideologies or criticising or banning people/things seldom has such a positive effect
     
    Criticism doesn't make people think, it just makes me think that you don't understand what I'm doing or how I'm living.
     
    Criticism divides (scoff all you want but that's my view)



  • Siam says: "I've been to [list of countries] and they're Sharia and they're fairly cool. So it's not necessarily Sharia."
    Baron says: "I've been to [list of countries] and they're Sharia and they're fucked up. So it's definitely Sharia and Islam by extension."
    Is that about it?



  • Firstly, this thread is incorrectly named isn't it? Lets call a spade a spade - it's an anti Muslim/Islam thread. I bet all of us on here live in pretty successful multicultural societies.
    snip
    Hell, even Enoch Powell would crack up at some of the end of civilisation comments on this thread.

    ^ Fuck I wish I said that.



  • I'd argue it wasn't so much criticism rather education, enlightenment and the realisation that alternative views exist and demonstrable methods lead to behaviour change
     
    It might be splitting hairs but standing and yelling "you're fucking wrong!" doesn't achieve a lot in humans. Offering evidence based alternatives is the way to affect what people believe in my opinion. 
     
    A lot of us believed homosexuality was wrong or that black people were all theives. Criticism of our views didn't affect us as much as evidence and explanation that our ideas were flawed
     
     
    It's my belief that that method altered our perceptions of colour, equality and sexuality throughout history. Wiping out ideologies or criticising or banning people/things seldom has such a positive effect
     
    Criticism doesn't make people think, it just makes me think that you don't understand what I'm doing or how I'm living.
     
    Criticism divides (scoff all you want but that's my view)

    I disagree. Nothing happened until people started daring to challenge the orthodoxies around them. You could also argue that people also became more affluent and financially independent and could afford to tell the powers that be to fark off. Not seeing much sign of that in the Muslim world though.
     
    How do you expect what you've written to occur with Islam when even the slightest hint of criticism is slapped down as racism or bigotry? This isn't about going round harassing and insulting people, but subjecting Islam to the same level of criticism and debate that all religions in the West have to tolerate. To me that's the true test of whether Islam is compatible with Western values and society.



  • I disagree. Nothing happened until people started daring to challenge the orthodoxies around them. You could also argue that people also became more affluent and financially independent and could afford to tell the powers that be to fark off. Not seeing much sign of that in the Muslim world though.
     
    How do you expect what you've written to occur with Islam when even the slightest hint of criticism is slapped down as racism or bigotry? This isn't about going round harassing and insulting people, but subjecting Islam to the same level of criticism and debate that all religions in the West have to tolerate. To me that's the true test of whether Islam is compatible with Western values and society.

    Fair enough, I can see what you mean



  • Siam says: "I've been to [list of countries] and they're Sharia and they're fairly cool. So it's not necessarily Sharia."
    Baron says: "I've been to [list of countries] and they're Sharia and they're fucked up. So it's definitely Sharia and Islam by extension."
    Is that about it?

    Also
     
    Siam - "I went somewhere, everyone seemed nice & I got on well with people"
    BSG - "I went somewhere, everyone I met seemed like a fucking idiot & thought I was a fluffybunny"
     
    I can believe both of those.



  • Thanks Nepia, about three times I'd started to write a post that the thread title describing the 'failure of multiculturalism' instead turns out to be almost all about Islam. But each time I ran out of energy...
    I've said before on other threads and in more detail: that Europe has done things... interestingly... across their whole migrant attraction/selection/settlement/integration space doesn't necessarily mean our policies here need wholesale changes, nor are the situations directly comparable.
    That the SunWolves are a poor rugby team doesn't mean you throw out the whole game of rugby... You can figure out how to do it better though.



  • Except you guys have just shown you didnt actually read the article I linked to.
    It was a direct quote from the article form the ex Human rights and equalities commissioner in the UK he was also a left wing politician. 
    So claims it is an incorrect thread title is frankly a bit silly and just trying to deflect.
     
     
    jeez Siam has  admitted he hasnt and doesnt want to even want to read the article! And yet he jumps boots and all into the thread along with others saying the thread is misnamed...  it doesnt get any more clear than that.
     
    As for shouting down,... classic Bullshit form those wanting to close down debate. The only attempting  shutting down of debate in this thread is coming from those who think that there is nothing wrong with Islam.
     
    I think Siams assertion that it is pointless criticising Islam is grade A bullshit. It is however useful in illustrating the mindset of many in the west who would happily let a doctrine that preaches hate carry on with no criticism in the 21st century. I am guessing it makes them feel like they are somehow elnlightened?


Log in to reply