With Open Gates: The forced collective suicide of Europe

[Avaratis]

Hello guys,

I stumbled across this little piece:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44vzMNG2fZc

 

I never got a full picture what political mindset Ross's community has or even Ross himself. For the most part you guys seem to be pretty liberal or simply don't care. Just curios what you think about the refugee crisis. Since Ross lives in Poland he is affected by it too so his views on it would be most interesting.

Has it some truth to it or is it right wing propaganda, personally I am split between both worlds.

Greets from Germany.

 

Don't click this if you have a weak stomach:

 

 

Edited November 18, 2015 by Guest (see edit history)

[Vapymid]

Well, it IS the right wing or, shall I say, the ultra-right wing propaganda and panic mongering, alright.

 

Yes, there are issues with assimilating such a large number of migrants but Europe is not in danger of being taken over by them. That argument about the migrants having more children is unconvincing as hell - good luck having 20 kids here. They simply won't be able to afford them - children are expensive in a civilised world.

 

On the other hand, Europe needs young eager working hands to keep its economy going and the migrants will be providing that. Plus, a lot of the current wave of migration is formed of the middle class and professionals. They will also be quite handy - and less picky - than the stale unionised work forces in Europe.

 

Terrorists? Well, sending terrorists to Europe disguised as migrants is the most stupid and inefficient way of doing that. The best way is to use those who already live here and have the citizenship, passports and the whole shebang. These home-grown dissidents are much easier to recruit too. Because, the migrants want to come here to have a better life - they are less interested to go all the way only to blow themselves to pieces in the name of some sky fairy. They can easily do it without going anywhere in the first place...

 

Regards

[Avaratis]

Hmm I agree that the birthrates of migrants will drop, but not quite adjust. And in Germany you will receive money per child so that makes having more children easy when you have a wife which stays all day at home like in Islam.

While as seen on the example of migrants taking the the lower working jobs, aren't we just using them as cattle to do our dirty work? Also what kind of dirty work is there still left? (despite Germany having 3 million unemployed already) Europe has very few natural resources so we need to put all our efforts in education and technology, something they can't really provide.

We should rather help those poorer countries to develop properly and not force them to cross the Mediterranean, maybe drown on the way. Because if half of Syrian is left (10 million refugees) what does the rest of the country do after ISIS is gone? It can't work with half of the working population gone and will collapse creating even more problems, because all the strong males in their 20s are here with us. And they want to stay. (The big majority of refugees are male: http://data.unhcr.org/mediterranean/regional.php) So by solving one problem we create even more. And the Gulf states (who are filthy rich) who did not take a single refugee despite being neighbors. A total mismanagement under which the refugees must suffer.

 

Additionally to the ISIS point, why do they find crate full of Assault Rifles and other military equipment in refugee shelters?

 

In Greece they found lots of weapons in Humanitarian Aid packs:

 

- http://newswire.net/newsroom/news/00090322-police-in-greece-discovered-arms-in-humanitarian-aid-for-migrants.html

 

And in Sweden directly in a Shelter:

 

- http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/swedes-find-weapons-stash-at-migrant-center/

 

Also ISIS happily announces that they do smuggle people in:

 

- http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/555434/Islamic-State-ISIS-Smuggler-THOUSANDS-Extremists-into-Europe-Refugees

 

Additionally many of the people who arrive here aren't even from syria:

 

- http://www.smh.com.au/world/migrant-crisis-pakistanis-others-dumping-ids-to-become-syrian-20150906-gjggcn.html

 

And this is what I know from my own experience after arriving in Germany from the Soviet Union, integration is very hard, people automatically segregate themselves into own communities which leads to social isolation which inturn leads to crime:

 

Here is an example from sweden where violent crime has increased by 300% and rapes by 1,472%

 

- http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

 

You are lost between two worlds which are culturally too different. You are in a constant state of limbo and don't know where you belong too. Every day is a crisis of identity because you are Russian/Syrian but you are not in your homeland and the people around you are far too different from what you know. And many people commit crimes to which they do not feel connected too, it is far easier to rob that foreign dude than one of your own statesmen.

[Vapymid]

help those poorer countries to develop properly and not force them to cross the Mediterranean

Well, that's a slightly different matter - not so much help them develop, we should first stop using that whole region as a playground for proxy wars because that's what pushing all those people out.

 

For now, though, the migrants is a fact that isn't going to go away. And, yes, of course, there will be problems with their assimilation. I don't doubt for a second. But these problems won't be much different from dealing with the existing disenfranchised minorities - with all the poverty, gang crime and stuff. And any civilised country must find a way of handling these problems - that's why it can be called civilised.

 

But of course, there won't be a "forced mass suicide of Europe".

 

There will be issues with the second generation of migrants. The children who will be born in Europe but will not be fully accepted by their peers - they will feel they are still outsiders and it will generate resentment. These second generationers are the part of the population that produces "terrorists". But don't fear ISIS sending their army here under the guise of migration. It simply isn't happening and isn't going to happen.

 

Also, I would not generally recommend paying too much attention to the right wing tabloids like the ones you quoted. They are very economical with the truth. Not to say just making things up outright. They pander to the people who want to be scared, and there are plenty of those. They live their mundane lives and they like to blame their misery on somebody else. Some scary monster who is the reason for them not living the dream life they thought was ahead of them in their childhood. And the scarier the monster, the happier they become - because the threat is clear and it's not their fault and there's nothing they can do about it.

 

Regards

[Binky The Rabbit]

Just want to say that the events in Paris last night are the sorts of events that these refugees are running away from.

 

I can imagine with depressing certainty that your last paragraph, Vapy, will be all the more true in the coming weeks.

[Jek Jek Roo]

I just hope this thing wont spread across the europe. I mean paris now, what's next? I hope there also wont be a war or soemthing. Things aren't good in UE. And opened borders are great idea, but now we all see consequences...

[RandomGuy]

Most of the "concerns" about the refugee crisis are racist propaganda that have been historically proven wrong. E.g. "they'll never integrate", "we have no room", "taking in the refugees will wreck our economy", etc. This rhetoric is particularly strong in Poland and France, as both countries are highly racist. It's not as prominent in Germany or the UK.

 

We should rather help those poorer countries to develop properly and not force them to cross the Mediterranean, maybe drown on the way. Because if half of Syrian is left (10 million refugees) what does the rest of the country do after ISIS is gone? It can't work with half of the working population gone and will collapse creating even more problems, because all the strong males in their 20s are here with us.

The 10 million number is for the total number of people displaced by the war (Assad likes to destroy houses). 4 million of those are refugees outside of Syria. Fewer than 1 million of those are in Europe. Mysteriously, the United States has no trouble assimilating well over 1 million immigrants annually, every year for several decades. Nor did it have any problem taking in 1,000,000+ war refugees in the immediate aftermath of the Second Indochina War, back in the 70s. Turkey, on its own, has also been able to hold up 2 million Syrian refugees in relative comfort. Yet an entire continent will commit collective suicide by letting in fewer than 1 million, apparently. I had no idea that Europe was so unstable.

 

While as seen on the example of migrants taking the the lower working jobs, aren't we just using them as cattle to do our dirty work? Also what kind of dirty work is there still left? (despite Germany having 3 million unemployed already) Europe has very few natural resources so we need to put all our efforts in education and technology, something they can't really provide.

3 million unemployed out of 80 million people puts Germany pretty damn close to the ideal unemployment rate; any lower than 4% should have you concerned. They still have a labor shortage, though. This is why OECD is saying that a softer immigration policy would be good for the German economy.

http://www.ibtimes.com/german-cities-say-unskilled-immigrants-threaten-social-stability-country-faces-labor-shortage

 

Many of the refugees streaming in are perfectly capable of performing the low to moderately skilled jobs that remain undone in the current situation. A disproportionate amount of the refugees were upper and middle class.

 

EDIT: Of course, this will only work out if Germany acts more like the US than it does France. If they act like the latter, we'll get crap like 70% of the prison population being Muslim, and widespread discrimination against people based on skin color and religion being almost completely ignored by the government. It needs to integrate them into society instead of segregating them into ghettos in the suburbs and economically marginalizing them. Certain civil liberties may need to be curtailed, specifically I'm talking about the right of parents to send their kids to the kinds of extremist Islamic mosques/schools that preach hate. There needs to be a carrot in addition to the stick. German Muslims need to be able to see their lives improve and be given economic opportunities so there aren't giant mobs of angry unemployed young men burning cars every other weekend. Basically, don't be like France; with them it's all stick.

[Seattleite]

It is truly an odd day when I largely agree with Randomguy, and I do.

[Alyxx Thorne]

My only opinion is that they are human beings, not aliens from another planet like some people seem to think.

[Seattleite]

A LOT of people, who I would otherwise describe as intelligent and critically thinking people, believe that Islam is fundamentally irreconcilable with civilized society. They think Muslims are incapable of being productive and responsible members of a secular society because the Quran espouses many thousands of evil, heinous things that would only cause immense harm if they were ever implemented. They even point to the countries where these things are implemented and go "See, this is what Islam looks like."

 

Well, they're certainly right about the first one. Islam IS irreconcilable with civilized society. But you forget that Christianity shares most of Islam's horrors, if with a little less paedophilia, but Christians are STILL functional members of civilized society. And if you say "Well, Christians don't really know what's in their holy book, so of course they aren't going to follow its barbarism.", you're assuming that Muslims actually do know what's in their holy books, and that's complete horse shit. Outside of their religious leadership, none of them have really read the damn things, and most are just blindly swallowing whatever their leaders say the same way Christians do.

 

So yes, Muslims will just have to abandon every substantial policy of their own religion and be Muslims in name only to ever be civilized. They CAN do that. Even as horrific as their religion is they can still choose being a human being over following their religion, and we KNOW they can do that. We KNOW they can do that because most of them that leave their home countries and end up in civilized places DO choose their humanity over their religion. And we also know that because both Christians and Jews before them have almost universally chosen to be human beings over being Christians and Jews, and their holy books are JUST as bad. (Except for the whole paedophilia thing. That's just fucking disgusting. But then, most Muslims have already decided to pretend that part isn't in there, even in the really bad countries. Which just acts as more proof that their humanity CAN override their religious text.)

 

What we are seeing now is the slow and violent death of the last major religious establishment in the way of human progress. It isn't pleasant, and it isn't pretty, but dying religions are like dying animals, and they always lash out at first. Then they submit, lie down, and bleed out. And we know this is what they look like when they die because we've been through this whole song and dance before. Believe it or not, it looked a lot worse when Christianity did it. Islam's last hurrah is Sharia and terrorism, Christianity's last hurrah was THE FUCKING HOLOCAUST. Islam will collapse eventually, its people will continue being "Muslim" in the way Christianity's people are still "Christian", and civilization will slowly take over even in the poor, disenfranchised nations all these people are coming from. And eventually, its people will stop even pretending to be Muslim in much the same way we're seeing a lot of people in the west no longer pretending to be Christian.

 

It'll take a while, it might take decades or even centuries, but we'll get there. Islam will die the same death as its predecessors, and its people will embrace civilization just as Jews and Christians did. And if we want it to happen faster, which I'm assuming we do, then we need to remember to treat them like human beings. People act how they're treated, if we continue to treat them like animals they will continue to act like animals. We need to remember that the enemy is Islam, not Muslims. And you can't kill a religion by bombing its people.

 

So yes. I am in favour of letting Muslims come join us in civilized society. And I think the people who aren't are short-sighted and stupid.

[Vapymid]

It is truly an odd day when I largely agree with Randomguy, and I do.

 

That makes two of us!

 

I don't think Islam as such should be blamed here and not to forget that most of the gory stuff in all Abrahamic religions is coming from the oldest part of the Books - the Old Testament. The problems always lie in the interpretation of scriptures. In particular, the Wahhabi Islamists' (which is what the current crop of the lunatics are) are, basically, a Satanic cult.

 

It is about time for the civilised world authorities to round up proper Islamic clerics and demand that they publicly and unequivocally denounced that version of Islam as being non-Islamic. Until that happens any "war on terror" will remain futile.

 

So far, the Western governments have been milking opportunistically the threat of these Islamists to justify more power grabs in their own countries (eroding civil liberties and privacy protections of law abiding population) and have done absolutely nothing to counteract the Satanic ideology. This has directly led to the appearance and the success of ISIS and it has to change...

 

Regards

[Binky The Rabbit]

The problems always lie in the interpretation of scriptures.

 

This can never, ever be said enough. Twisting religion to 'justify' acts of suffering is something I oppose on principle, and will forever consider it an affront to both religion and humanity.

[Seattleite]

The problems always lie in the interpretation of scriptures.

 

This can never, ever be said enough. Twisting religion to 'justify' acts of suffering is something I oppose on principle, and will forever consider it an affront to both religion and humanity.

 

Except that the scripture does, absolutely unambiguously, not only condone but DEMAND such barbaric actions. The Quran DOES demand the deaths of apostates, and of those who mock Muhammed, and it DOES condone paedophilia and it DOES call for the violent assimilation of the entire world. Similarly, the bible DOES condone slavery, and it DOES demand the deaths of homosexuals, disobedient children, and just about everybody else, and it DOES endorse polygamy, incest and rape. The only way to be a member of any Abrahamic religion and not be a mass-murdering, slave-driving, misogynistic, homophobic sociopathic monster is to either have no idea it's in the books, or to choose to ignore its presence. And the latter is what most people do, and what we should encourage.

 

Religion is and will only EVER be a destructive force. And it will only be destroyed if people choose to give it up. Attacking them, bombing them and treating them like animals is NOT the way to convince them to give it up. And that's why I am 100% all for allowing Muslims to integrate into society, where society WILL win out, and speed along the death of Islam by deprogramming its people.

[Vapymid]

Yet, religion is an inegral and unavoidable part of human psyche and if you remove or weaken the established ones too much, that vacuum will be immediately filled with the likes of Scientology, ISIS, or worse...

 

Hmm, I'm kind of sympathetic to polygamy though, can we just have that but without incest and rape?

 

Regards

[Jeb_CC]

But I mean, not ALL religions are terrible. X3 I mean, Buddhism is cute. Right? I dunno. I don't know any history on religion. I think really, people should stop taking things literally and slaughtering people because a book told them to. :I You can experience miracles or whatever and believe in some sort of higher-order from that. But don't literally throw someone in a lion's den because they dissed your family. XD Times have changed people! It's now illegal to kill. I mean, it was back then too, but that didn't stop anyone, neither is it stopping anyone today. X3 Ah well.

 

But yes, let's keep polygamy. XD For fun.

[Seattleite]

1. Really, it isn't. Plenty of people are abandoning it altogether or switching their devotion over to other institutions that actually have some real-world significance. I don't think it's much better to worship, say, the Republican Party, but it is *A* step up.

 

2. Every genocide in history was motivated by religion or politics. Religion has been responsible for most of them, and politics is required for society to function. Guess which one has to go.

 

3. Buddhism forbids western medicine in favour of faith healing. Which is not cute. Quite the opposite, actually. Still, compared to any abrahamic religion that is a fairly mild flaw.

 

4. Polygamy is okay in my book, but that's largely because I give zero fucks about the institution of marriage. Homosexuals want to marry? Sure. A guy wants to marry three women? Sure. A woman wants to marry three guys? Sure. I think ALL of you are stupid for signing a lifetime contract when you really should know very few relationships can last that long, and humans do NOT naturally mate for life, NOR naturally hold exclusive relationships, but whatever. I dislike the formality of the whole thing, I hate contracts, the whole thing is unbelievably unnatural and I would much rather have a friend I can have sex with than a wife, but to each their own and I will always stand by people's right to make and suffer for their own mistakes.

[Vapymid]

Well, Burma or whatever it's name now is run by militant Buddhists and the Muslim minority there is one of the most oppressed and persecuted peoples in the world... So... No, there aren't any cute religions... Each and every one of them can be twisted and perverted...

 

But they are unavoidable - whether they involve a deity or a deified person or symbol - it is a fact that people always find something to believe in. Once they do, if you touch the subject of their faith - they will bite. A bit like dogs and their chains...

 

Oh, we're probably going off topic with that polygamy thing! Probably a subject for "Discuss your opinion" Hehe...

 

Regards

[Seattleite]

Well, I would agree that the most destructive religions are the ones centred around a real person who knows he is being treated as a god. Google "Cult of Personality" for examples. Because that's a religion, as far as I'm concerned. Muhammed wants you to worship him, Stalin wants you to worship him, Kim-Jung Un wants you to worship him, that's a religion. But that's different from worshipping a set of ideals, and we can never underestimate the ability of people to change their minds. ANYBODY can change their mind, and ANYBODY can be persuaded. What usually holds people back is that their position is supported by others, so changing their mind is disadvantageous. You have to win over the masses, and the holdouts will eventually come around. It happened with the downfall of classical mythologies and the death of every religion no longer practiced today, it can happen with modern religions and be replaced with a worship of philosophy and principles.

 

And really, that's what I want these people who must worship something to worship. Philosophy and principles, which is what they pretend to get out of religion anyway (they don't, they just think they do). Can we really say a society of Russeauians would be a bad thing? I'd much prefer that to Jews, Christians or Muslims. I mean, of course, worshipping his ideals and not him himself. Worship the idea that other people are innocent, that they aren't malicious so much as they don't understand what they're doing and act in their own interests. The amount of empathy that would breed is enough by itself to make it infinitely better than any extant religion.

[BTGBullseye]

Christianity's last hurrah was THE FUCKING HOLOCAUST.

How the fuck was the holocaust something caused by Christianity?

[Seattleite]

Christianity's last hurrah was THE FUCKING HOLOCAUST.

How the fuck was the holocaust something caused by Christianity?

 

Do you know the source of anti-Semitism in Europe? Because it largely comes from a single organization. And it's a single organization that Hitler and every single member of the Nazi party was legally required to be members of, wear the symbols of, and attend the functions of. Also a single organization that Hitler claimed his party was inspired by, and cited rhetoric of to support his claim.

 

Yeah, that's right. The Catholic Church. The Catholic Church decided very early in its history that Jews were not to be tolerated, and had committed or endorsed genocides on the Jewish populations multiple times before this, including Catholic crusaders deciding to slaughter Jews on their way to the holy land for no reason other than them being there (though it is notable that not ALL priests agreed with this, some opposed it just like in the holocaust as the pope himself was silent on the issue), and creating a propaganda play called The Passion of the Christ (a Nazi favourite, I might add) to drum up anti-Semitism by promoting the Catholic belief of Jewish Deicide. That is, the belief that the unbelieving Jews who refused to accept Jesus were responsible for his death, rather than the Roman soldiers who, you know, actually killed him. To be fair, though, they probably only failed to condemn The Holocaust (which is too extreme, even for them) because they were, you know, kinda in the middle of Italy.

 

Had the Catholic Church not created and promoted the concept of Jewish Deicide, and done everything within their power to drum up anti-semitism for over a thousand years, endorsed previous genocides of the Jewish people and failed to condoemn the Nazi party's anti-Semitism even when the Nazis claimed that the Catholic Church was their inspiration, the Holocaust could not have happened. The Jews would not have been the go-to scapegoat in the first place, and far fewer Germans would have supported the idea even if they were somehow scapegoated anyway.