• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The News Thread

I'm sure it's not nearly as apocalyptic as you think it's going to be.

Do you actually want to know what I think will happen or do you want to tell me your version, which I'm assuming comes equipped with war, famine, genocide and crappy baguettes?

Right, I forgot. The more white nationalists in sitting governments, the better.
 
You can explain why you agree with that statement if you'd like.

I really hope you realize the irony in your position on this.

Do you actually want to know what I think will happen or do you want to tell me your version, which I'm assuming comes equipped with war, famine, genocide and crappy baguettes?

Your response

My Response.
I take that as a no.
 
Last edited:
For the sake of clarity, I have one simple question for you: do you think the rise of right wing, white nationalist movements in Europe is a good thing, and if so, why?

[video=youtube;efHCdKb5UWc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHCdKb5UWc[/video]
 
For the sake of clarity, I have one simple question for you: do you think the rise of right wing, white nationalist movements in Europe is a good thing, and if so, why?

I think that right wing nationalists movements will tear apart the EU, a increasingly unpopular organization held together by fear of the repercussions of leaving than move of the benefits of staying.

I hope that countries bring back their own currency in order to have the exchange rate help foster competition. I don't believe Germany, a much more high tech efficient economy, should be using the same currency as Greece, a far less high tech efficient economy. I believe each individual country should have their own central bank, allowing for greater flexibility in their monetary policy. These things would come to pass if these nationalist movements come to power.

I believe every nation should set their own immigration limits, because the local populace has a right to, on a whole, control the amount of immigration is allowed.

My hope is that the negative effects are minimal. I know there will be some economic disruption from this, I know there may be a period of backlash aim at certain segments of society.

I don't think there will be anything close to war between European nations, famine or the black death.

But I do think that this European experiment has failed, people are growing more and more unhappy with it and it's better for it to die a peaceful death soon that be torn apart kicking and screaming down the road.
 
I think that right wing nationalists movements will tear apart the EU, a increasingly unpopular organization held together by fear of the repercussions of leaving than move of the benefits of staying.

I hope that countries bring back their own currency in order to have the exchange rate help foster competition. I don't believe Germany, a much more high tech efficient economy, should be using the same currency as Greece, a far less high tech efficient economy. I believe each individual country should have their own central bank, allowing for greater flexibility in their monetary policy. These things would come to pass if these nationalist movements come to power.

I believe every nation should set their own immigration limits, because the local populace has a right to, on a whole, control the amount of immigration is allowed.

My hope is that the negative effects are minimal. I know there will be some economic disruption from this, I know there may be a period of backlash aim at certain segments of society.

I don't think there will be anything close to war between European nations, famine or the black death.

But I do think that this European experiment has failed, people are growing more and more unhappy with it and it's better for it to die a peaceful death soon that be torn apart kicking and screaming down the road.

Okay, I'm going to attempt to sum up your position. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Basically, you're willing to bet that the alleged upside (i.e. EU breaks up) is worth the potential downside (i.e. fascism, discrimination, alienation/purging of minorities, closed borders, economic ruin) of having right wing, white nationalist parties rise to power across Europe.

So, ignoring the merits of your anti-EU position, which I know is something ME has dealt with in depth... I think you're being blind and naive to the potential harms that will come from the rise of white nationalist movements. We've already gotten a glimpse in the U.S. after two weeks of trump. We've already seen a documented rise in violence against minorities/racially inspired violence/hate speech in the UK, Canada, and the US. Even if all your assertions are correct about the benefits of breaking up the EU (which we'll just have to agree to disagree on), you're dramatically underselling the danger of the risks.

In no way could I argue that your desired ends will justify the means. You basically see racists and white nationalists as a necessary tool to break up Europe, ignoring any harms and costs as collateral damage for the greater good? You realize these are borderline white supremacists? And you want to put them in power all across the continent in the hopes that it will sow further division?
 
I still feel that we live in such an open and connected society, that it doesn't make sense to go back to the artificial barriers of the past.

I do agree that parts of the EU system are running into issues. They probably went too aggressively for the poorer eastern European countries - while it makes sense for Germany, the Netherlands, and France to share a currency, maybe they shouldn't have pushed the places like Greece to join the Euro quite so readily.

But as long as the Schengen treaty remains, the nations really cannot control their own immigration quotas, and on the whole, the Schengen zone is just amazing. That's exactly what we need in more places - essentially a border-free zone, where a permit in one country is the same as a border in another country.

I mean, the EU is basically set up as the modern day US, where the "national" government controls some basic issues like visas and immigration, and the "states" have control over their own components. Yes, each state/country needs to have some matters under their own control which they can cater to what their populations require, but to me, it just makes sense to be more inclusive overall, and allow a free movement between the members. I still don't understand how it's harder for me to get a visa to work in the US than it would be to get a visa to work in the EU. I wish that Canada and the US could sign a similar treaty allowing full access and movement between us like they have in Europe.
 
Okay, I'm going to attempt to sum up your position. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Basically, you're willing to bet that the alleged upside (i.e. EU breaks up) is worth the potential downside (i.e. fascism, discrimination, alienation/purging of minorities, closed borders, economic ruin) of having right wing, white nationalist parties rise to power across Europe.

So, ignoring the merits of your anti-EU position, which I know is something ME has dealt with in depth... I think you're being blind and naive to the potential harms that will come from the rise of white nationalist movements. We've already gotten a glimpse in the U.S. after two weeks of trump. We've already seen a documented rise in violence against minorities/racially inspired violence/hate speech in the UK, Canada, and the US. Even if all your assertions are correct about the benefits of breaking up the EU (which we'll just have to agree to disagree on), you're dramatically underselling the danger of the risks.

In no way could I argue that your desired ends will justify the means. You basically see racists and white nationalists as a necessary tool to break up Europe, ignoring any harms and costs as collateral damage for the greater good? You realize these are borderline white supremacists? And you want to put them in power all across the continent in the hopes that it will sow further division?

His arguments aren't actual arguments - they are post-hoc justifications for his trump boner.
 
I still feel that we live in such an open and connected society, that it doesn't make sense to go back to the artificial barriers of the past.

I do agree that parts of the EU system are running into issues. They probably went too aggressively for the poorer eastern European countries - while it makes sense for Germany, the Netherlands, and France to share a currency, maybe they shouldn't have pushed the places like Greece to join the Euro quite so readily.

But as long as the Schengen treaty remains, the nations really cannot control their own immigration quotas, and on the whole, the Schengen zone is just amazing. That's exactly what we need in more places - essentially a border-free zone, where a permit in one country is the same as a border in another country.

I mean, the EU is basically set up as the modern day US, where the "national" government controls some basic issues like visas and immigration, and the "states" have control over their own components. Yes, each state/country needs to have some matters under their own control which they can cater to what their populations require, but to me, it just makes sense to be more inclusive overall, and allow a free movement between the members. I still don't understand how it's harder for me to get a visa to work in the US than it would be to get a visa to work in the EU. I wish that Canada and the US could sign a similar treaty allowing full access and movement between us like they have in Europe.

What the EU needs is reform, but they have not proven open to that. The Brits tried to negotiate a better deal, the Greeks did too, albeit from a position of position of extreme weakness.

So burn it down.
 
Okay, I'm going to attempt to sum up your position. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Basically, you're willing to bet that the alleged upside (i.e. EU breaks up) is worth the potential downside (i.e. fascism, discrimination, alienation/purging of minorities, closed borders, economic ruin) of having right wing, white nationalist parties rise to power across Europe.

So, ignoring the merits of your anti-EU position, which I know is something ME has dealt with in depth... I think you're being blind and naive to the potential harms that will come from the rise of white nationalist movements. We've already gotten a glimpse in the U.S. after two weeks of trump. We've already seen a documented rise in violence against minorities/racially inspired violence/hate speech in the UK, Canada, and the US. Even if all your assertions are correct about the benefits of breaking up the EU (which we'll just have to agree to disagree on), you're dramatically underselling the danger of the risks.

In no way could I argue that your desired ends will justify the means. You basically see racists and white nationalists as a necessary tool to break up Europe, ignoring any harms and costs as collateral damage for the greater good? You realize these are borderline white supremacists? And you want to put them in power all across the continent in the hopes that it will sow further division?
I think you're being dramatic.

These right wing nationalists movements aren't nationalist socialists. There isn't a Hitler among them. None of them have thugs at their Beck and call hunting down people. They all seem to respect the Democratic process and European countries have strong checks and balances to guard against authoritian regimes, arguably better than in the USA.

The geopolitical situation on the ground isn't the same as the 1930s. Same as in the USA, and perhaps brexit, there is going to be a bit of pushback from these insurgent parties, but do I see state organized violence against minorities? No. Will certain extremist groups and individuals participate in Quebec City style attacks? Definitely, but I cannot directly lay blame at the parties, for while they may inspire these things, they aren't out ordering muslims and immigrants to be killed. Same way I don't blame islam for radicals attacking people.

So no, I don't see a fascist Europe, I don't see a purging of minorities. I do see closed borders, a natural reaction when the borders have been wide open for decades, I don't see economic ruin, for I am pretty sure European nations can see the sense of free trade.

This is democracy at its core. When you have large organizations completely disconnected with the people on the ground you get these results. The EU has been stumbling and bumbling for close to ten years now and it's still to this day telling people everything is fine the way it is, no need to reform anything.

You have establishment parties telling people the status quo is fine even through a decade of low job growth, weak economic performance, and rising racial and social tensions. So I completely understand and sympathise with people who are frustrated with the status quo and mainstream parties that haven't done much to address it.

So to sum up, I don't see fascism, I don't see economic ruin, I don't see organised state sanctioned/tolerated violence and hate speech against minorities and immigrants. I don't see everyone who votes and supports them as racist. I do foresee a end to the EU, a period of adjustment followed by a return of mainstream parties at some point when people feel that they get the message.
 
Back
Top