Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
A Political Thread pt. 2
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Booboobang" data-source="post: 1111202" data-attributes="member: 86230"><p>I have to say I disagree with your idea of giving creadance to the idea that being overwhelmed by migrant populations that have opposing views to the country they are entering is ever an actualy possibility in reality. Basically all those examples would rather stay in their own region, CCP supporters in china believe China is eden so why would they ever leave? Pro putin Russians are generally taken care of in russia, why leave? etc... why would they move somewhere to impose their own world view, and if they did they dont have the resources to actually do such a thing. The only people with the capital to do that and make a real difference in culture aren't the ones who come here and if they wanted ot do such a thing they already would have. The ones coming here are coming to make their lives better and thus accept that their own cultures have flaws.</p><p></p><p>The large muslim population that tend to enclave is also a direct result of an acceptance of this bigotry in the first place, a lot of people moved over due to historical empire reasons or were welcomed for lack of manpower reasons and thus their family moved with over generations, only to be met generally with racism from the greater population in the first place which in turn just results in turning to their own people for kindness.</p><p></p><p>Recognizing something that is simply impossible from a logistical and influence standpoint gives the idea undeserved legitimacy; this was done over Brexit and fears of Turkey joining, many points before it, with the BBC and other outlets not understanding that unbias journalism isn't giving a 50/50 split to just unfactual arguments. Aknowledging it as a valid point just leads to more warryness of foreigners and thus racism when they arrive. It gets really dangerous when you consider we are on the verge of a wave of climate refugees and a population that in some quarters is happy enough to see boats in the channel carrying children etc sunk.</p><p></p><p>I personally think accepting the premise jsut leads to a legitimising of the dehumanising of foreigners rather than seeing them for what they are, not radical muslims coming over to impose shiria law, not sleeper CCP agents, instead people that are realy poor that simply want to improve their life and will go by any means to do it. Humanizing in my opinion is the only way to avoid this, rather than legitimizing operant points of view.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Booboobang, post: 1111202, member: 86230"] I have to say I disagree with your idea of giving creadance to the idea that being overwhelmed by migrant populations that have opposing views to the country they are entering is ever an actualy possibility in reality. Basically all those examples would rather stay in their own region, CCP supporters in china believe China is eden so why would they ever leave? Pro putin Russians are generally taken care of in russia, why leave? etc... why would they move somewhere to impose their own world view, and if they did they dont have the resources to actually do such a thing. The only people with the capital to do that and make a real difference in culture aren't the ones who come here and if they wanted ot do such a thing they already would have. The ones coming here are coming to make their lives better and thus accept that their own cultures have flaws. The large muslim population that tend to enclave is also a direct result of an acceptance of this bigotry in the first place, a lot of people moved over due to historical empire reasons or were welcomed for lack of manpower reasons and thus their family moved with over generations, only to be met generally with racism from the greater population in the first place which in turn just results in turning to their own people for kindness. Recognizing something that is simply impossible from a logistical and influence standpoint gives the idea undeserved legitimacy; this was done over Brexit and fears of Turkey joining, many points before it, with the BBC and other outlets not understanding that unbias journalism isn't giving a 50/50 split to just unfactual arguments. Aknowledging it as a valid point just leads to more warryness of foreigners and thus racism when they arrive. It gets really dangerous when you consider we are on the verge of a wave of climate refugees and a population that in some quarters is happy enough to see boats in the channel carrying children etc sunk. I personally think accepting the premise jsut leads to a legitimising of the dehumanising of foreigners rather than seeing them for what they are, not radical muslims coming over to impose shiria law, not sleeper CCP agents, instead people that are realy poor that simply want to improve their life and will go by any means to do it. Humanizing in my opinion is the only way to avoid this, rather than legitimizing operant points of view. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
A Political Thread pt. 2
Top