|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jun 17, 2023 16:05:26 GMT
Dan puts this up on every forum he has been on.. He does. Finds a way of proclaiming "See? Hitler had the right idea after all!" Backs it up with lengthy quotes from anti semitic publications ("Occidental Quarterly", et al). Definitely NOT a nazi. At all... I don't recognise you as a member of the Phora* Wally, what was your handle there?
* or Majority Rights.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jun 17, 2023 16:36:47 GMT
So why do (only) western liberal democracies accept unwanted immigration?  "It stands to reason don't it, yer daft Scouse git! It's yer bleedin' Joos innit!" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2023 16:50:41 GMT
So why do (only) western liberal democracies accept unwanted immigration? "It stands to reason don't it, yer daft Scouse git! It's yer bleedin' Joos innit!" Because they have to abide by the rule of law and undoing human rights legislation to make it harder for immigrants to come or stay here is so frought with potential unintended consequences where our own freedoms are concerned that more thoughtful people in the corridors of power think twice about going there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2023 16:59:30 GMT
On reflection, Hitlers Schadenfreude might have been a better choice given the widespread lack of appreciation for irony these days. To characterise what I actually wrote as a 'conscious endeavour on Hitler's part' is beyond parody even for a card-carrying liberal leftie. I was merely taking your words at face value. Irony is not always obvious, especially when some use it to mask something darker. So when it comes to the expressed opinions of others I tend to accept their words at face value because people are generally honest about their own opinions, however much some might base theirs on untruths or false so-called "facts." This latter observation is a general one and not one aimed at you personally, by the way. I am not accusing you personally of citing fake facts. If I ever have reason to do so I will say so and why. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 18, 2023 9:41:21 GMT
Dan, what is your opinion on the past migration of Europeans to North America?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 18, 2023 10:19:45 GMT
Dan, what is your opinion on the past migration of Europeans to North America? They should stay there. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 18, 2023 14:44:22 GMT
So why do (only) western liberal democracies accept unwanted immigration? "It stands to reason don't it, yer daft Scouse git! It's yer bleedin' Joos innit!" Because they have to abide by the rule of law and undoing human rights legislation to make it harder for immigrants to come or stay here is so frought with potential unintended consequences where our own freedoms are concerned that more thoughtful people in the corridors of power think twice about going there. No human rights legislation gives any foreign national a right to enter (one narrow exception excluded), or become a national of, another country. I think you are mixing up your domains a bit. Why this is phenomena is more or less limited to western democracies is a good question. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jun 18, 2023 15:19:52 GMT
Dan, what is your opinion on the past migration of Europeans to North America? I think on the whole it has worked out rather well for all concerned. Although for some unfathomable reason European-Americans appear to have resigned themselves to the prospect of turning it all over to a new wave of non-European migrants.
Historically unprecedented and highly experimental I'd have thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 18, 2023 15:28:51 GMT
Hmm. I think the indigenous peoples may have a more nuanced answer.
If you are trying to say that it was OK for Europeans to dominate north America but it would be wrong for anyone else, then there does seem to be some hypocrisy in your argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 18, 2023 15:38:27 GMT
Hmm. I think the indigenous peoples may have a more nuanced answer. If you are trying to say that it was OK for Europeans to dominate north America but it would be wrong for anyone else, then there does seem to be some hypocrisy in your argument. You could make a reasonable argument against uncontrolled immigration into Europe ( and the UK) by using the US an example . I understand the trap that you set but it only needed to be turned on it’s head. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 18, 2023 15:40:48 GMT
I've never argued for uncontrolled immigration into Europe? I'm all in favour of freedom of movement within Europe, and fair immigration from outside, including a fair Asylum Seekers policy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jun 18, 2023 15:41:49 GMT
Heading off on a bit of a tangent here, so this will be my final comment on European migration to N. America (and by extension to colonial-era European migration generally).
I think that we have to be careful not to judge historical events and processes by our (post-)modern sensibilities but rather by the standards of the time. In that respect all the so-called 'white settler' countries were effectively viewed as 'terra nullius', vast practically empty spaces populated by natives who had failed to take advantage (or were even unaware) of the physical and natural resources available to them. So they were displaced by other people who could even though, in many cases the indigenous population resisted the invaders to the extent they were capable.
So that's the lesson for us in the West: if we don't put up an effective resistance we will also be invaded and overwhelmed but that's a message which goes unheard or, more sinisterly, gets suppressed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 18, 2023 15:46:13 GMT
I've never argued for uncontrolled immigration into Europe? I'm all in favour of freedom of movement within Europe, and fair immigration from outside, including a fair Asylum Seekers policy. Europe is a big place . Freedom of movement is uncontrolled immigration under a different name .but you knew that . ’ Fair’ immigration is a subjective concept . My idea of fair is in the context of the impact immigration has on the native population, especially the areas where the immigrants are placed or tend to move too . What’s yours ? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 18, 2023 15:46:13 GMT
Hmm. I think the indigenous peoples may have a more nuanced answer. If you are trying to say that it was OK for Europeans to dominate north America but it would be wrong for anyone else, then there does seem to be some hypocrisy in your argument. So, the current immigration could / should resisted using the same direct methods used to resist European settlement? Domination is domination. I'm not sure drawing that parallel gets you where you want to go. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 18, 2023 17:20:34 GMT
Dan, what is your opinion on the past migration of Europeans to North America? I suppose as a reasonable comparison then one should consider what the view of the native Americans was to being overwhelmed. I am not sure that because a lot of people left here and went somewhere else then those that stayed here should be subject to mass immigration. |
|
