PDA

View Full Version : Conversation is always possible.


Stronk Serb
January 18th, 2017, 01:58 PM
In the wake of Black Lives Matter violence and racial tensions in the US erupti g to worse levels than the sixties, people forgot that dialogue and peaceful solutions are always possible.


http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/george-lincoln-rockwell-attend-nation-islam-1961/

Yes, you read right. Nazis meeting with black supremacists with Islamic tendencies without any problem. They even agreed on some things. Although separation of racial groups is not a good thing, it shows that even the most hated groups can reach a compromise and talk in a civil manner. I mean the NoI leaders met with KKK leaders and reached a mutual conclusion without any violence. I give this example because these groups are supposed to hate each others guts, but they sat down and talked. Why can't people do it now?

Porpoise101
January 18th, 2017, 04:50 PM
I don't really see it that way. Violence is pretty sporadic. Maybe the reason that people don't really sit down and talk it out though is because of technology. Traditional meetings are less and less popular. Instead, both sides just tend to rant on the Internet instead of meeting in person.

Microcosm
January 18th, 2017, 07:05 PM
It truly baffles me why people often refuse to simply discuss things. I'm inclined to think it is solely the doing of pride, that diplomacy is a sign of weakness. World War I, for instance, could have likely been avoided if nationalism and pride had been briefly put aside for the preservation of the lives of millions of soldiers.

Violence usually only begets more violence and, in today's world especially, it never reaches any nearly satisfactory solution.

The BLM protesters who are violent are likely just doing it because they are trying to find a reason to be angry and break the law. They're natural crooks, proven by their inclination to rob stores and such while they're "protesting" and throwing stones at officers who did nothing to them. Ignorance is all it is.

Uniquemind
January 19th, 2017, 04:49 PM
It truly baffles me why people often refuse to simply discuss things. I'm inclined to think it is solely the doing of pride, that diplomacy is a sign of weakness. World War I, for instance, could have likely been avoided if nationalism and pride had been briefly put aside for the preservation of the lives of millions of soldiers.

Violence usually only begets more violence and, in today's world especially, it never reaches any nearly satisfactory solution.

The BLM protesters who are violent are likely just doing it because they are trying to find a reason to be angry and break the law. They're natural crooks, proven by their inclination to rob stores and such while they're "protesting" and throwing stones at officers who did nothing to them. Ignorance is all it is.


Avoidance has been heavily practiced in the last 25 years.

1. Don't like an opinion, walk away don't associate with those people.


2. Internet allows for people to stay in "safe spaces".


There definitely was something to the "political correctness" culture of the last election and it is this, but it is not a justification to hurl insults like we saw on the campaign.

Stronk Serb
January 22nd, 2017, 02:46 AM
Avoidance has been heavily practiced in the last 25 years.

1. Don't like an opinion, walk away don't associate with those people.


2. Internet allows for people to stay in "safe spaces".


There definitely was something to the "political correctness" culture of the last election and it is this, but it is not a justification to hurl insults like we saw on the campaign.

The internet gave everyone the option to hurl insults from under the shroud of anonimity, a thing never seen before. I still hate the liberal mass report groups which pick on facebook pages and YouTube channels. Mostly because repirts happen for no reason, no jate speech was used and because it sparks unnecessary conflict.

Hyper
January 26th, 2017, 12:59 AM
Because the racial tension of today is manufactured and has turned into hysteria.

Stronk Serb
February 3rd, 2017, 12:04 PM
Because the racial tension of today is manufactured and has turned into hysteria.

Yeah, they paint America as KKK-Central where it's an all year long negroid hunting season. Like what the fuck? If it were truly like that, America would be white by now.

Dalcourt
February 4th, 2017, 12:22 AM
Yeah, they paint America as KKK-Central where it's an all year long negroid hunting season. Like what the fuck? If it were truly like that, America would be white by now.

Well there's still a law against murder so this kinda complicates the making America white again a great deal.

Stronk Serb
February 4th, 2017, 06:57 AM
Well there's still a law against murder so this kinda complicates the making America white again a great deal.

And the popularity of the KKK has hit an all time low. I still find it funny that BLM is taking a KKK-esque stance with all the propaganda, rioting, assaulting police officers, hate crime against whites... All lives matter, not just black lives, or white lives for that matter.

Dalcourt
February 4th, 2017, 10:00 AM
And the popularity of the KKK has hit an all time low. I still find it funny that BLM is taking a KKK-esque stance with all the propaganda, rioting, assaulting police officers, hate crime against whites... All lives matter, not just black lives, or white lives for that matter.

Discussing this with Whites gets kinda old and clearly shows that conversations might be possible but are useless in a lot of cases.

I don't condone violence but saying the BLM movement as a whole is faulted is wrong, too.

One of the most prominent misconceptions of White people is that pro Black means anti White...that's not the case at all. Nobody ever said just black lives matter...the slogan means Black lives matter, too. So to say all lives matter even those of Blacks.
If you'd be a black person in certain parts of the US you'd understand this.

Apart from the KKK there are so many other white supremacist groups that it's hard to say which loses members and which gains more...the last figures I saw didn't really point to a decline as a whole. And since our new President condones all forms of hate against whatever minority you wanna hate why still joining such groups anyway?

PlasmaHam
February 4th, 2017, 01:58 PM
One of the most prominent misconceptions of White people is that pro Black means anti White...that's not the case at all. Nobody ever said just black lives matter...the slogan means Black lives matter, too. So to say all lives matter even those of Blacks. I understand that black activism isn't necessarily anti-white, MLK was a good example of that, but the BLM movement often crosses that line. Numerous BLM leaders and supporters spread clearly anti-white opinions over social media, many times even encouraging violence and hatred against white people, especially the police. And while I wouldn't mind it that much if BLM disavowed those people who support anti-white violence or actively condemn violence towards white people, they simply do not. That gives the impression that BLM supports and tolerates those hateful opinions.

I think another thing that encourages people to think of BLM as an anti-white organization, is that they only have a problem with black-on-white shootings. If BLM really was for helping black people fairly, then you would think they would be protesting Chicago for failing to protect the nearly 700 black-on-black deaths that have occurred over the last year. Let's be honest, the biggest problem in black communities is not racism, but non-existent families and black-on-black violence. Yet BLM doesn't seem to address this ever, instead only wanting to defend the black criminal.

Dalcourt
February 4th, 2017, 06:25 PM
I understand that black activism isn't necessarily anti-white, MLK was a good example of that, but the BLM movement often crosses that line. Numerous BLM leaders and supporters spread clearly anti-white opinions over social media, many times even encouraging violence and hatred against white people, especially the police. And while I wouldn't mind it that much if BLM disavowed those people who support anti-white violence or actively condemn violence towards white people, they simply do not. That gives the impression that BLM supports and tolerates those hateful opinions.

BLM is not a movement with one leader like MLK so it's hard to say who spreads what over social media and who is for or against something and surely every movement will also attract extremists who use a certain name or symbol to make their views known. So in fact there are many blacks who don't want this violence and protest in a peaceful manner...those are BLM who don't tolerate and support hate...As I said there's no real leader to speak for themselves and that's something that's obviously hard to understand.

But who wants to listen to 500 peaceful people when you can pick out one who is violent just to make all the others look bad, too?

Do you want me to judge you for using the same symbol in your avatar that a person called Dylann Roof loved to show off in his selfies?
Surely not.

So I don't think that argument about a handful violent people within a great deal of peaceful one will lead us anywhere


I think another thing that encourages people to think of BLM as an anti-white organization, is that they only have a problem with black-on-white shootings. If BLM really was for helping black people fairly, then you would think they would be protesting Chicago for failing to protect the nearly 700 black-on-black deaths that have occurred over the last year. Let's be honest, the biggest problem in black communities is not racism, but non-existent families and black-on-black violence. Yet BLM doesn't seem to address this ever, instead only wanting to defend the black criminal.

Sure racism isn't a problem in black communities it's just when there has to be interactions with Whites.
There are many organisations under the umbrella of the BLM movement that try to tackle problems within black communities...I'm not from Chicago but as far as I know, there like in many other black communities in bigger cities, they have the so called Violence Interrupters to fight gang crime etc.

And apart from that most black are killed by other blacks sure but most Whites are killed by other Whites. So why's it white people are obviously more afraid of Blacks than their fellow whites and why is this white on white crime not addressed by white people? Do Whites not care for the well-being of their white brothers and sisters?

Non-existent families? Well let's rather say alternative family models...it's not that kids aren't looked after when there isn't the classic mom dad kids model...black communities are why closer knit...where parents aren't around other relatives are...

bentheplayer
February 4th, 2017, 09:25 PM
Actually stuff are real simple. Deny that something doesn't exist and it automatically becomes a non-issue. This is what many people who don't understand whats going on and only perpetuate rhetoric commonly do. Rather than claiming racism doesn't exists or thinking that blacks are inherently inferior for acting the way they do, try to see things from their pov.

People of color are already often at a disadvantage and due to being impoverished result to crime. Its naive to think that everyone should be treated equally when they don't start at the same level playing field as whites do. I recall seeing a poll on how white favored standardized testing when their competitors are blacks and sports/extra academic achievements when their competitors are asians. Need I say more? There is and always will be a certain degree of racism but the least one can do is to recognize it and try to level the playing field for everyone so that all have at least 1 fair chance at life.

While it is true that some BLM protest ended up being violent, this almost happens with every protest that starts off peacefully a first. Just look at the uk riots to know the power of the herd instinct. The idea that blacks are often treated with a greater degree of suspicion and given a lower threshold of the benefit of the doubt isn't just isolated to the US. Even the Uk police tasered (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/20/police-admit-tasering-ownblack-race-relations-advisorafter-mistaking/) their own black race relations advisor who was black after thinking that he was a wanted man. The police are often very quick to resort to the use of force when dealing with black people than white.

Also, rather that being so quick to point out the perceived "flaws" of these organisations think first whether the other side has valid points. This kind of hostile attitude is not going to benefit anyone. BLM is there for the purpose of pointing out unnecessary use of police force not black on black deaths which are mostly gang related. Perhaps I should ask what you have done for the blacks other than constantly criticizing their actions.

Stronk Serb
February 5th, 2017, 04:29 AM
Okay, so I am a Skinhead and you could say I have nationalistic tendencies etc. but I think the law should be upheld above all prejudices etc. Now, the police here in Serbia isn't percieved as racist. Give them a reason and they will beat you no matter if you are white, black, gypsy, Martian etc. They are brutal and get away with it, just not with murder which doesn't happen. Me and a few friends who are also Skinheads were attacked by some hooligans 2-3 times our number and when the cops showed up, we had to explain that we didn't instigate anything and that we were assaulted. I sort of get it how by your appearance you are automatically assumed guilty. I mean even though we were bruised, black-eyed and my friend had a bleeding nose, we were searched and had to persuade the cops that we are innocent. My friend almost got his skull smashed with a rock if didn't punch that guy to the ground and pounced on him till he let go of the rock. My other friend almost got trampled. I went to the cops a day later with medical documentation of injuries sustained and you know what the cops said? I am quoting: "We are sorry but there is nothing we can do, stop picking fights or we will see you again in handcuffs."

I think the main issue here is poverty. Lack of a warm meal makes you steal another just to survive. Also I think the gang subculture which is dominant in poor neighbourhoods regardless of race is to blame too. To ensure a safe community these need to go away first.

bentheplayer
February 5th, 2017, 05:41 AM
Okay, so I am a Skinhead and you could say I have nationalistic tendencies etc. but I think the law should be upheld above all prejudices etc. Now, the police here in Serbia isn't percieved as racist. Give them a reason and they will beat you no matter if you are white, black, gypsy, Martian etc. They are brutal and get away with it, just not with murder which doesn't happen. Me and a few friends who are also Skinheads were attacked by some hooligans 2-3 times our number and when the cops showed up, we had to explain that we didn't instigate anything and that we were assaulted. I sort of get it how by your appearance you are automatically assumed guilty. I mean even though we were bruised, black-eyed and my friend had a bleeding nose, we were searched and had to persuade the cops that we are innocent. My friend almost got his skull smashed with a rock if didn't punch that guy to the ground and pounced on him till he let go of the rock. My other friend almost got trampled. I went to the cops a day later with medical documentation of injuries sustained and you know what the cops said? I am quoting: "We are sorry but there is nothing we can do, stop picking fights or we will see you again in handcuffs."

I think the main issue here is poverty. Lack of a warm meal makes you steal another just to survive. Also I think the gang subculture which is dominant in poor neighbourhoods regardless of race is to blame too. To ensure a safe community these need to go away first.

Thank you for sharing your personal experience. In essence the BLM campaign was born out of the long history of presumed white innocence and black guilt. Every thing else about the violence, anti-white sentiments are totally unrelated and are at best distractions of the primary aim of BLM movement. I am sure that from your unfortunate experience with the police will help you understand what many blacks face. As I exemplified, the prejudice is not just limited to blacks in US but in UK too. In Europe, like you highlighted, other groups such as Skinheads, gypsies are subjected to such prejudice too.

As you rightly pointed out, the roots of this problem is persistent and endemic economic oppression. It is clearly the duty of the government and politicians to rectify these social problems rather than deepen the racial fault lines by pointing fingers and adopting accusatory rhetoric. This always ends up becoming a verbal war where nothing gets done and status quo prevails. Wait long enough, the tension escalates and people end up rioting or protesting, resulting in this orchestrated self-fulfilling prophesy that the other side are "criminals".

Stronk Serb
February 5th, 2017, 09:33 AM
Thank you for sharing your personal experience. In essence the BLM campaign was born out of the long history of presumed white innocence and black guilt. Every thing else about the violence, anti-white sentiments are totally unrelated and are at best distractions of the primary aim of BLM movement. I am sure that from your unfortunate experience with the police will help you understand what many blacks face. As I exemplified, the prejudice is not just limited to blacks in US but in UK too. In Europe, like you highlighted, other groups such as Skinheads, gypsies are subjected to such prejudice too.

As you rightly pointed out, the roots of this problem is persistent and endemic economic oppression. It is clearly the duty of the government and politicians to rectify these social problems rather than deepen the racial fault lines by pointing fingers and adopting accusatory rhetoric. This always ends up becoming a verbal war where nothing gets done and status quo prevails. Wait long enough, the tension escalates and people end up rioting or protesting, resulting in this orchestrated self-fulfilling prophesy that the other side are "criminals".


The gypsy problem in Serbia is that a large amount of them (not all of them) live in slums, engage in begging, petty theft and petty crime. Now the government programs made to alleviate their conditions are actively denied. The government secured living containers with bedding, electricity, running water and thermal isolation. Most of it was scrapped by the gypsies living in that slum. I think the black community in America would gladly accept any aid and provide something back in return but the problem of the gypsies in Serbia is that they are unwilling to integrate and be productive members of society. Also for the sake of not losing their jobs, cops search minorities less often that whites. That's the unfortunate part of having a Pro-EU government.

bentheplayer
February 5th, 2017, 10:10 AM
The gypsy problem in Serbia is that a large amount of them (not all of them) live in slums, engage in begging, petty theft and petty crime. Now the government programs made to alleviate their conditions are actively denied. The government secured living containers with bedding, electricity, running water and thermal isolation. Most of it was scrapped by the gypsies living in that slum. I think the black community in America would gladly accept any aid and provide something back in return but the problem of the gypsies in Serbia is that they are unwilling to integrate and be productive members of society. Also for the sake of not losing their jobs, cops search minorities less often that whites. That's the unfortunate part of having a Pro-EU government.

i am afraid I don't really know much about the social issues in ex-Yugoslavia apart from the balkanisation of it so I can't really comment. However, from what I understand about the gypsies is that they seem to have their own ideas of life which is not too compatible with ideas of the state and sovereignty.

The main similarity of the European govt treatment towards the gypsies is somewhat similar to the US treatment of blacks. Depending on who is in power, the flavor of the month changes and politicians vacillate between "helping" them by dictating what they should do and demonizing them. This has been been happening for so many years so clearly are failed policies. Similar to attitudes about the BLM, they are always talking about the peripheral issues but ignoring the root cause; the presumed black guilt and white innocence. Similarly, gypsies prefer the freedom to move around countries and hate being tied down to a single place; they are known as the travelers.

I could do an in-dept summary on this issue of racial divide and harmony from a global perspective by illustrating what these divides are like in various countries and how local governments deal with such racial/ethnic fault lines but unfortunately I don't have the time currently. Often it isn't that conversation is impossible, its just that neither parties are willing to see or even entertain the other side's pov. One classic example would be the democrats and republicans in the US. Even issues that used to be non-partisan are politicized into partisans ones. At the end of the day, it is the masses that suffer, not these politicians.

Stronk Serb
February 7th, 2017, 10:18 AM
i am afraid I don't really know much about the social issues in ex-Yugoslavia apart from the balkanisation of it so I can't really comment. However, from what I understand about the gypsies is that they seem to have their own ideas of life which is not too compatible with ideas of the state and sovereignty.

The main similarity of the European govt treatment towards the gypsies is somewhat similar to the US treatment of blacks. Depending on who is in power, the flavor of the month changes and politicians vacillate between "helping" them by dictating what they should do and demonizing them. This has been been happening for so many years so clearly are failed policies. Similar to attitudes about the BLM, they are always talking about the peripheral issues but ignoring the root cause; the presumed black guilt and white innocence. Similarly, gypsies prefer the freedom to move around countries and hate being tied down to a single place; they are known as the travelers.

I could do an in-dept summary on this issue of racial divide and harmony from a global perspective by illustrating what these divides are like in various countries and how local governments deal with such racial/ethnic fault lines but unfortunately I don't have the time currently. Often it isn't that conversation is impossible, its just that neither parties are willing to see or even entertain the other side's pov. One classic example would be the democrats and republicans in the US. Even issues that used to be non-partisan are politicized into partisans ones. At the end of the day, it is the masses that suffer, not these politicians.

Actuall, the way I see blacks is that they are accepting and using that aid, while offering something in return. Gypsies from the cigan malas (slums they live in) usually engage in crime, theft, begging... While not even sending their kids to school, they expect governmental aid while they do not even do their basic obligations to said government, like respecting the law, sending kids to school etc. A parasitical way of existence to be honest.

bentheplayer
February 7th, 2017, 10:57 AM
Actuall, the way I see blacks is that they are accepting and using that aid, while offering something in return. Gypsies from the cigan malas (slums they live in) usually engage in crime, theft, begging... While not even sending their kids to school, they expect governmental aid while they do not even do their basic obligations to said government, like respecting the law, sending kids to school etc. A parasitical way of existence to be honest.

The problem here is that we are lumping and stereotyping groups. Groups can be useful in identifying their general believes and culture but probably less useful now with all these cultural assimilation. How many of us actually still practice all the old traditions of our race/ethnicity?

While not all gypsies are like what you mentioned, it needs to be recognized that they view themselves as a mobile "state" if you will. They don't "respect" the modern doctrines of sovereignty as you and I understand that to be. I recall talking to someone who has a strong interest in the anthropology of gypsies and he told me that they had very different views on what is "right and wrong". They have differing views on stealing and begging from our current modern views. There are also other issues where research has purported suggested that gypsies have a significantly lower average IQ of around 70+ and may not be able to function in the knowledge based high value added economy that most parts of Europe are gearing towards.

My point was that, often times, these govt aid programs may actually be used with a malicious intent for political reasons. Also, the degree of racial prejudice and hate may be so deep that integration becomes nearly impossible. Social integration can't just be done from a top down approach or through segregation. This segregation may be done covertly especially through economics by simply out pricing them of certain neighborhoods. So back to your original point. How can conversion be possible when the current climate of things are only fostering greater distrust and hate between the various groups? I am not saying that conversation is impossible but opportunities has be created for conversation be it thro social engineering/population planing/"mixed" schools etc. However, to be fair to govts who try, most countries believe that people should have the free will to choose who they speak to and this only acts as an additional barrier to conversation. Based on my observations, people are unwilling to get out of their comfort zones to initiate such conversations. These conversations usually only occur out of necessity, where both parties are forced to act or face annihilation. I.e. they need to have one common sufficiently dangerous enemy.

In terms of this racial/ethnic integration, from my travels to various countries for holiday, again based on my own observations, I think Singapore had been most successful in solving this issue of integration. Interestingly, the precipitating enemy that bounded the various races together was the racial riots where the various races attacked each other. To me that is possibly one of the most astounding achievement ever by any government, considering that people who once fought with each other abt half a century ago are now living rather peacefully together.

Stronk Serb
February 14th, 2017, 05:23 PM
The problem here is that we are lumping and stereotyping groups. Groups can be useful in identifying their general believes and culture but probably less useful now with all these cultural assimilation. How many of us actually still practice all the old traditions of our race/ethnicity?

While not all gypsies are like what you mentioned, it needs to be recognized that they view themselves as a mobile "state" if you will. They don't "respect" the modern doctrines of sovereignty as you and I understand that to be. I recall talking to someone who has a strong interest in the anthropology of gypsies and he told me that they had very different views on what is "right and wrong". They have differing views on stealing and begging from our current modern views. There are also other issues where research has purported suggested that gypsies have a significantly lower average IQ of around 70+ and may not be able to function in the knowledge based high value added economy that most parts of Europe are gearing towards.

My point was that, often times, these govt aid programs may actually be used with a malicious intent for political reasons. Also, the degree of racial prejudice and hate may be so deep that integration becomes nearly impossible. Social integration can't just be done from a top down approach or through segregation. This segregation may be done covertly especially through economics by simply out pricing them of certain neighborhoods. So back to your original point. How can conversion be possible when the current climate of things are only fostering greater distrust and hate between the various groups? I am not saying that conversation is impossible but opportunities has be created for conversation be it thro social engineering/population planing/"mixed" schools etc. However, to be fair to govts who try, most countries believe that people should have the free will to choose who they speak to and this only acts as an additional barrier to conversation. Based on my observations, people are unwilling to get out of their comfort zones to initiate such conversations. These conversations usually only occur out of necessity, where both parties are forced to act or face annihilation. I.e. they need to have one common sufficiently dangerous enemy.

In terms of this racial/ethnic integration, from my travels to various countries for holiday, again based on my own observations, I think Singapore had been most successful in solving this issue of integration. Interestingly, the precipitating enemy that bounded the various races together was the racial riots where the various races attacked each other. To me that is possibly one of the most astounding achievement ever by any government, considering that people who once fought with each other abt half a century ago are now living rather peacefully together.

I use the gypsies from the slums because they are the part of the population unwilling to integrate. Most gypsiesnwith second-level education learn a trade or something so they can work since they were brought into the fold of civilisation by education, they know they can live better than in shabby cardboard hovels. Lots of them work as street sweepers because they can collect paper/plastic which can be sold to recyclers. Now the ones which live and die in slums (glorified cardboard boxes) are the type of population whose majority engages in begging, crime, organised begging (a gypsy takes a bunch of kids to beg and takes the money afterwards), copper/iron stealing. Not to mention they enjoy healthcare without being subscribed to the Health Insurance Fund (our version of the NHS, the HIF handles money and subscriptions that go into government healthcare), not sending their children to school which is required by law in most if not all countries in the world... I mesn they are not integrated, while all the other ethnic minorities are. The Slovaks, Czechs, Hungarians, Gorani, Rusyns, Germans (before the end of WWII), are integrated. By law they have to learn their mother tongue along Serbian in schools, have right to ethnic manifestations, TV stations in their language, radio stations in their language and minority parties have a minimum number of seats in parliament they get regardless of election results. The number can only be larger than the base amount.

bentheplayer
February 14th, 2017, 08:46 PM
I use the gypsies from the slums because they are the part of the population unwilling to integrate. Most gypsiesnwith second-level education learn a trade or something so they can work since they were brought into the fold of civilisation by education, they know they can live better than in shabby cardboard hovels. Lots of them work as street sweepers because they can collect paper/plastic which can be sold to recyclers. Now the ones which live and die in slums (glorified cardboard boxes) are the type of population whose majority engages in begging, crime, organised begging (a gypsy takes a bunch of kids to beg and takes the money afterwards), copper/iron stealing. Not to mention they enjoy healthcare without being subscribed to the Health Insurance Fund (our version of the NHS, the HIF handles money and subscriptions that go into government healthcare), not sending their children to school which is required by law in most if not all countries in the world... I mesn they are not integrated, while all the other ethnic minorities are. The Slovaks, Czechs, Hungarians, Gorani, Rusyns, Germans (before the end of WWII), are integrated. By law they have to learn their mother tongue along Serbian in schools, have right to ethnic manifestations, TV stations in their language, radio stations in their language and minority parties have a minimum number of seats in parliament they get regardless of election results. The number can only be larger than the base amount.

I see. If you are referring to these people who sponge off the govt, if I were in the government, I would give them 2 options. 1) Leave and never return. 2) Get all their kids and place them in government custody. This might sound harsh but when vermin are left to their own devices, plagues will arise. The idea is that due opportunity must be given to them to integrate and jobs based on their ability. For those who do not wish to be a part of society, society has no need for them. Besides it isn't as if society wronged the travelers historically in a way that stunted their ability to seek gainful economic employment. I believe that people are free to choose how they want to live their life but they can't expect these benefits without any current of potential future contribution.

Europe isn't like Africa. Surely there is no need to live in slums that enable the perpetuation/justification of "petty" crimes. I am very against stealing and vandalism especially when it is done as an easy way out. To me only being lazy by finding a more efficient way of working is justifiable.

Human
February 14th, 2017, 09:39 PM
The main reason they met is because they both agreed to be racist and seperate the races. Not really a relevant solution today. The same way Hitler allied with the Japanese as they were a very ethnically pure race.

Stronk Serb
February 15th, 2017, 04:40 AM
I see. If you are referring to these people who sponge off the govt, if I were in the government, I would give them 2 options. 1) Leave and never return. 2) Get all their kids and place them in government custody. This might sound harsh but when vermin are left to their own devices, plagues will arise. The idea is that due opportunity must be given to them to integrate and jobs based on their ability. For those who do not wish to be a part of society, society has no need for them. Besides it isn't as if society wronged the travelers historically in a way that stunted their ability to seek gainful economic employment. I believe that people are free to choose how they want to live their life but they can't expect these benefits without any current of potential future contribution.

Europe isn't like Africa. Surely there is no need to live in slums that enable the perpetuation/justification of "petty" crimes. I am very against stealing and vandalism especially when it is done as an easy way out. To me only being lazy by finding a more efficient way of working is justifiable.

Well, that is a good idea, but there is a strong lobbying group in the EU. Yeah, the kids should be integrated in the society, if their parents wish to live like primitive savages, let them.

The main reason they met is because they both agreed to be racist and seperate the races. Not really a relevant solution today. The same way Hitler allied with the Japanese as they were a very ethnically pure race.

Yeah but I find it extremely ironical that Nazis and black-supremacists met, both percieving the other side as less than human which should be exterminated with extreme perjudice. The most ironic thing is that they met without any bad words exchanged and just talked.

bentheplayer
February 15th, 2017, 05:18 AM
Well, that is a good idea, but there is a strong lobbying group in the EU. Yeah, the kids should be integrated in the society, if their parents wish to live like primitive savages, let them.



Actually i won't be so quick to say that this is a good idea because it can only work if implemented properly. In the field of public policy, there isn't really anything new. The key hurdle is always in implementation. Given that Europe has a consistent history of child abuse of kids in state/Church/NGO care, I would be hesitant to implement this policy. My first step would be to strengthen the integrity of the public institutions. In all organizations, all you need is one bad apple to destroy any possible benefit.

Stronk Serb
February 15th, 2017, 04:10 PM
Actually i won't be so quick to say that this is a good idea because it can only work if implemented properly. In the field of public policy, there isn't really anything new. The key hurdle is always in implementation. Given that Europe has a consistent history of child abuse of kids in state/Church/NGO care, I would be hesitant to implement this policy. My first step would be to strengthen the integrity of the public institutions. In all organizations, all you need is one bad apple to destroy any possible benefit.

Well, there is a lot of undocumented child and domestic abuse in many forms occurring in gypsy slums due to the isolation of said slums of outside influences. Those slums should be wiped out if you ask me. Or if that is not possible, at least get the kids out. Also child abuse in institutions is not just a Europe-only thing. It happens in the US, just not to the same extent like in some parts of Europe. Europe is not a homogenous entity like the US, it is a large amount of nation-states of which some share similarities (like Germany and Austria) while others are completely different from one another (like Serbia and Albania), what may be viewed in one country one way can be viewed in an entirely different way in another country.

Dalcourt
February 15th, 2017, 09:51 PM
The main reason they met is because they both agreed to be racist and seperate the races. Not really a relevant solution today. The same way Hitler allied with the Japanese as they were a very ethnically pure race.




Yeah but I find it extremely ironical that Nazis and black-supremacists met, both percieving the other side as less than human which should be exterminated with extreme perjudice. The most ironic thing is that they met without any bad words exchanged and just talked.

And that's why I basically didn't understand the point you wanted to make with your post in the first place.

They agreed that the mutually hate each other and want to stay separate. (which is a lie per se since the goal on both sides in reality is to get rid off the other side)
So what kind of conversation was there? What solutions were found?

Problem is not bring to groups together and they agree on hating each other , problem is finding solutions to overcome hate.
Sure most people should be able to converse in a civil and polite way with an enemy without hitting him over the head at first sight. I mean we claim are humans not animals after all...

So I'm sure your gypsies could talk to your people and agree with them on not liking each other. But where does that lead you all know anyway. They don't want to integrate in your country...that's the problem, right? And that's where conversation gets tricky....so yeah.

So your first post may contain interesting pics and all but I don't completely understand it.