Random Politics & Religion #09

Before certain people bite my head off for using the word "free"


It's paid for through taxes

First of all, you haven't linked any science so there's not much of a conflict.

Second of all, I think it's convenient that researchers are inherently untrustworthy, biased, and near-incompetent until one of them claims something you agree with.

He is correct gang. I have often railed at the inappropriate use of the term semite as applying only to Jews. And, as a mater of sober fact, many Jews are not semites while all Arabs are.

Being anti Israel is not being antisemitic.

Swoosh

Question is, whose taxes?

As we've been over this in many other threads, taxes collected is money the government owns, or is owed, for the use of many things, such as the currency itself, to the use of government owned and operated buildings and programs.

Unless you're (in the royal sense) one of those people who seem to believe that every scent of the taxes collected is somehow yours, and you, privately, and secretly decide what that collected money is used for.

We already covered this when it happened. I linked it then. Go find it if you're interested.

Secondly, I only referenced the study because people continue to spew the narrative that there a racial bias in police shootings. When you have something to show for it to back your claim beyond confirmation bias, let us know.

Same study found racial bias in police violence but not shootings. Which fits the narrative.

Errr...Irish flag?

Also, since you're bringing up past events, I could easily point to current events, as would a few others here. We probably shouldn't go that route since there's a multitude of threads devoted to it.

You've said some pretty objectionable things on here. Are you going to keep going for broke?


Yep. So, if we're white-washing things here, let's hope grandchildren of ISIS and other affiliates actually learn harsh, stark realities from the past.

There was certainly a bias for physicality. That wasn't what was said in here, though. Stick with that and I won't call have to call anyone out on it.

Sign me up. Transgender studies here I come !

I'm going to major in gender fluidity with a minor in nuclear engineering...

Irish Archbishop To Stop Sending Trainee Priests to Catholic College Due to its ‘Gay Culture’
Time

"One [allegation] is that there is a homosexual, or gay culture, and that students have been using an app called Grindr"

A) #Wings4Rooks
B) I'm talking about EU. Since it's all interconnected, I wasn't sure if Drac's country's taxes are used only in his country for tuition or if it's a shared pool (some things are shared between member countries, which is why Brexit was such a big deal).

And I'm too lazy to look it up myself.

MMMM, smells like theft

More like Sex and Candy

#MakeAmericaSingMarcyPlaygroundAgain

#Thisisthesongthatneverends

Now for a musical interlude

Iunno man, Teen Spirit is in the air.

#hashtagsforreasons #recklesshashtags

Either you're intentionally being dense or trying to strawman. If you read the original point of contention, it centered around Anglo-Saxon and European imperialism being or not being especially destructive and oppressive. (white people who conquered Australia and disenfranchised the native people now refusing refuge to others), furthermore stating that in the ancient and modern history, the middle east has actually enjoyed exceptionally long periods of peace in comparison to the rest of the world.

Some came out and said there's nothing particularly special about European history while also attacking my claim about the middle east- you then came in with your Anti-semite false claims.

Why is it ironic? try to keep up now:

1. For 1,300 years Jews have been fleeing europe to the middle east for refuge from european persecution.

2. The most recent killing spree of Jews that Europe went on resulted in the creation of an Apartheid state in the middle east.

3.The term Anti-Semite was constructed to make note of european persecution of Jews - because there was no such thing as Arab or Islamic persecution of Jews. You, Europeans, own the term. It exists to describe your proven track record of discriminating and persecuting Jews. And what a track record it is.

4. The Europeans create an Apartheid state in a land that isn't theirs (imperialism) and call the native SEMITE people "Anti-Semite" for resisting the occupation.

The argument isn't about sweeping generalizations. It is about policies and the consequences of such, repeated over and over again throughout history by Europe. Its convenient for you to call them "sweeping generalizations" - another strawman, as the discussion isn't about individuals but about historical fact. Furthermore, you resort to ad hominem by calling me, a semite, Anti-Semite.

Weak.

I am very Anti-Israeli. very anti-zionist. That doesn't make me an anti-semite or anti-jew. There are hundreds of thousands of Jews who are Anti-Israel and Anti-Zionism.

Furthermore, my stance is the mainstream one on Israel. There are 9 Nations in the entire world that voted against a UN resolution recognizing everything I said above - Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.

Every single other nation on the planet, all 183, signed that resolution and voted YES - Palestine is a state and Israel is illegally occupying its territory. If you read the actual wording of the resolution, it states "remnants and consequences of Colonial powers", "european anti-semitism". It outright condemns European ambitions in Africa and Asia. And ALL your governments signed it.

But I can see how someone who doesn't follow the nuances might think that. If anything, you make sweeping generalizations. I'm still waiting for these Anti-Semite quotes.

#1: "You understand that these warlords arise from their own ranks, right?"
Beautiful Causation Fallacy. well done.

Have you done any reading at all into the past 400 years of African History?
Do you see those borders on the African Continent? Those were drawn by Europeans. They drew them without any regard to people's historical tribal ties to each other and the land. They did so to divide the resources of the land amongst themselves. Africa is still suffering as a result of this.

Furthermore, and most often, the rebels and warlords are basically one of 2 things:
A) A minority that takes up arms (from western arms dealers) to rebel against the oppression they suffer. They are on the wrongside of an imaginary border. On the other side they would be fine, but within their current nation they are a minority living in an area without water, without arable land. Check out Congo, Thanks Europe

B)An Anti-Government western sponsored faction rises to power and topples the government. Bringing about policies that are pro-western such as access to diamonds and gold mines or oil for close to nothing. Check out Nigeria, its a cool story.

Indeed the most troubled and impoverished states in Africa are those that did not/do not have the ability to resist european imperialism. The strangest thing about you who would deny the europeans exceptionally barbaric practices in Africa is that you don't realize it only ended officially 40 years ago.
Check out Portuguese Colonial War.
FACT: 90% of Africa was oppressed by Europe.

Appeal to ignorance, Check.
Here's a short video that might start the path to your enlightenment if you chose to really know, that is.


Or don't watch them. You're not likely to meet anyone irl who knows better, so you can continue to appeal to their ignorance and make statements like you just did.

Next we have this association fallacy.
#2:"You understand that the problems you're bemoaning are not intrinsically a white trait, and that there are people throughout all societies that will happily brutalize their peers to gain position, power, etc.?"

If other nations/civilizations demonstrate some similar traits of europeans, that does not a european history give them.
You seem to be at odds with the fact that no other group of people have been as successful as the europeans have at oppression and destruction. Let me put it to you this way, factually:

"Europe as a continent has seen more wars fought on its soil than the continents of Asia, Africa and the Americas combined. Recorded history tells us that the last century was the bloodiest years the world has ever seen."
http://worldwatchtoday.org/archives/1828


How many of these are European:
http://listverse.com/2012/03/02/top-10-worst-moments-in-human-history/
http://www.wonderslist.com/10-deadliest-wars-in-human-history/

You like anecdotal evidence? ok
Terms like "White Supremacy" exist just because right?
I've never heard Brown Supremacy, Yellow Supremacy, Black Supremacy, Red Supremacy.. I see a lot of white people living in countries built on the bones and skeletons of the native people, can you show a country where africans or asians built their nation on the bones and skeletons of their slaves and the native people?

South Africa - check
USA - Check
South America - Check
Australia - Check
Israel - Check
Thousands and thousands of Islands in the indian ocean, the arabian sea, the pacific, the atlantic - check
We're all speaking English because it's the richest language right (lol).

Except none of those people are alive anymore and you can't blame that on the people currently living there

Here in Sweden we start learning English in 3rd grade I believe and then German/French/Spanish in 6th grade (all the way up to 10th grade where we can choose a new language (Italian, Mandarin, Japanese etc or continue)

The reason we learn English first is because it's much more useful. It's much easier than languages like German and French because of pronunciation and grammar. It should be something everyone learns in school. Around 95% speak English here, at least enough to make themselves understood. Most speak it quite well.

Blazed, you're not schooling me in anything, you're trying to say one group of people are shittier than another. That's not the case.

Some people historically are just better at being shitty.

It doesn't mean they're shittier. It just means they're more efficient at doing it on a large scale/in a different way.

There isn't a populated continent out there that isn't jam packed with a history of the indigenous people being shitty to each other and/or someone coming in from outside and being shitty to them.

There's a book called "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond.

You should read it if you haven't.

It's really very good, even if you don't agree with all of its conclusions. It really makes you think about the subject.

Basically it suggests that Europeans didn't imperialize the world through any sort of superiority of intellect or genetics, but rather due to environmental and geographical causes allowing for technological advancement creating -- to borrow a phrase from the book's wiki -- a positive feedback loop.

Really, the fact of the matter is that you and I aren't saying completely different things. It's just that you're attributing it to some sort of greater evil of Europeans whereas I'm simply saying that historically, they're no worse than anyone else, they just managed to happen upon the formula to be better at being bad first.

Actually, also, did you mention you went to UCLA in the 90s?

You may even be familiar with Mr. Diamond.