The Procession of Plight

Don't call me James wrote:At the very least it looks like mostly everyone here is in agreement that a) these refugees do need help and need some place to lead their lives forward so some compassion is shown in this thread and b) that whichever country opens their doors to them, these people need to assimilate themselves into the society and culture that is already present there.

On number 2 we disagree, "racist backward bigots" are saying they need to integrate and recognise values and tradition of the country they live in, opponents say "nah, they can build Saudi Arabia right inside Germany", etc (because thats what multiculturalism is in contrast to "melting pot" and "assimilation")

That's not what I got from reading the thread. Both groups seems to agree with the assimilation but it's just the extent to which the two sides are arguing it. You have too very extreme sides of the same coin honestly.

I have a socialist vision of the life, so I haven't idea why the nationalism is still considered in 2015.  I just hoped it belonged to a waste of a dark and not really so  far  Past .  But well , evidently we should cohabit with it forever , as the religion. I 'don't get the sense of both but anyway it's just my opinion...
But anyway  regardless of the great perspectives, ideologies etc  it has to do basic human needs.
I believed the priority should be   saving other lifes, help them , or at least don't let die , not avoiding this in name of "nationalism , identity ... This rediscovery of such  values look like even selfish to me. Europe is Always been a mixture of races (talking for Italy..it's evident the Norman invasion in a good number of Sicilians for blond hair etc while at same time you can observe Sicilian with dusky skin for the ancient Arabic invasion .. noone cried the scandal though ) , it won't be the 2015 to stop this Normal , physiological ,natural process. the migrations always will accompany the human species , unless every race will live in an ideal condition , such as not force them/us to run away from own  land. Basically unachievable. You emigrated,  now it's reverse now. So what ? Or does it rotate around the Islam ? Well, I don't like definitely  the Christian lobbies present here, so it's not a matter of islam , or matter of religions ( even if I am not a fan of religions..the State Atheism was a good experiment, but it won't work so go on) , if anything it's matter of religious fundamentalism , another waste to be walk off (and even the Christianity has to give us something in its history .. )  , but I don't note the Sharia in France or Germany so I don't get why Islamic ppl should be a similar consequence.
Yes, I am still convinced a humanitarian matter (and probably all us have some  immigrated grandfather from his land ) should be more relevant than continuing to have the Rossi , Johnson, Muller as neighbors . I don't believe my life will change if a respectful Karthikeyan will replace as neighbour a Rossi , besides uncivilized but who cares he's Italian for generations ! , a day.

I love you, man.

Hapless_Hans wrote:I love you, man.

I'm not for one side or the other in this argument but I think this is a middle east problem and should be down to the middle east to fix it. Europe should help out with aid. but if this war was in Europe would we be looking at the middle east to take in the refugees. I don't think we would. the big problem is the middle east will always be at war. for what ever reason they cant live together in peace. these people need help I understand that. but we cant keep picking up the pieces when people in this day and age want to kill each other for something that don't exist. if these people were homeless from a natural disaster then we should all go out of our way to help them as best we can. but a lot of lifes are changed. massive amounts of money spent on fixing a problem that will carry on as long as people follow one god or other. this is 2015 and the world is at war because people have a imaginery friend. crazy.

Grande_Milano wrote:

Don't call me James wrote:At the very least it looks like mostly everyone here is in agreement that a) these refugees do need help and need some place to lead their lives forward so some compassion is shown in this thread and b) that whichever country opens their doors to them, these people need to assimilate themselves into the society and culture that is already present there.

On number 2 we disagree, "racist backward bigots" are saying they need to integrate and recognise values and tradition of the country they live in, opponents say "nah, they can build Saudi Arabia right inside Germany", etc (because thats what multiculturalism is in contrast to "melting pot" and "assimilation")

What? F*ck no.

The proponents of helping the refugees just said they needed help now, and we'll also have to make sure to integrate them later.

The proponents of not helping them made up BS statistics about rape that have no basis in fact, and then tried to distract as hard as they could from the point they were making ("let's let poeple die because they're less important than people that look like me").

And Unique, of course the middle east needs to fix ist, but "helping out" right now sadly means taking in millions of refugees for Europe. Listen, I don't exactly want to take in a million refugees, I just think it would be immoral not to.

I also think the problems with mass migration are grossly exaggarated. They are also grossly underestimated by fractions of the left, but what are you gonna do.

In the end, you can't just let people drown in the mediterranean or let them starve in the streets. Unless you're Sepi, then it's cool, because those people might De-Europe Europe, or whatever. It's hard to find arguments between the buzzwords, if I'm being honest.

Also, I kind of agree with your last sentence. It's ridiculous that millions of people get disenfranchised about basically imaginary problems because their imaginary friends don't get along. But since you can't instantly purge religious fanaticism from millions of people, we'll have to stop whining about the hand we're dealt, and try to roll with it.

Of course if there was a real choice, I would help nobody, and keep all the resources for myself. But there's people in genuine danger, and they need help. As a proper European I've been raised in the spirit of humanism, so I support helping them.
People might choose not to, but they're not humanists. I'm a proponent of Humanism. That's basically it.

Robespierre wrote:I have a socialist vision of the life, so I haven't idea why the nationalism is still considered in 2015.  I just hoped it belonged to a waste of a dark and not really so  far  Past .  But well , evidently we should cohabit with it forever , as the religion. I 'don't get the sense of both but anyway it's just my opinion...
But anyway  regardless of the great perspectives, ideologies etc  it has to do basic human needs.
I believed the priority should be   saving other lifes, help them , or at least don't let die , not avoiding this in name of "nationalism , identity ... This rediscovery of such  values look like even selfish to me. Europe is Always been a mixture of races (talking for Italy..it's evident the Norman invasion in a good number of Sicilians for blond hair etc while at same time you can observe Sicilian with dusky skin for the ancient Arabic invasion .. noone cried the scandal though ) , it won't be the 2015 to stop this Normal , physiological ,natural process. the migrations always will accompany the human species , unless every race will live in an ideal condition , such as not force them/us to run away from own  land. Basically unachievable. You emigrated,  now it's reverse now. So what ? Or does it rotate around the Islam ? Well, I don't like definitely  the Christian lobbies present here, so it's not a matter of islam , or matter of religions ( even if I am not a fan of religions..the State Atheism was a good experiment, but it won't work so go on) , if anything it's matter of religious fundamentalism , another waste to be walk off (and even the Christianity has to give us something in its history .. )  , but I don't note the Sharia in France or Germany so I don't get why Islamic ppl should be a similar consequence.
Yes, I am still convinced a humanitarian matter (and probably all us have some  immigrated grandfather from his land ) should be more relevant than continuing to have the Rossi , Johnson, Muller as neighbors . I don't believe my life will change if a respectful Karthikeyan will replace as neighbour a Rossi , besides uncivilized but who cares he's Italian for generations ! , a day.

Pls show some respect to syntax, I had to mentally restructure all that to understand it.

Im curious as to why you juxtaposed socialism and nationalism?

VivaStPauli wrote:

Grande_Milano wrote:

Don't call me James wrote:At the very least it looks like mostly everyone here is in agreement that a) these refugees do need help and need some place to lead their lives forward so some compassion is shown in this thread and b) that whichever country opens their doors to them, these people need to assimilate themselves into the society and culture that is already present there.

On number 2 we disagree, "racist backward bigots" are saying they need to integrate and recognise values and tradition of the country they live in, opponents say "nah, they can build Saudi Arabia right inside Germany", etc (because thats what multiculturalism is in contrast to "melting pot" and "assimilation")

What? F*ck no.

The proponents of helping the refugees just said they needed help now, and we'll also have to make sure to integrate them later.

The proponents of not helping them made up BS statistics about rape that have no basis in fact, and then tried to distract as hard as they could from the point they were making ("let's let poeple die because they're less important than people that look like me").

And Unique, of course the middle east needs to fix ist, but "helping out" right now sadly means taking in millions of refugees for Europe. Listen, I don't exactly want to take in a million refugees, I just think it would be immoral not to.

I also think the problems with mass migration are grossly exaggarated. They are also grossly underestimated by fractions of the left, but what are you gonna do.

In the end, you can't just let people drown in the mediterranean or let them starve in the streets. Unless you're Sepi, then it's cool, because those people might De-Europe Europe, or whatever. It's hard to find arguments between the buzzwords, if I'm being honest.

Also, I kind of agree with your last sentence. It's ridiculous that millions of people get disenfranchised about basically imaginary problems because their imaginary friends don't get along. But since you can't instantly purge religious fanaticism from millions of people, we'll have to stop whining about the hand we're dealt, and try to roll with it.

Of course if there was a real choice, I would help nobody, and keep all the resources for myself. But there's people in genuine danger, and they need help. As a proper European I've been raised in the spirit of humanism, so I support helping them.
People might choose not to, but they're not humanists. I'm a proponent of Humanism. That's basically it.

I agree they need help mate. but we are nothing more than a band aid. and a very expensive band aid at that. I am of the opinion that a an ounce of prevention is better than a tonne of cure. the problems in the middle east will only get worst. when does it get to the point where we cant do any more. all we are doing it putting water on the fire. the people of the middle east have to stop starting fires in the first place. islam will never see peace. I would never tell people what they can or cant beleave in. but Europe cant keep picking up the pieces because the middle east is hell bent on killing each other. its not fair on the people of Europe. its not our fault  the muslim world want to kill each other. that's why I think the middle east should deal with this problem. its easy for them to make war and let the rest of the world  clean up.

Have you some alert when does anyone talk about religion ?
It reminds me Maradona whenever he is  chased by Italian finance police .
I hope the syntax is legit now.

Robespierre wrote: Have you some alert when does anyone talk about religion ?
It reminds me Maradona whenever he is  chased by Italian finance police .
I hope the syntax is legit now.

what is the problems in the middle east if its not down to religion.

futbol wrote:

RealGunner wrote:

futbol wrote:

Hijabs should actually be forbidden in any civilized, modern country. Unless they are worn within religious facilties. What is it that a hijab is symbolizing? Covering women's hair so all the evil men surrounding them don't get all randy? Great idea of mankind.

Wait, now people can't wear what they want just because you don't like it?

Is this communist Germany?

No. Because it's a sign of supression of women. Do you think this is okay? If not, why not? Just some "clothes".



Just about a month ago I've personally wittnessed a woman in that sort of thing collapsing on the street. We had a record summer with up to 40°C (104° F) and it coincided with Ramadan where she apparently didn't drink anything and was walking around in that thing. But hey, look at me, I'm such an educated and open minded guy and I totally tolerate that without questioning.

And yes, it's communist Germany. You can live from the welfare system for an unlimited amount of time if you wish to and you can live realtively well. Full medical service + housing costs + almost € 400 money every month per person. As a student I don't have much more and I live from that nicely. Sounds pretty communist to me.

Felllaa, don't talk about niqab/burqa. Talk about Hijab. The former, I can understand why it can be a security issue at places and hence the ban on it. But to ban hijab, worn by women with their own choice is ridiculous. There are families which force women to cover up as M99 said and that's obviously wrong. But if a woman/man is wearing something out of his own choice then it's really none of your business whether it sits right with you or not.


@Grande_Milano

No one in here who is defending the aid for refugee is asking countries to bend over and lose their identity (whatever that means). I don't even know why religion is important in a discussion focusing on refugee aid who are NOT all muslims.

Robespierre wrote:I have a socialist vision of the life, so I haven't idea why the nationalism is still considered in 2015.  I just hoped it belonged to a waste of a dark and not really so  far  Past .  But well , evidently we should cohabit with it forever , as the religion. I 'don't get the sense of both but anyway it's just my opinion...
But anyway  regardless of the great perspectives, ideologies etc  it has to do basic human needs.
I believed the priority should be   saving other lifes, help them , or at least don't let die , not avoiding this in name of "nationalism , identity ... This rediscovery of such  values look like even selfish to me. Europe is Always been a mixture of races (talking for Italy..it's evident the Norman invasion in a good number of Sicilians for blond hair etc while at same time you can observe Sicilian with dusky skin for the ancient Arabic invasion .. noone cried the scandal though ) , it won't be the 2015 to stop this Normal , physiological ,natural process. the migrations always will accompany the human species , unless every race will live in an ideal condition , such as not force them/us to run away from own  land. Basically unachievable. You emigrated,  now it's reverse now. So what ? Or does it rotate around the Islam ? Well, I don't like definitely  the Christian lobbies present here, so it's not a matter of islam , or matter of religions ( even if I am not a fan of religions..the State Atheism was a good experiment, but it won't work so go on) , if anything it's matter of religious fundamentalism , another waste to be walk off (and even the Christianity has to give us something in its history .. )  , but I don't note the Sharia in France or Germany so I don't get why Islamic ppl should be a similar consequence.
Yes, I am still convinced a humanitarian matter (and probably all us have some  immigrated grandfather from his land ) should be more relevant than continuing to have the Rossi , Johnson, Muller as neighbors . I don't believe my life will change if a respectful Karthikeyan will replace as neighbour a Rossi , besides uncivilized but who cares he's Italian for generations ! , a day.

Brilliant post

So very many of the discussion points and assertions made in this thread remind me of those made by certain groups in the US in Interwar period. I find it quite striking and equally intriguing that these topics have suddenly come to the fore in Europe and am watching intently to see how they play out. So far, so similar.

Nationalism can be a positive influence, in the right circumstances. Like so many things though, what country someone is from (or what sex/gender/race/sexual orientation/religion they are) should never EVER be considered as more important than the fact that they're human. Categorization and organization is basically a staple of human reasoning and consideration of the world, but the divisions should never supersede the connections.

RedOranje wrote:Nationalism can be a positive influence, in the right circumstances. Like so many things though, what country someone is from (or what sex/gender/race/sexual orientation/religion they are) should never EVER be considered as more important than the fact that they're human. Categorization and organization is basically a staple of human reasoning and consideration of the world, but the divisions should never supersede the connections.

you make a good point. but the religion of islam does put its self above others.

Every religion, to some degree, "puts itself above others." That's the nature of religion, it insists upon itself. Any ideology that claims to hold the One True Truth must do so to justify its very existence, else it admits to a contradiction in its very core. Islam is no different from any other Abrahamic Religion in that aspect, nor any other religion which claims knowledge and understanding of universal truths, omnipotent or omniscient beings, or guides to "salvation."

RedOranje wrote:Every religion, to some degree, "puts itself above others." That's the nature of religion, it insists upon itself. Any ideology that claims to hold the One True Truth must do so to justify its very existence, else it admits to a contradiction in its very core. Islam is no different from any other Abrahamic Religion in that aspect, nor any other religion which claims knowledge and understanding of universal truths, omnipotent or omniscient beings, or guides to "salvation."

again I agree. and in the history of man kind religion has led man to do some very bad things. but as of today 2015 islam is turning the world upside down. would it be fair to say that islam is now the biggest religious problem in the world today. I don't follow any religion so I have no bias. but in the last 20 years you would have to say islam is a problem.

And prior to that you could make a very convincing argument that nationalism was the major ideological instigator of disaster and crisis, and before that Christianity (either by sect, or as a whole) stood at that point.  You cannot isolate the contemporary without considering past context and the influences that led us here.  Atrocities and violence are no new discovery, nor is Islam somehow worse than previous drivers of violence and hate toward others deemed "different" and therefore "inferior."  

Listen closely; it's the same damned song just with slightly different lyrics.

RedOranje wrote:And prior to that you could make a very convincing argument that nationalism was the major ideological instigator of disaster and crisis, and before that Christianity (either by sect, or as a whole) stood at that point.  You cannot isolate the contemporary without considering past context and the influences that led us here.  Atrocities and violence are no new discovery, nor is Islam somehow worse than previous drivers of violence and hate toward others deemed "different" and therefore "inferior."  

Listen closely; it's the same damned song just with slightly different lyrics.

my point is all religion has done some really bad things in the name of one god or other. like I said I have no bias to any religion because I don't follow any. but in the year of 2015 islam is a problem imo. all over the world crimes are being commited in the name of islam.

Unique wrote:

Robespierre wrote: Have you some alert when does anyone talk about religion ?
It reminds me Maradona whenever he is  chased by Italian finance police .
I hope the syntax is legit now.

what is the problems in the middle east if its not down to religion.

Constant political destabilization and imaginary borders drawn in the process of Western intervention.

futbol wrote:

M99 wrote:

VendettaRed07 wrote:

What exactly are you trying to say here? It's a bunch of men, women and children boarding a train. Does this somehow disgust you ?...

Of course it does. Don't you see they are clearly Muslim, wearing their disgusting Hijabs and all that?

Hijabs should actually be forbidden in any civilized, modern country. Unless they are worn within religious facilties. What is it that a hijab is symbolizing? Covering women's hair so all the evil men surrounding them don't get all randy? Great idea of mankind.

people can wear anything they want
you aint shit to tell anyone buddy. if you dont agree with it suck it up (:
once again, this is 2015. times are a' changing

Robespierre wrote:I have a socialist vision of the life, so I haven't idea why the nationalism is still considered in 2015.  I just hoped it belonged to a waste of a dark and not really so  far  Past .  But well , evidently we should cohabit with it forever , as the religion. I 'don't get the sense of both but anyway it's just my opinion...
But anyway  regardless of the great perspectives, ideologies etc  it has to do basic human needs.
I believed the priority should be   saving other lifes, help them , or at least don't let die , not avoiding this in name of "nationalism , identity ... This rediscovery of such  values look like even selfish to me. Europe is Always been a mixture of races (talking for Italy..it's evident the Norman invasion in a good number of Sicilians for blond hair etc while at same time you can observe Sicilian with dusky skin for the ancient Arabic invasion .. noone cried the scandal though ) , it won't be the 2015 to stop this Normal , physiological ,natural process. the migrations always will accompany the human species , unless every race will live in an ideal condition , such as not force them/us to run away from own  land. Basically unachievable. You emigrated,  now it's reverse now. So what ? Or does it rotate around the Islam ? Well, I don't like definitely  the Christian lobbies present here, so it's not a matter of islam , or matter of religions ( even if I am not a fan of religions..the State Atheism was a good experiment, but it won't work so go on) , if anything it's matter of religious fundamentalism , another waste to be walk off (and even the Christianity has to give us something in its history .. )  , but I don't note the Sharia in France or Germany so I don't get why Islamic ppl should be a similar consequence.
Yes, I am still convinced a humanitarian matter (and probably all us have some  immigrated grandfather from his land ) should be more relevant than continuing to have the Rossi , Johnson, Muller as neighbors . I don't believe my life will change if a respectful Karthikeyan will replace as neighbour a Rossi , besides uncivilized but who cares he's Italian for generations ! , a day.

I thnk it sound really ideal and fancy to write such things on forum but as RO already said you need some of these elements to run the society smoothly and thereby people can have their normal lives. You need nationalisim, you need a concept called country, state, city even religion. Remember they are just tools of lives. Some people do need religion to feel satisfied and peaceful.

You definitely need structure, rules so that people can have their own space but still respects someone elses space.

Religion was not a bad thing, we humans needed it initially when we all/culture started developing before few hundred years ago. The problem with religion is, many of the things are outdated now (in general about all the religions.)

We also need to preserve the elements of particular region or particular society or a particular group. But I am not saying, immigration should not be allowed or it is not good. Immigration is happening from thousands of years and it will keep on happening. But you need to accommodate everything into a strctured manner so that people living in the country A wont feel insecure/unsafe because of people coming from country B. You cant allow everyone just to come in as they like, otherwise you dont want people from Country A to hurt the people from country B.

See in the end, it just depends on if you are bending/modifying/redefining the rules in constructive manner or destructive one !

Now i'm not going to pretend i'm an empathetic person because i'm honestly really not but obviously what's happening for a vast majority of these people seeking asylum sucks. And in the perfect world (Well almost perfect as in the perfect one this wouldn't be happening in the first place) we would use our infinite land, infinite wealth and infinite resources to sort these people out and ensure they can live a decent life by 21st century standards, but that's obviously not possible.

Really the only way I can see situations like this being sorted out is at the source. But again, we have finite resources and a limited amount of people willing to risk their lives for so-so money and all for foriegn people in distant lands. And yes, some of the people you end up bending over backwards to accommodate will come over with ill intentions, of course many won't. But either side arguing that

A) All of the migrants are out to take over and crazy shit to that effect

B) Everybody coming over wants to do their absolute best to integrate into the country they find themselves in, and be pillars of the community

Are both horribly wrong. A lot of the debate here and elsewhere again boils down to clashes in beliefs/religions and I don't know if I've ever shared my own religious POV here but I pretty much despise it in general. It has caused so much unnecessary hell on Earth and people just can't handle all of these religious ideas without wanting to go against anybody who differs in belief. I really can not stand it.


If you look at religions they offer up a lot of great advice on how to live your life in a positive way but the problem with all of these outdated man made texts is that people, particularly uneducated people and/or people with their own little personal agenda's interpret the texts differently and then you have your pockets of extremism and all of that pathetic bullshit. So I guess my problem is not with religion, but how a LOT of human beings who are pretty damn stupid get a hold of all these ideas and end up trying to force it down everybody elses throats. And why, partially because 'the ancient book I read told me that the way we're supposed to live is different from your ancient book' *bleep* stupid.

So yeah when you have a lot of people who's lives are deeply routed in a religion different to the people who's countries they're coming to, you're inevitably going to have a lot of tension and the situations will escalate and escalate and escalate.


There is no magic solution, some people look at it from the pure economic view I.E taking in hundreds of thousands of people who will undoubtedly be a burden on society and give very little back is pointless. And others look at the unrealistic humanitarian view where everybody should hold hands, make flower necklaces and everybody should help everybody else. It's impossible folks.

All you can do is find a middle ground, if it's sustainable, and you can handle it, you as a country should take in a reasonable amount of genuine asylum seekers. But it should never be to the point where you end up hurting your economy and compromising your own national security by allowing waves of unknowns to march in unchecked. My problem is that you see a lot of do gooders who know nothing of the real world bitching and moaning and preaching about how nobody is doing enough, yet they themselves would certainly not give up their homes, their own comfortable lives and their belongings to help a family of strangers.

@ Unique: You are generalizing. You can't blame Islam or Muslims for the deeds of few who are Muslims or doing something in name of Islam. There's a strong radicalism/fanaticism among Buddhists in Sri Lanka and Myanmar but it would be stupid to lay it one Buddhism. There's Hindu extremism (to extent penalizing shops that sells beef) in India but that can't be the responsibility of Hinduism or nearly a billion Hindus. Would you blame Christians or Christianity for the madness of Bush Era? After all, he (and his cronies) were ever so eager to be identified with Christianity.

Fact is all those people have just one religion, insanity.

@Helmer: Do we really need Nationalism to have a structure, and a structure that actually accommodates diversity??? I don't agree. We need the structure of a country or state. Without that the governing is impossible and without government, ensuring rights isn't possible. Now each country comes with an identity and culture. But patriotism is far cry from Nationalism.

Nationalism actually goes against the concept of state. It either propagates cutting out its own niche and thus break up of the existing structure or it propagates taking space occupied by other groups and thus changing the existing identity.

the west has a big role to play in this. im sorry but none of this would have happened without cia/mossad intervention.

am i villianizing the west? not at all. i hate sharia law, and government should never be based on religion. id much rather live in israel or the usa then any arab country bar morroco really. but the fact is that the miliary industrial complex + far right hypocritical warmongers like bush and trump can and will continue to cause these kinds of problems. islam is just a small part of the puzzle.

heres my problem with nationalism; the underlying reasons for it are often racially or ethnically inspired. screw that. sepi and futbol are jumping around in this thread but the fact of the matter is if say, refugees came from a nordic or germanic country, its all good. but bring in the arabs and all hell breaks loose. get over it, humans as a race are all more or less the same.