Neo-Nazis Conduct Violent Attack on Anti-Racism Protesters in Sweden

[RicardoZ]

No, that's what emigrants do. Refugees flee to a safe place. Your sarcasm was misplaced.

So then you don't care if they get out of the line of fire, you just don't want them to have any social benefits to help them start a new life in a "safe place".

[Djuntas]

I'm always surprised at how often refugees 'fleeing persecution' manage to cross through many safe havens until they reach the country with the best welfare systems.

Its not like they don't have internet, even inn North Africa countries like Somalia. They know where to go.

[Deleted]

It was coming, it was coming.

Only one solution to go, you know where that vote goes? :O

[Deleted]

So then you don't care if they get out of the line of fire, you just don't want them to have any social benefits to help them start a new life in a "safe place".

What I believe is that a refugee fleeing persecution should go to the nearest safe country. That's it. If the nearest country is full then go to the next one, etc.

[Endus]

The thread is about Neo-Nazis attacking anti-racism posters.

It isn't about Muslims and why "we" should hate "them".

Islamophobia isn't acceptable, so cut it out, folks.

[Austilias]

[COLOR=#008080]Islamophobia isn't acceptable, so cut it out, folks.

Islamaphobia is a silly term and for obvious reasons.

[Tastyfish]

Sweden sounds like pre-1960 US. People desperately trying to hold on to their supremist ways.

Makes me appreciate how functionally disfunctional we are here.

[Cybran]

It isn't about Muslims

Right wing groups are gaining ground, because radical immigrant groups are a real threat. They preach sexism and violence.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...p-9006322.html

That evening, on Channel 4 News I took on Omar Ali of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies. He said segregation at universities was no different from what happens in synagogues and mosques and that a liberal society should accommodate such “choices”. I rejoined that prayer houses were not state-funded public spaces and that some choices ought never to be accommodated.

The following morning, Nicola Dandridge, UUK’s CEO was on the Today programme. Presenter Justin Webb, in a probing, yet reasonable way, put to her the arguments against male-female separatism. She rejected them all, alight with self-righteousness. I threw a glass of water at the radio. The glass broke and I picked up the pieces, almost weeping with rage. Such white liberals from left to right need to grow up. By Friday UUK had shed its overconfidence and seemed to be wavering. I predict the guidance will be binned.

This Talibanisation of British universities has got to stop. Now I think it might be.

The two topics go hand in hand.

[Voidism]

Right wing groups are gaining ground, because radical immigrant groups are a real threat. They preach sexism and violence.

Which is hilarious considering right wingers thoughts on the matter of gender.

[Deleted]

Neo-Nazis are same scum with any fundamentalist religious or ideological people no matter the group. If you're using violence, threat or bullying to oppress other people's opinions, freedoms or rights, you're piece of shit that needs to be thrown in the jail. If you support this kind of violent actions you're no better than those violent religious nuts you're fighting against.

[FAILoZOFF]

Which is hilarious considering right wingers thoughts on the matter of gender.

that should give you something to think about
not tho mention whole right wing vs left wing war is so full of sht, specially considering that there are people with "mixed" wievs.
what i find hilarious is that most of what media calls "far right" groups/organisations etc, have not only socialistic wievs on economy and hate capitalism or free marked to be exact but also hate religion, probably even more than left "wingers" (many of them would not mind killing priests etc), which would make them of course actually "far left" wing as the believe in 2 main things that are used to distinguish between left and right.

[Deleted]

For hundreds of years people have been living in their land, building a functional society with it's own unique culture and good living standard. But now people from other countries are pouring in, because their countries are a mess, and they also want to live a nice life. And that's fine - we can totally understand them.

But if those people from third countries keep coming, and continue to reproduce at much higher rates than original inhibitants, those that build that wonderful country everyone suddenly wants to live in will eventually become a minority.

Does a nation have a right to fight against becoming a minotry in its own country?

Do you have a right to keep a random stranger out of your house?

Do we need to owerflow, say, Norway with people from western Africa? Will Norway continue to function that well in that case - or will it turn into an average african country?

I'd like to ask you to answer these questions, please.

[Deleted]

But if those people from third countries keep coming, and continue to reproduce at much higher rates than original inhibitants, those that build that wonderful country everyone suddenly wants to live in will eventually become a minority.

It's quite clear that a worse socio-economic situation breeds more kids, it's not something biologically programmed.

Does a nation have a right to fight against becoming a minotry in their own country?

Very unclear question, with the nation, do you mean a state or a group? Does minority entail racial or cultural minority? Violent or peacefully?

Do you have a right to keep a random stranger out of your house?

Except it's a random stranger we invited because his house sucks.

Do we need to owerflow, say, Norway with people from western Africa? Will Norway continue to function that well in that case - or will it turn into an average african country?

There's a big difference between the history of Norway and most African countries and why they're in the state they are in today. And it's not because of any cultural reasons.

- - - Updated - - -

that should give you something to think about
not tho mention whole right wing vs left wing war is so full of sht, specially considering that there are people with "mixed" wievs.
what i find hilarious is that most of what media calls "far right" groups/organisations etc, have not only socialistic wievs on economy and hate capitalism or free marked to be exact but also hate religion, probably even more than left "wingers" (many of them would not mind killing priests etc), which would make them of course actually "far left" wing as the believe in 2 main things that are used to distinguish between left and right.

I see more rightists being for religion, either because they're religious or because the religion in question is a part of the country's traditions.

[Deleted]

It doesn't matter why they have more kids, the statistical fact is that they do. No one can disprove that.

So, if current trends continue, certain nations might become a minorty in their own countries.

Does a nation have a right to fight against becoming a minority in its own country?

Does wanting to preserve your people and your culture make you a hateful racist?

Nation clearly means a group of people that share race, culture and history, no idea why you think "nation" could mean a state. Answer the question, please.

History of our examplary country, which is Norway, is indeed different than history of african countries. That doesn't have anything to do with my question, though. Does Norway needs to be owerflown by Africans because their histories are different?

Are you saying that Norway is a rich country with a very high standard of living because it exploits Africa? Evil norwegian agents, white as snow of course, working undercover deep in Africa, supporting spread of disease, warlords and attacks on white farmers (attacks which, by the way, won't ever be covered by western media)?

[Deleted]

It doesn't matter why they have more kids, the statistical fact is that they do. No one can disprove that.

Well, yes, it does matter why they have more kids, because if it's socio-economic situations that causes an increase in the amount of children per family, then it's very logical how it'll end up. Hint: Ethnic Norwegians aren't going to be a minority in a long while.

Does a nation have a right to fight against becoming a minority on their own country?

Nation clearly means a group of people, no idea why you think "nation" could mean a state. Answer the question, please.

A nation's state? I don't know how that can be more clear.

History of our examplary country, which is Norway, is indeed different than history of african countries. That doesn't have anything to do with my question, though. Does Norway needs to be owerflown by Africans because their histories are different?

Are you saying that Norway is a rich country with a very high standard of living because it exploits Africa?

Now you're clearly just being intentionally obtuse. History matters a lot in order to understand how a country's future will look like.

[Deleted]

Sorry, so far I've just seen excuses from your side, no real answers. Especially to the question I bolded out - it seems that this simple question makes you uncomfortable, since you've been eluding it for the last two posts.

Norwegians and other white nations won't become a minority in their country for a long while, true. But again, that's not important here - what's important are current trends. Which are low birth rates on one side and high birth rates + immigration on another side. If this continues, they result is obvious.

You are saying that immigrants have higher birth rates because they're poor. Fine, so what solution do you propose? They have already been given an option to live in successful countries, they can benefit from every social system those countries have in place (schools, healthcare, welfare ...). Is there anything more that could be done to help with their economic status, so they perhaps one day will start having less children, even though there's little guarantee for that, anyway?
Perhaps some form of affirmitive action? Just brainstormin' here.

To get back to the house example I gave about letting a stranger to live in your house. Given your liberal views I think you're just an awesome person, but are you actually being a part of the change? I'm guessing you have some kind of place to live at, but surely there are also some homeless people around your parts. Why not let them sleep at your place? Do you hate them, perhaps?

It's freezeing out there.

[Endus]

Does a nation have a right to fight against becoming a minotry in its own country?

This is a question with no semantic meaning.

It isn't the nation fighting this fight. Nor is that nation in any way becoming a minority in itself. It's a ridiculous statement.

What you seem to be trying to say is "do white people have a right to fight against minorities?" And the answer to that is easy. No, because that's racist.

Do you have a right to keep a random stranger out of your house?

They aren't "random strangers". They're legal immigrants, immigrants who've attained citizenship, and immigrants who've claimed refugee status, all of which are ways your nation invites them in.

So it's like you're at a friend's party, and you see all these Muslims and brown people showing up, with invites, and you think he shouldn't let them in because they're not "us". Which, again, is blatantly racist.

[Deleted]

Norwegians and other white nations won't become a minority in their country for a long while, true. But again, that's not important here - what's important are current trends. Which are low birth rates on one side and high birth rates + immigration on another side. If this continues, they result is obvious.

If we get less white kids, so what?

You are saying that immigrants have higher birth rates because they're poor. Fine, so what solution do you propose? They have already been given an option to live in successful countries, they can benefit from every social system those countries have in place (schools, healthcare, welfare ...). Is there anything more that could be done to help with their economic status, so they perhaps one day will start having less children, even though there's little guarantee for that, anyway?
Perhaps some form of affirmitive action? Just brainstormin' here.

No social system guarantees them a job. More money spent on creating jobs and small courses I'd say in Norway's case.

To get back to the house example I gave about letting a stranger to live in your house. Given your liberal views I think you're just an awesome person, but are you actually being a part of the change? I'm guessing you have some kind of place to live at, but surely there are also some homeless people around your parts. Why not let them sleep at your place? Do you hate them, perhaps?

I like how this suddenly isn't an analogy anymore.

I'd probably consider helping homeless people if I got money from all of Sweden to fund my cause. Unfortunately, taxes don't go solely to me.

[Zython]

Islamaphobia is a silly term and for obvious reasons.

Uh, there are people hear fearing a Muslim takeover from a population that makes up <10% of their country (or believe that said takeover has already happened). If that's not irrational fear, than what is it?

- - - Updated - - -

So, if current trends continue, certain nations might become a minorty in their own countries.

Only country I can see this happening to in this century is the U.S. Again, your countries are over 80% white. I'd hate to see you in the U.S., or you might have a heart attack.

Does a nation have a right to fight against becoming a minority in its own country?

Why is it that people from other origins can't be a part of your country? This isn't colonialization.

The real question is why is it OK for other races to be a minority in their own country, but not you? That seems pretty damned arrogant to me.

Does wanting to preserve your people and your culture make you a hateful racist?

This comes with the presumption that other races want to destroy your culture, which screams projection to me.

Are you saying that Norway is a rich country with a very high standard of living because it exploits Africa?

Yes, historically, and to a lesser extent today. Hey, you said history was important, right?

Evil norwegian agents, white as snow of course, working undercover deep in Africa, supporting spread of disease, warlords and attacks on white farmers (attacks which, by the way, won't ever be covered by western media)?

Again, history. Learn it.

[Zangeiti]

Kind of sounds like the KKK vs The West burrow baptist church vs. The Crips. No lie this is a actual video on youtube by VICE.