Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Europol: Ireland hit by surge of ‘right-wing extremism’
Options
Comments
-
Eric Cartman wrote: »Deportations provide a politically expedient option. Closing borders to begin with provides a politically expedient option
Not everyone is a bitter little racist who can't stand the sight of people with darker skin. The continued abject failure of the National (Socialist Workers) Party pretty clearly demonstrates that the vast, vast majority of the electorate don't share your opinions.
No matter how many times you lot try to convince yourselves, you're nothing more than an extremely vocal minority.You're assuming that all people who have serious concerns about immigration are against gay marriage and abortion, and are "angry little gammons" - you see, that sort of idiotic stereotyping will get you nowhere. I'm an atheist, liberal, feminist woman [...]
Going by your post history I highly doubt you're atheist, liberal, or even, to be totally bloody honest, a woman.
Don't know many 'liberal' people who spout racist memes like "doctors and engineers" or ****e on about "wokes". To say nothing of stuff like this:It's interesting to see the penny drop for many people in Ireland now, about how globalisation works.
Twitter is ablaze now with lefties complaining about the "far-right" and their opposition to Keelings hiring this flight of Bulgarian worker to pick strawberries. What are they saying, that importing cheap labour at the height of a pandemic and lockdown is somehow "left wing"?
They literally don't know left from right.
Oh and shall we talk about this:It really is astonishing. With increased automation wiping out a lot of unskilled and semi-skilled jobs in the near future, how on earth does this benefit our economy, creaking infrastructure and welfare bill? I'm absolutely baffled by it. I used to think people talking about "globalists" and their plans to divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe were in tinfoil hat territory but now I'm not so sure.
Interesting use of "globalists" there because we both know that's a rather obvious by-word for "Jews". Don't know many liberals who like to promulgate antisemitic conspiracy theories like that, either.
If you're going to try to pretend to be left-wing, you should probably make a better effort of it. This is so obvious it's insulting.0 -
Those arson attacks were right wingers of course, but why are we putting asylum seekers into the the poorest and remotest parts of Ireland and not in richer parts of Dublin where they could have access to better resources?
Often thought the same.
Why is there no centers in rathmines Rathgar ballsbridge etc ?0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »Not everyone is a bitter little racist who can't stand the sight of people with darker skin. The continued abject failure of the National (Socialist Workers) Party pretty clearly demonstrates that the vast, vast majority of the electorate don't share your opinions.
No matter how many times you lot try to convince yourselves, you're nothing more than an extremely vocal minority.
Going by your post history I highly doubt you're atheist, liberal, or even, to be totally bloody honest, a woman.
Don't know many 'liberal' people who spout racist memes like "doctors and engineers" or ****e on about "wokes". To say nothing of stuff like this:
Oh and shall we talk about this:
Interesting use of "globalists" there because we both know that's a rather obvious by-word for "Jews". Don't know many liberals who like to promulgate antisemitic conspiracy theories like that, either.
If you're going to try to pretend to be left-wing, you should probably make a better effort of it. This is so obvious it's insulting.
I think your problem is that you like to build people up to be a bogeyman that you can then argue against. I've never heard the term globalist being used in reference to Jewish people. And btw, if you want liberalism and anti-semitism, check out the labour party. Only yesterday a prominent corbynite sacked over it.
I too, am socially liberal, and believe that having too many people from areas of the World were ideas like gay rights and women's rights are within the realm of science fiction is not a good idea.
Now no doubt you'll try and paint me as far-right like you have Nesta, but unfortunately for your World-view and own sense of moral superiority, I'm not.0 -
CtevenSrowder wrote: »I think your problem is that you like to build people up to be a bogeyman that you can then argue against. I've never heard the term globalist being used in reference to Jewish people. And btw, if you want liberalism and anti-semitism, check out the labour party. Only yesterday a prominent corbynite sacked over it.
"Globalism"/"globalists" as a by-word for Jews is quite well documented at this point so I really don't care to debate the point with someone who obviously is just unwilling to acknowledge that. For reasons that I think are clear enough.
As is the conspiracy theory that Jews are trying to topple the West. Now, I'm hardly building anyone up into a bogeyman when I'm just linking to posts they've made. It's not my fault that some people are incapable of hiding their true intentions. Nobody ever said most antisemites were that smart, though.I too, am socially liberal, and believe that having too many people from areas of the World were ideas like gay rights and women's rights are within the realm of science fiction is not a good idea.
And how do you feel about our own home-grown types who believe such things? Because in my experience, racists don't tend to just be racist. As a gay man myself, I don't consider such people my friends because they invariably call people like me "degnerates".Now no doubt you'll try and paint me as far-right like you have Nesta, but unfortunately for your World-view and own sense of moral superiority, I'm not.
You really need to get some help for that persecution complex. You seem desperate for me to say something I've never said.
Besides, I haven't looked through your post history so I don't know if you've been spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories, anyway. c:0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »
It's a term that's commonly used in academia https://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicSearch?Query=globalism&acc=off&wc=on&fc=off&group=none. By your standards any academic that uses the term is antisemitic. You people are seriously warped, you try and turn completely valid terms into something that has a negative connotation just so that you can scream racism.“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”-― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov0 -
Advertisement
-
Its always the right who ruins countries economically.
Look at the UK...brexit is a disaster. Look at trump...do people really want that ..i mean are their Irish people THAT stupid to think that looks like good idea?0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,161 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59089
True enough. TBH I read "globalists" and think "hmmm where is this going then?". Though like so many loan words from across the pond too many Irish ape them as a shorthand without actually understanding that meaning, or believing in that bollocks. "Elite" can be another one depending on context.BarnardsLoop wrote: »
My personal politics would generally be old stylee liberal. Voted yes to marriage equality and choice, support a welfare state, free education and health, have no issue with LGBT folks or rights* and melatonin levels have no bearing on things in of themselves and no way would I vote for a national party. Oh and the Irish being replaced notion is utter bollocks too. There isn't a single nation in Europe where immigrant populations are anything but a minority and they've been running this multicultural thing for many decades, and their birth rates are way lower than Ireland's. That said I also don't get the horn some seem to have of the Irish ending up a minority and it's Irish people who say it. Some weird self hate ballsology going on. Can you imagine an African or Asian promoting the same idea in their countries? If they did they'd be morons and I think the same of Irish people coming out with that nonsense.
However I would be against this social experiment of western multiculturalism. Why? Because a) it doesn't work out to well, not least for the non indigenous population and works least of all for those who appear most different to the indigenous population. b) I don't believe all cultures are equal or compatible. Some are overall better for societies. Oh and unlike some in Ireland I'd not herald the US of A as a particularly superior culture and mindset. They'd be nowhere near the top in my book. And c) this crazy notion that only White nations and cultures appear to require this multiculturalism to be "correct". I'd have more respect for the multiculturalist position if they were just as gung ho and looked at Tanzania or Taiwan and said what they need to be "correct" is more White people. But they don't. The very suggestion would bring on paroxysms of outrage.
The above would likely have me painted as a "right wing extremist" by some.
*tbh the latter addition of an alphabet of extra letters and the more vocal Trans types(always M to F, F to M it seems just get on with things) gets on my wick.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
It's a term that's commonly used in academia https://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicSearch?Query=globalism&acc=off&wc=on&fc=off&group=none. By your standards any academic that uses the term is antisemitic. You people are seriously warped, you try and turn completely valid terms into something that has a negative connotation just so that you can scream racism.
There's a difference between using 'globalism' as an established economic term and screeching about "globalists" trying to "divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe". The latter of which is quite an old antisemitic conspiracy theory.Since 1996, the term has spread in usage, and is now popular with many other antisemitic organizations. Swedish Neo-Nazis, for example, say that Jews—in what they call the Swedish Zionist Occupied Government—are importing immigrants to "dilute the blood of the white race". The antisemitic website Jew Watch claims that the entire spectrum of Western nations and other countries are being ruled by "Zionist Occupation Governments".
Kind of difficult to claim ignorance or innocence when it's so clearly documented, eh?0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,161 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59089
It's not as if there aren't examples of Socialist countries that are economic basket cases... What ruins a country is any extreme in either direction. Centrism is what works, some centre left, some centre right.ILoveYourVibes wrote: »Its always the right who ruins countries economically.
Look at the UK...brexit is a disaster. Look at trump...do people really want that ..i mean are their Irish people THAT stupid to think that looks like good idea?Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »There's a difference between using 'globalism' as an established economic term and screeching about "globalists" trying to "divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe". The latter of which is quite an old antisemitic conspiracy theory.
I don't see the distinction. If one has a problem with globalism, they'll naturally blame globalists. The same way anti capitalists have a problem with capitalists.“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”-― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov0 -
Advertisement
-
I wonder the same.Beechwoodspark wrote: »Often thought the same.
Why is there no centers in rathmines Rathgar ballsbridge etc ?0 -
ILoveYourVibes wrote: »Its always the right who ruins countries economically.
Look at the UK...brexit is a disaster. Look at trump...do people really want that ..i mean are their Irish people THAT stupid to think that looks like good idea?
What in the world are you taking about? For people who like to state that capitalism is inherently right wing, you seem to ignore that position when it suits you. I'm regularly told that FG & FF are right wing by posters like yourself. The Irish economy was doing well before the virus, as was the American.“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”-― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov0 -
It's not as if there aren't examples of Socialist countries that are economic basket cases... What ruins a country is any extreme in either direction. Centrism is what works, some centre left, some centre right.
Well no.
Socialism even communism can keep a country from going under for at least 80 yrs.
Right wingers can't last 2 yrs with it all going down the crapper. Trump has had just one term!
And there are PLENTY of socialist countries that are not basket cases. Like Denmark. Like Norway, Sweden Germany etc.
Its usually the right wing forces or ideology WITHIN socialist countries that is their undoing.
I mean Russia is actually quite socialist. They have weeks of time off. They get free education. Free healthcare etc. But they have right wing propaganda etc.0 -
I don't see the distinction.
Yes, I'm sure you don't.If one has a problem with globalism, they'll naturally blame globalists. The same way anti capitalists have a problem with capitalists.
But they're not talking about "globalists" 'importing immigrants to "dilute the blood of the white race"', they're talking about "Jews". How much more patently obvious race-baiting do you need to see before you understand the simple concept that one word can have different meanings in different contexts?
Do you think racists only ever say "black people"? That they never use racial epithets to refer to them? No, sorry, I don't believe you're as ignorant as you claim.0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »Yes, I'm sure you don't.
But they're not talking about "globalists" 'importing immigrants to "dilute the blood of the white race"', they're talking about "Jews". How much more patently obvious race-baiting do you need to see before you understand the simple concept that one word can have different meanings in different contexts?
Do you think racists only ever say "black people"? That they never use racial epithets to refer to them? No, sorry, I don't believe you're as ignorant as you claim.
I'm glad that you've mastered the art of mind reading, I might get some lessons of you sometime.“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”-― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov0 -
Not going to engage with the points I raised and the evidence I've presented? Quelle surprise, frankly.0
-
BarnardsLoop wrote: »"Globalism"/"globalists" as a by-word for Jews is quite well documented at this point so I really don't care to debate the point with someone who obviously is just unwilling to acknowledge that.
Quite well documented and you throw up a link to wiki, which goes on to say:Maude Barlow, national chairperson of the Council of Canadians, argues that Strauss has "inflamed, not enlightened" the debate over globalization by making "no distinction between the far right's critique of globalization and that of the global social justice movement", which is premised on "respect for human rights and cultural diversity". She notes that the Council of Canadians has condemned antisemitism, and that it expelled some individuals who tried to organize a David Icke tour under its auspices.[79] John Cavanagh of the International Policy Centre has also criticized Strauss for using unproven allegations of antisemitism to criticize the entire anti-globalization movement, and for failing to research the movement's core beliefs
Even your Haaretz article, which is behind a paywall, acknowledges that the context in which it is used is important:but the problem comes when it’s used in the ‘globalist vs. nationalist’ economic debate
Clearly nuance isn't your strong point.BarnardsLoop wrote: »For reasons that I think are clear enough.
What reasons are these, they aren't at all clear?BarnardsLoop wrote: »As is the conspiracy theory that Jews are trying to topple the West. Now, I'm hardly building anyone up into a bogeyman when I'm just linking to posts they've made. It's not my fault that some people are incapable of hiding their true intentions. Nobody ever said most antisemites were that smart, though.
The OP said not sure, not that they believed that. You always seem to think you can see people's 'true intentions'. And these intentions are never well intentioned. As I said, building up bogeymans, or strawmans if you'd like, to argue against.BarnardsLoop wrote: »And how do you feel about our own home-grown types who believe such things? Because in my experience, racists don't tend to just be racist. As a gay man myself, I don't consider such people my friends because they invariably call people like me "degnerates".
I don't take kindly to them. Thankfully, today, Ireland has few homophobes and people who are opposed to women's rights. The fight for these things had been ongoing since the foundation of the state and we have only recently won these battles. I suggest we limit the number of people coming here who may like to bring us back 80 years.
Also, I don't consider such people my friends either. But these homegrown views are homegrown, they are not imported views from abroad.
Are you referring to yesterday? I had no idea what you were trying to say, which is why I was asking for clarification. You always throw out words terms like 'certain types', 'people like you' or even here, 'reasons that I think are clear enough'. Yet when asked what to clarify you mean, you refuse to do so.BarnardsLoop wrote: »You really need to get some help for that persecution complex. You seem desperate for me to say something I've never said.BarnardsLoop wrote: »Besides, I haven't looked through your post history so I don't know if you've been spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories, anyway. c:
Well I'll save you the time. I haven't.0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »Yes, I'm sure you don't.
But they're not talking about "globalists" 'importing immigrants to "dilute the blood of the white race"', they're talking about "Jews". How much more patently obvious race-baiting do you need to see before you understand the simple concept that one word can have different meanings in different contexts?
Do you think racists only ever say "black people"? That they never use racial epithets to refer to them? No, sorry, I don't believe you're as ignorant as you claim.
Don't agree that Globalism equates to Jews but there are certainly many, many prominent Western Jews who openly advocate and celebrate the displacement of whites in Western nations.0 -
ILoveYourVibes wrote: »Well no.
Socialism even communism can keep a country from going under for at least 80 yrs.
Right wingers can't last 2 yrs with it all going down the crapper. Trump has had just one term!
And there are PLENTY of socialist countries that are not basket cases. Like Denmark. Like Norway, Sweden Germany etc.
Its usually the right wing forces or ideology WITHIN socialist countries that is their undoing.
I mean Russia is actually quite socialist. They have weeks of time off. They get free education. Free healthcare etc. But they have right wing propaganda etc.
None of these countries are socialists. The Danes I know in particular would actively refute the accusation.0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »There's a difference between using 'globalism' as an established economic term and screeching about "globalists" trying to "divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe". The latter of which is quite an old antisemitic conspiracy theory.
The 2 posts you quoted were in relation to economics:It's interesting to see the penny drop for many people in Ireland now, about how globalisation works.
Twitter is ablaze now with lefties complaining about the "far-right" and their opposition to Keelings hiring this flight of Bulgarian worker to pick strawberries. What are they saying, that importing cheap labour at the height of a pandemic and lockdown is somehow "left wing"?
They literally don't know left from right.
Nothing about any kind of replacement or anti-semitic conspiracy theories there and:It really is astonishing. With increased automation wiping out a lot of unskilled and semi-skilled jobs in the near future, how on earth does this benefit our economy, creaking infrastructure and welfare bill? I'm absolutely baffled by it. I used to think people talking about "globalists" and their plans to divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe were in tinfoil hat territory but now I'm not so sure.
Both these comments are in relation to economic policies. Yet, as per, you've built up an anti-semitism bogeyman to fight against.0 -
Advertisement
-
CtevenSrowder wrote: »None of these countries are socialists. The Danes I know in particular would actively refute the accusation.
The Danish PM had to call out this nonsense a few years ago
https://www.vox.com/2015/10/31/9650030/denmark-prime-minister-bernie-sanders“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”-― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov0 -
CtevenSrowder wrote: »Quite well documented and you throw up a link to wiki, which goes on to say:
Even your Haaretz article, which is behind a paywall, acknowledges that the context in which it is used is important:
Clearly nuance isn't your strong point.
Nor yours or you'd understand that someone complaining about "globalists" and "their plans to divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe" couldn't be any more obvious unless they just said "Jews".
Also the key word there is economic; what does "divide and conquer us through mass immigration" have to do with economics?
As they say in the US, don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining. I've seen that language used by unabashed antisemites enough times to recognise it.What reasons are these, they aren't at all clear?
Well if someone won't accept clearly presented evidence then there's not much basis for a discussion. If you show someone a photo of the Earth and they continue to claim it's flat, what's the point?
Is that sufficiently clear for you or do I need to break it down into monosyllabic words?The OP said not sure, not that they believed that. You always seem to think you can see people's 'true intentions'. And these intentions are never well intentioned. As I said, building up bogeymans, or strawmans if you'd like, to argue against.
And of course antisemites never couch their language in reasonable sounding terms to try and persuade other people!
Come off it, you think I'm seeing boogeymen? You're looking for ways to excuse obviously antisemitic rhetoric.I don't take kindly to them. Thankfully, today, Ireland has few homophobes and people who are opposed to women's rights. The fight for these things had been ongoing since the foundation of the state and we have only recently won these battles. I suggest we limit the number of people coming here who may like to bring us back 80 years.
Also, I don't consider such people my friends either. But these homegrown views are homegrown, they are not imported views from abroad.
Yes, exactly. Those views aren't being "imported". Nor is there any basis for the ridiculous notion that somehow they'll become a large enough bloc as to effect the kind of political change you seem to be suggesting will happen here.Are you referring to yesterday? I had no idea what you were trying to say, which is why I was asking for clarification. You always throw out words terms like 'certain types', 'people like you' or even here, 'reasons that I think are clear enough'. Yet when asked what to clarify you mean, you refuse to do so.
Because, as I said yesterday, I'm not the kind of person who can be baited into giving you the kind of reply you're so obviously looking for. Again, obviously, because you so clearly (and bizarrely) want to paint yourself as some kind of victim here.Well I'll save you the time. I haven't.
If you say so.0 -
CtevenSrowder wrote: »The 2 posts you quoted were in relation to economics:
Nothing about any kind of replacement or anti-semitic conspiracy theories there and:
Both these comments are in relation to economic policies. Yet, as per, you've built up an anti-semitism bogeyman to fight against.
Still not seeing that that has to do with "globalists" and some supposed "plans to divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe".
Again, I think you're only seeing what you want to see because the alternative is rather ugly.0 -
Clarence Boddiker wrote: »Don't agree that Globalism equates to Jews but there are certainly many, many prominent Western Jews who openly advocate and celebrate the displacement of whites in Western nations.Since 1996, the term has spread in usage, and is now popular with many other antisemitic organizations. Swedish Neo-Nazis, for example, say that Jews—in what they call the Swedish Zionist Occupied Government—are importing immigrants to "dilute the blood of the white race". The antisemitic website Jew Watch claims that the entire spectrum of Western nations and other countries are being ruled by "Zionist Occupation Governments".
Not even being subtle about it at this point, eh?0 -
About arson attacks.
There was a huge case in Sweden where there was a fire at a mosque.
It was attributed to right-wing people having put the place on fire.
The Minister for Democracy (yes, they have one for that) was on TV saying freedom of religion was at stake.
Everyone was up in arms.
6 months later is was concluded it was a deep fat fryer in their kitchen that had caught fire...
But I'm sure tons of people don't know and still think right-wingers burned down a mosque.0 -
Kind of different when multiple hotels (one attacked twice) that also happened to have been announced were going to be used as housing for asylum seekers happen to be the only ones attacked.
I think I get your point but... it's not really relevant. One incident of the far-right not having been the cause doesn't mean they can't be the cause elsewhere, especially under different circumstances.0 -
Just in case I haven't said it in this thread yet: The Left-Right political spectrum is bull**** and has outlived its usefulness. You can't distil complicated issues down to one of two camps and expect to make everything easy to understand and not abstracted to fcuk.0
-
Clarence Boddiker wrote: »Don't agree that Globalism equates to Jews but there are certainly many, many prominent Western Jews who openly advocate and celebrate the displacement of whites in Western nations.
What relevance is a person being Jewish? Also I'm guessing you're jumping into George Soros conspiracy territory...0 -
BarnardsLoop wrote: »Nor yours or you'd understand that someone complaining about "globalists" and "their plans to divide and conquer us through mass immigration from outside Europe" couldn't be any more obvious unless they just said "Jews".
Also the key word there is economic; what does "divide and conquer us through mass immigration" have to do with economics?
Mass immigration could be seen as an economic policy. There are too many jobs, and not enough people to do them, a government wants to lower the wage level by increasing demand for jobs, the population is too old and a government wants more young people so decided to take in people from abroad. Mass immigration is seen as a key cornerstone of Globalisation.
The divide and conquer comment could mean to usurp are market economies in order to supplant other economic methods instead, such as socialism or communism. It's you whose decided to bring Jews into the discussion. Noone else.BarnardsLoop wrote: »As they say in the US, don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining. I've seen that language used by unabashed antisemites enough times to recognise it.
I couldn't give a bollox what they say in the US. Are you American, or consume a lot of American media? It would explain a lot.BarnardsLoop wrote: »Well if someone won't accept clearly presented evidence then there's not much basis for a discussion. If you show someone a photo of the Earth and they continue to claim it's flat, what's the point?
Is that sufficiently clear for you or do I need to break it down into monosyllabic words?
You haven't given 'clear evidence'. Ok, so far-right groups and people use the term Globalist as an anti-semitic slur. Both many others do not use it in such a way. You've seen the word and instantaneously assumed the poster is an anti-semite. Clearly, you fancy yourself as some sort of mind-reader.BarnardsLoop wrote: »
And of course antisemites never couch their language in reasonable sounding terms to try and persuade other people!
Come off it, you think I'm seeing boogeymen? You're looking for ways to excuse obviously antisemitic rhetoric.
Yes, exactly. Those views aren't being "imported". Nor is there any basis for the ridiculous notion that somehow they'll become a large enough bloc as to effect the kind of political change you seem to be suggesting will happen here.
Ofcourse there is a basis for it. Who 30, 40 years ago would've thought Ireland would be as liberal as it is today? Just because we have moved forwards doesn't mean we can't move back. As recently as 2016 half of British Muslims believed that being gay should be illegal*, that is roughly 1.3 million people. This doesn't include those that believe it should be legal but things like same-sex marriage should be illegal. The number of Muslims in the UK is said to triple by 2050**. 25% of those polled wanted sharia law. I suggest Ireland has a serious think if we won't to go down a similar path that Britain has.BarnardsLoop wrote: »Because, as I said yesterday, I'm not the kind of person who can be baited into giving you the kind of reply you're so obviously looking for. Again, obviously, because you so clearly (and bizarrely) want to paint yourself as some kind of victim here.
If you say so.
Baited? I am asking for clarification. Is what you mean a bannable offence on boards, is that why you won't say what it is that you mean?
Do you even know yourself what you mean?
Why won't you just be open and honest? Truly bizarre.
*https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/british-muslims-strong-sense-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law
**https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/muslim-population-uk-could-triple-13m-following-record-influx/#:~:text=The%20Muslim%20population%20of,2016%20to%2013m%20in%202050.0 -
Advertisement
-
BarnardsLoop wrote: »Not even being subtle about it at this point, eh?
Noel Ignatiev, Historian, formlerly of Harvard University and Author of "How the Irish became white"
"Whiteness is a form of racial oppression, Treason to whiteness is loyalty to Humanity. The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition"
Susan Sontag, writer and philosopher
"The White race is the Cancer of Human history"
Barbara Lerner Spectre, director of the European Institute for Jewish Studies "Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that"0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement