NationStates Jolt Archive

And the amount increased eight percentage point since last year. I guess this is a natural way of real French people reacting against their country turning into an extension of Africa and Middle East by mass immigration and high minority birthrates. With 10% of the overall population and 25% of people 25- already muslim (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/01/26/do2601.xml), They already got huge banlieues that looks like 3rd world countries and which keep growing. One other thing is that violance and crime related to racism is also dropping, it's a good that people are expressing their worries in a civilized manner.


One in three French 'are racist'

One third of French people say they are at least somewhat racist, an opinion poll suggests.

The figure shows an eight percentage point rise in those who said they were racist in a similar poll last year.

The survey of 1,011 people was carried out by the CSA polling institute for the National Consultative Commission for Human Rights.

The commission said the poll pointed to socio-economic unease and suggested racism is gaining acceptability.

France last year saw weeks of rioting in impoverished suburbs that was partly linked to the anger many youths from immigrant families felt at alleged racial discrimination.

The survey was conducted in late November 2005 - just after the riots had subsided.

'Drop in crime'

Respondents were given five options for describing their personal stance on race, ranging from "somewhat racist" and "a bit racist" to "not racist at all" and "don't want to say".

More than three in every 10 said they were "a bit racist" or "somewhat racist".

Only 32% of people said they would notify police of racist behaviour they witnessed, compared to 50% in the previous year.

"Despite the efforts deployed to fight racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia there is still a long way to go," the president of the commission, Joel Thoraval, said.

According to the report, anti-racist sentiment has grown weaker since last year.

However, the report noted that the number of racist and anti-Semitic crimes had also fallen in 2005.

France's justice minister, Pascal Clement, said last week that the number of convictions for racist and anti-Semitic crimes had risen 43% in 2005.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4832238.stm

Edit: Of course, the real percentage of racism in France might be higher since the poll asked them if they are "somewhat racist" and "a bit racist" or "not racist at all" or if they "don't want to say". Due to PC environment, many "racists" might have choosed "dont want to say" option (who's more likely to pick this option?). The racism rates in France were much higher in 1997 afterall when non respondents were exculeded:

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/966/racismbh3.jpg

:D Nice...nothing new though!

At least they're honest.

:D Nothing new though!

The amount should be higher for the real french. I dont think those foreigners pretending to be French would be included in that one third...

The amount should be higher for the real french. I dont think those foreigners pretending to be French would be included in that one third...
Yeah, and anyway...I doubt many of the Frenchies would admit to being "racist" even if they really were...so it could be higher.

At least they have the saving grace of living in France.

Yeah, and anyway...I doubt many of the Frenchies would admit to being "racist" even if they really were...so it could be higher.

Racist or not, an overwheming majority supports tighter restrictions on immigration...

When I first saw this... months ago... I was quite worried. I'm still worried, but less so as I'm positive that the French are simply being more honest, not more Racist than Americans. (I bring up Americans for comparison as I have the most experience with them, what with being one and all)

Note that the first half of the poll was taken during the riots.

EDIT:
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/AntiSemi/8081.htm
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1749952

Racist or not, an overwheming majority supports tighter restrictions on immigration...
And wisely so.

Somehow this seems like an improvement.

Psh. It'll blow over in a couple generations once everybody is french again. :)

France also doesn't acknowledge ethnic french so their census doesn't count race. I don't blame them being mad, I would be to.

Psh. It'll blow over in a couple generations once everybody is french again. :)
Yep, Le Pen will definitely see to that. :p

France also doesn't acknowledge ethnic french so their census doesn't count race. I don't blame them being mad, I would be to.
Yes well whatever the census shows, Europe is going to have to give this entire immigration issue (and, ex necessitate, the welfare state) a good hard look once more.

Yes well whatever the census shows, Europe is going to have to give this entire immigration issue (and, ex necessitate, the welfare state) a good hard look once more.


Yes you will, how much does your history and culture mean to you?

Yes you will, how much does your history and culture mean to you?
Personally, it means an awful lot. I wanna see what the rest of Europe is gonna say though.

Yeah, and that figure would be about the same in any other country, I imagine, whether they're honest about it or not.

Is it racism or nationism?

i will say ,more ,they are living under class opression,crawling under leanings and other financial constructions,beeing brainwashed under de moto, arbeit mach ekonomie ,hating the "others",helping the poor and the rich,in an ever republican hypocracy leading me to remember two French"s quote :

The whole dream of democracy(as it is) is to elevate the proletarian to the level of the imbecility of the bourgeois

"Le despotisme qui se propage sous le gouvernement de plusieurs, le despotisme sénatorial est aussi terrible que le sceptre des rois, puisqu'il tend à enchaîner le peuple, sans qu'il s'en doute, puisqu'il se trouve avili et subjugué par les lois qu'il est censé dicter lui-même".

They are the essence of what is going on
Racism or not

Yes you will, how much does your history and culture mean to you?It means a lot. History should not be forgotten, but it shouldn't be used as an argument to keep culture static.

Most of the French in Paris were racists, but it was along the lines of "If you aren't truly French (i.e., white and born in France speaking French), you are dogshit to be scraped off of my shoes."

Most of the French in Paris were racists, but it was along the lines of "If you aren't truly French (i.e., white and born in France speaking French), you are dogshit to be scraped off of my shoes."No they weren't :)

And the amount increased eight percentage point since last year. I guess this is a natural way of real French people reacting against their country turning into an extension of Africa and Middle East by mass immigration and high minority birthrates. With 10% of the overall population and 25% of people 25- already muslim (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/01/26/do2601.xml), They already got huge banlieues that looks like 3rd world countries and which keep growing. One other thing is that violance and crime related to racism is also dropping, it's a good that people are expressing their worries in a civilized manner.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4832238.stm


Wait... so 10% of the French population are Muslim, and only 30% of the entire population are "racist"? That would work out as 3% of Muslims on France being racist. I think that's a brilliant success for integration, don't you? :D

Why do I think Nordligmark had to go change his kex when he saw that there's racist assholes elsewhere in Europe?

Of course, if the poll was taken just in Paris the result would have probably been something like 90% view themselves as racist.
Including against all other non-Parisian French.

Wait... so 10% of the French population are Muslim, and only 30% of the entire population are "racist"? That would work out as 3% of Muslims on France being racist. I think that's a brilliant success for integration, don't you? :D

Well Cabra West, we actually dont know the exact percentage. If you read the article there are three categories that were asked in the poll; racist, not racist and dont want to say. The article didnt mention the percentage of not racists. It could be something like 10%, who knows. Most of the french, along with most of the Europeans were racist afterall in 1997. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_113_en.pdf - page 2)

Edit: I couldnt find any newer version of this type of Eurobarometer. I guess the idiots in Brussels were so ashamed that they needed to hide another truth...

Why do I think Nordligmark had to go change his kex when he saw that there's racist assholes elsewhere in Europe?

kex?
Oh and I dont think assholes are like that. They are usually for one thing.

Wait... so 10% of the French population are Muslim, and only 30% of the entire population are "racist"? That would work out as 3% of Muslims on France being racist. I think that's a brilliant success for integration, don't you? :D

Integration is neither needed nor wanted.

Assimilation, on the double, Or Else.

I don't think this one in three is confined to the French. Everyone is slightly racist, and I would definitely think that one in three people who aren't French are racist.

Integration is neither needed nor wanted.

Assimilation, on the double, Or Else.

Speak for yourself only. Integration is very much wanted from my part, and I wouldn't be in favour of assimilation, ever.

Well Cabra West, we actually dont know the exact percentage. If you read the article there are three categories that were asked in the poll; racist, not racist and dont want to say. The article didnt mention the percentage of not racists. It could be something like 10%, who knows. Most of the french, along with most of the Europeans were racist afterall in 1997. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_113_en.pdf - page 2)

Edit: I couldnt find any newer version of this type of Eurobarometer. I guess the idiots in Brussels were so ashamed that they needed to hide another truth...

Meh... that link crashed my browser, thanks.
What percentage is "most of the French"? If it was a majority, it must have dropped by at least 20% in the last 9 years.... good for them :)

Speak for yourself only. Integration is very much wanted from my part, and I wouldn't be in favour of assimilation, ever.

And there is your dilemma - in a nutshell.

You cant have integration without cooperation.
And folks like me totally refuse cooperation with those who are too divergent.
Therefore: integration is impossible, and questing for it is pointless.

Good on them, having finally realised the desirability of nationalism.

And there is your dilemma - in a nutshell.

You cant have integration without cooperation.
And folks like me totally refuse cooperation with those who are too divergent.
Therefore: integration is impossible, and questing for it is pointless.

So you're telling me that I should completely assimilate to Irish society, should immediately start binge drinking, listen to the worst kind of pop music available, dress in flimsy pastel rags and should in fact have been pregnant at age 14?

I'll have a very hard time doing that... and frankly, I don't see any reason why I should.

Good on them, having finally realised the desirability of nationalism.

I think the French never lacked nationalistic feelings....

Meh... that link crashed my browser, thanks.
What percentage is "most of the French"? If it was a majority, it must have dropped by at least 20% in the last 9 years.... good for them :)

It's pdf. A window saying "you want to update?" probably popped up in the back and you didnt see it and waited and it eventually crashed. Anyway, since you are one of the nicest people on this forums I'm going to tell the percentages here: 75% of the French are racist while 25% arent. 34% of EU15 arent racist and the rest are in 1997.
Anyways, your assumptions might be correct. However you cant be sure. They migh have just picked "Dont want to say" option for PCness.

I think the French never lacked nationalistic feelings....

Well indeed, If onyl the same were true for dear old England.

So you're telling me that I should completely assimilate to Irish society, should immediately start binge drinking, listen to the worst kind of pop music available, dress in flimsy pastel rags and should in fact have been pregnant at age 14?

I'll have a very hard time doing that... and frankly, I don't see any reason why I should.


Depends in whether you want cooperation and thus access to integration.

Can't say I was born British - nor white,
but I work very hard at being a good Britsh Citizen,
and won't do cooperation with those don't do assimilation.

It's pdf. A window saying "you want to update?" probably popped up in the back and you didnt see it and waited and it eventually crashed. Anyway, since you are one of the nicest people on this forums I'm going to tell the percentages here: 75% of the French are racist while 25% arent. 34% of EU15 arent racist and the rest are in 1997.
Anyways, your assumptions might be correct. However you cant be sure. They migh have just picked "Dont want to say" option for PCness.

No such window. Maybe that would only happen if I used MS IE.

The French? PC? I find that a bit hard to believe ;)
and I would be curious to the definition of "racist" in that survey... what is considered racist, and what isn't? Or did they ask people straight out if they considered themselves racist? If that's the case the French would have a serious problem with their self-image.

Depends in whether you want cooperation and thus access to integration.

Can't say I was born British - nor white,
but I work very hard at being a good Britsh Citizen,
and won't do cooperation with those don't do assimilation.

How do you try very hard at being a "good British citizen"? Do you follow official regulations about the exact amount of tea to drink in one day? Do you make sure not to miss a single episoed of Coronation Street and East Enders?
Do you insist on beating up everyone who isn't a ManU fan? Will you try to burn some real Catholics every 5th of November?

You do have me confused there... :confused:

You do have me confused there... :confused:
He doesn't know. That's an absolutely essential part of it - it cannot be defined what exactly a good XYZ is, because it needs to be flexible enough to cover anyone you don't like on any given day.

He doesn't know. That's an absolutely essential part of it - it cannot be defined what exactly a good XYZ is, because it needs to be flexible enough to cover anyone you don't like on any given day.

It's description is also quite irrelevant.
What IS relevant is the vibes it gives to the insiders.

You can't define a sandhill - but you know one when you see one.

How do you try very hard at being a "good British citizen"? Do you follow official regulations about the exact amount of tea to drink in one day? Do you make sure not to miss a single episoed of Coronation Street and East Enders?
Do you insist on beating up everyone who isn't a ManU fan? Will you try to burn some real Catholics every 5th of November?

You do have me confused there... :confused:


Yootopia had a good and long list of multiple-choice questions.

Answered them all. Result: triple-9 pure Oxford-english.

Meanwhile: if you have a problem with simply fitting in and following Irish culture ( such as being highly deferential to the Roman Catholic Church ), then you should not be in Ireland at all.

No such window. Maybe that would only happen if I used MS IE.

The French? PC? I find that a bit hard to believe ;)
and I would be curious to the definition of "racist" in that survey... what is considered racist, and what isn't? Or did they ask people straight out if they considered themselves racist? If that's the case the French would have a serious problem with their self-image.

Oh please all of West is a victim of extreme PCness. As for survey:

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/966/racismbh3.jpg

Yootopia had a good and long list of multiple-choice questions.

Answered them all. Result: triple-9 pure Oxford-english.

Meanwhile: if you have a problem with simply fitting in and following Irish culture ( such as being highly deferential to the Roman Catholic Church ), then you should not be in Ireland at all.

You'll be surprised to hear that even though I'm not Irish and will never be, and even though my views are radically different from those of the Roman Catholic church, I still don't feel out of place in Ireland.

I never felt particularly German either, despite having been born and growing up there...

If you're happy to be a living stereotype, you're of course free to do so. I personally rather be myself....

You'll be surprised to hear that even though I'm not Irish and will never be, and even though my views are radically different from those of the Roman Catholic church, I still don't feel out of place in Ireland.

I never felt particularly German either, despite having been born and growing up there...

If you're happy to be a living stereotype, you're of course free to do so. I personally rather be myself....

Mistake number X you make: what the individual wants is of utter irrelevance. The zygote is merely a tool that gametes use, to quote Bob Heinlein.

i don't blame them.

Mistake number X you make: what the individual wants is of utter irrelevance. The zygote is merely a tool that gametes use, to quote Bob Heinlein.

Great. If it's irrelevant to everybody else, I'll just go on with my life then. :p

Mistake number X you make: what the individual wants is of utter irrelevance. The zygote is merely a tool that gametes use, to quote Bob Heinlein. Uh, are you being sarcastic?

Uh, are you being sarcastic?

To a limited extent, yes.
Individuals are means, not goals, and I ( obviously ) disagree with Emanuel Kant.

Personally, it means an awful lot. I wanna see what the rest of Europe is gonna say though.
The rest of Europe might just tell all the South Africans to go home...:rolleyes:

Most of the french, along with most of the Europeans were racist afterall in 1997. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_113_en.pdf - page 2)
I quite like the fact that the people who said they were racist are also those who are afraid for their future, usually for economic reasons.

Which throws the whole integration vs assimilation argument out the window (page 8 indicates that both integration and an unidentified nothing containing both "they can never fit in" and "they don't have to change to fit in" were clearly favoured to assimilation), as well as the notion that people with different cultures can't coexist and work together quite peacefully and effectively (which is the case in many places, eg Canada, Australia and indeed Ireland).
The reasons people are being silly are internal, not external. They have problems with their own lives and identities, and that's why they blame others (supported by both the higher age and lower education of those who call themselves racist).

Individuals are means, not goals...
Biology seems to disagree with you.

Humans, as indeed almost all animals, are very individualistic. Their primary function is to survive, survive long enough to produce as much offspring as possible.
This primary function is not a utilitarian one. It is not about "let's help my fellow man to produce as much offspring as they can" or about "let's increase the total number of offspring being produced", it's about you. You as an individual, competing to produce offspring.

We think for ourselves. We eat for ourselves, we sleep for ourselves, indeed, we feel for ourselves. You cannot think for of me (reason in particular is an individual feat), you cannot eat for me, you cannot sleep for me, you cannot feel for of me (silly English grammar!). We are seperate organisms.

Are humans total individualists? Obviously not. Like many animals, we lived in small communities, forming close relationships (individual to individual) with each other. Eventually these relationships, and the achievements of individuals within the group, morphed into the notion of "society".

Whatever it has been defined as since, that is what society is, and always will remain: The sum total of the relationships we have with each other and our interpretations of them.

A little xenophobia never hurt anyone!

Ha! Us Brits can handle our mass immigration without any such racism.

....

*cough*

SNIP


Biology seems to disagree with you.

Humans, as indeed almost all animals, are very individualistic. Their primary function is to survive, survive long enough to produce as much offspring as possible.
This primary function is not a utilitarian one. It is not about "let's help my fellow man to produce as much offspring as they can" or about "let's increase the total number of offspring being produced", it's about you. You as an individual, competing to produce offspring.

We think for ourselves. We eat for ourselves, we sleep for ourselves, indeed, we feel for ourselves. You cannot think for of me (reason in particular is an individual feat), you cannot eat for me, you cannot sleep for me, you cannot feel for of me (silly English grammar!). We are seperate organisms.

Are humans total individualists? Obviously not. Like many animals, we lived in small communities, forming close relationships (individual to individual) with each other. Eventually these relationships, and the achievements of individuals within the group, morphed into the notion of "society".

Whatever it has been defined as since, that is what society is, and always will remain: The sum total of the relationships we have with each other and our interpretations of them.

Biology disagrees with you. We're herd-animals. And rather predatorial at that...

We're herd-animals.
I covered that.

It doesn't mean that 1/3rd of french hate Black people or Arabs or Chinamen it just means that 1/3rd of Frogs have a dislike hate if you will of a different race, it doesn't mean it is a uniformed hate at all!

I covered that.


Covered it. That was all. You didn't cover the part where we just CANT stop from chaining ourselves to higher-uppers ( no matter how daft or evil they might be ) from Atilla the H. to Adolf H. Our humanity comes out most significantly ( at its worst ) in our lust for war, bloodshed, and cruelty. We're wolves - not cows.

We're well and truely descendants of Ate, Eris, and Nemesis.

Covered it. That was all. You didn't cover the part where we just CANT stop from chaining ourselves to higher-uppers ( no matter how daft or evil they might be ) from Atilla the H. to Adolf H.
But how does any of this matter to my point? We're still seperate beings, even if we at times have the same goals and work together to achieve them.
Most people throughout history never chained themselves to anyone but their close friends and family.
Only in more recent history (ie Industrial Revolution and onwards) has nationalism appeared at all (before that it was just personal relationships, or threat of punishment), and therefore it can't possibly be biological.

Our humanity comes out most significantly ( at its worst ) in our lust for war, bloodshed, and cruelty. We're wolves - not cows.
That's an empty sentence. Since we can't measure "humanity" (we can't even define it) you're just mumbling to yourself. Lay off the booze! ;)

But how does any of this matter to my point? We're still seperate beings, even if we at times have the same goals and work together to achieve them.
Most people throughout history never chained themselves to anyone but their close friends and family.
Only in more recent history (ie Industrial Revolution and onwards) has nationalism appeared at all (before that it was just personal relationships, or threat of punishment), and therefore it can't possibly be biological.


That's an empty sentence. Since we can't measure "humanity" (we can't even define it) you're just mumbling to yourself. Lay off the booze! ;)


Shaddap. I don't drink nor do drugs, you sick bag of suck.

Shaddap. I don't drink nor do drugs, you sick bag of suck.
http://www.dooya.schildersmilies.de/braveheart.gif

Ha! Us Brits can handle our mass immigration without any such racism.

....

*cough*

Indeed.......

The fatalistic fallacy is to do what you think your nature forces you to do.

Only in more recent history (ie Industrial Revolution and onwards) has nationalism appeared at all (before that it was just personal relationships, or threat of punishment), and therefore it can't possibly be biological.


That's simply not true. Nationlism was around long before the industrial revolution. Ask the Greeks and the Persians. Or the Macedonians. Or the Romans.

Or look at England under Queen Elizabeth I, the rise in naitonalism can clearly be seen in Shakespere's works.

One in three French 'are racist'
That's a pretty racist thing to say.

Nationlism was around long before the industrial revolution. Ask the Greeks and the Persians. Or the Macedonians. Or the Romans.
I'd argue that the Persians and Macedonians were primarily bound by personal relationships as part of a very real top-down sort of structure.
The construction of an abstract sort of community you could call a nation...I guess you could have a point with some Greek cities and the Roman Empire. I'm no historian, I can't tell you all the details of how a Roman's "nationalism" would differ from that exhibited by a 19th or 20th century European.

But even if they were the same, you could still find some very practical considerations and real events that would have caused these sentiments to appear, so my point doesn't change: Nationalism is not natural behaviour.

Or look at England under Queen Elizabeth I, the rise in naitonalism can clearly be seen in Shakespere's works.
Hmmm, I guess I missed out on most of Shakespeare, not having been in an English-speaking school system for most of my school years. But in the little that I did read (ie Macbeth mainly), I think it would take a lot of spin to refer to nationalism in the actual form that makes people die for a "nation" rather than a person.

Which has little if anything to do with the actual thread topic, so I'll stop here. :p

So much for Europe as a bastion of liberalism.

So much for Europe as a bastion of liberalism.

Yep, a single country in Europe with 30% "somewhat racist" inhabitants turns the whole continent into q quagmire of conservatism... :rolleyes:

So much for Europe as a bastion of liberalism.
It's never really been one. Unless you mean it in the American sense, in which case you shouldn't because you're just confusing people.

However, there are real liberal parties (http://wahlkampf.fdp.de/files/363/fdp-chances_of_freedom.pdf) in Europe, and in Germany they actually do quite well these days (they are the biggest opposition party).

I'd argue that the Persians and Macedonians were primarily bound by personal relationships as part of a very real top-down sort of structure.
The construction of an abstract sort of community you could call a nation...I guess you could have a point with some Greek cities and the Roman Empire. I'm no historian, I can't tell you all the details of how a Roman's "nationalism" would differ from that exhibited by a 19th or 20th century European.

But even if they were the same, you could still find some very practical considerations and real events that would have caused these sentiments to appear, so my point doesn't change: Nationalism is not natural behaviour.


I don't know if it is natural in the sense that it is a biological imperative. But I don't think you can always assume it is the product of practical considerations or real events either. I think people just like to associate themselves with arbitrary groups to make them feel like they belong to something bigger than themselves. Sometimes that group is along national lines.

You could say the same about religion.

Yep, a single country in Europe with 30% "somewhat racist" inhabitants turns the whole continent into q quagmire of conservatism... :rolleyes:

I was actually commenting on the majority of opinions from the mix of Europeans on the boards regarding this, but I suppose I should also rephrase and wonder what the hell Bill O'Rielly was on (He's not Rush or we'd know) when he called France too liberal.

It's never really been one. Unless you mean it in the American sense, in which case you shouldn't because you're just confusing people.

Is there another reasonable term for the word I was looking for? Pseudo-Socialist? Left-libertarian? Hell if I know. Liberal (Not Neo-liberal) appears to be the most accurate term.

I quite like the fact that the people who said they were racist are also those who are afraid for their future, usually for economic reasons.

Which throws the whole integration vs assimilation argument out the window (page 8 indicates that both integration and an unidentified nothing containing both "they can never fit in" and "they don't have to change to fit in" were clearly favoured to assimilation), as well as the notion that people with different cultures can't coexist and work together quite peacefully and effectively (which is the case in many places, eg Canada, Australia and indeed Ireland).
The reasons people are being silly are internal, not external. They have problems with their own lives and identities, and that's why they blame others (supported by both the higher age and lower education of those who call themselves racist).


About problems with lives and identities, same can be said about the opposing side, lets destroy our country and culture side. The reason those people are being stupid are internal, not external. They hate themselves so they want people like themselves to be "phased out". Or they are too stupid that they cant see the consequences of what's happening. Maybe they are too ignorant to know whats going on. All reasons of those kinda people being idiotic might be internal.
As for economical reasons, Denmark and UK are much richer than Portugal and they got a much lower unemployment rate then Portugal but their racism rates are higher. So there goes your "argument" again. Belgium's education system is much better than Portugal and again Belguim is much more racist then Portugal. And there goes your education level argument. As for people being old, I guess it's because old people remember the good old times and hence they can compare what was and what is and of course they choose the better one.
To summarize NL, your baseless claims were just that....baseless claims...
Oh and finally...people on my side (who were an overwhelming majority in 1997 and werent listened by politicians) were right afterall, werent they? Those minorities did cause problems. Like bombings in London or riots in France or killing of Pim Fortyn in the Netherlands...

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/7549/immigrationle5.jpg

Is there another reasonable term for the word I was looking for? Pseudo-Socialist? Left-libertarian? Hell if I know. Liberal (Not Neo-liberal) appears to be the most accurate term.

Being liberal in its correct sense is to be for a laissez faire economy. Americans are using the term so incorrectly that they are actually meaning the opposite thing since "liberals" are pro welfare, universal healthcare, pro-green (which restricts bussinesses and hence un-liberal) etc...

About problems with lives and identities, same can be said about the opposing side, lets destroy our country and culture side. The reason those people are being stupid are internal, not external. They hate themselves so they want people like themselves to be "phased out". Or they are too stupid that they cant see the consequences of what's happening. Maybe they are too ignorant to know whats going on. All reasons of those kinda people being idiotic might be internal.
I'm one of that side. And I don't think that people like me need to be phased out at all, quite the opposite.

I don't think you ever understood me: I don't mind German people. I don't mind German culture or anything like it. But the fact of the matter is that what we know as German culture today is just a little snapshot out of a continuously changing set of relationships and interpretations. We can't freeze the picture at any given time or place...cultures are always changing.

And secondly: I'm first and foremost a citizen of the world. I don't belong to any given place nearly as strong as you seem to think you do. I go where I want, when I want. I work where I want, when I want. I don't deal with borders, I deal with people.

As for economical reasons, Denmark and UK are much richer than Portugal and they got a much lower unemployment rate then Portugal but their racism rates are higher. So there goes your "argument" again.
You don't read much, do you. Your own source answers your claim...it's not actual unemployment, it's fear of unemployment.

Belgium's education system is much better than Portugal and again Belguim is much more racist then Portugal. And there goes your education level argument. As for people being old, I guess it's because old people remember the good old times and hence they can compare what was and what is and of course they choose the better one.
There are graphs to support my argument in there. This particular response of yours is pretty pathetic.
We have data on the individuals (look at page 4) but you prefer to talk about countries, as if you can deflect the uncomfortable truth.

Oh and finally...people on my side (who were an overwhelming majority in 1997 and werent listened by politicians) were right afterall, werent they? Those minorities did cause problems.
As far as politics is concerned, you weren't even around in '97, dude.

That the growing minorities would pose questions and problems for many European societies was obvious. Everyone would have told you as much, even then.

We only differ in the responses.

So you're telling me that I should completely assimilate to Irish society, should immediately start binge drinking, listen to the worst kind of pop music available, dress in flimsy pastel rags and should in fact have been pregnant at age 14?
Those are the Mexicans.

It's scary how Spiegel always comes up with on-topic articles. I think their reporters are lurking NSG for inspiration.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,430912,00.html
The Race against Neo-Nazis

In under a week, a prominent neo-Nazi lawyer could be the proud new owner of a hotel in downtown Delmenhorst. The city, though, is now trying to raise the funds to buy it first. Citizens are worried the hotel may become a center of racist research.

Additional info (in German):
http://www.fuer-delmenhorst.de/
http://lexikon.idgr.de/r/r_i/rieger-juergen/rieger-juergen.php

Meanwhile: if you have a problem with simply fitting in and following Irish culture ( such as being highly deferential to the Roman Catholic Church ), then you should not be in Ireland at all.

Bollocks, I know many Irish people who don't fit into your stereotypical and laughably innaccurate view on what it means to be "Irish."

(And I'll play ball, I mean "indigenous" Irish people)

I may have already stated that I don't hold France responsible for this. Given how polluted the French nation is with Maghrebains and other such colonials, genuine French citizens have every right to actively endorse, and seek to re-assert, traditional France.

I may have already stated that I don't hold France responsible for this. Given how polluted the French nation is with Maghrebains and other such colonials, genuine French citizens have every right to actively endorse, and seek to re-assert, traditional France.

What the hell is traditional France, exactly? Le Ancien Regime, perhaps?

What the hell is traditional France, exactly? Le Ancien Regime, perhaps?

Oh how very original.:rolleyes:

Perhaps it may just be pre-post-colonial immigration France.

Oh how very original.:rolleyes:

Perhaps it may just be pre-post-colonial immigration France.

Roll your eyes all you want. Please, define traditional France. In fact, please define any so-called 'Traditional' society.

Bollocks, I know many Irish people who don't fit into your stereotypical and laughably innaccurate view on what it means to be "Irish."

(And I'll play ball, I mean "indigenous" Irish people)

Oh, I'm sure there are elements who are not exactly p'tit-bourgeois.
But that's irrelevant: traditional, conservative, that's the only acceptable standard.
Whatever does not conform is quite beyond the Pale.

Roll your eyes all you want. Please, define traditional France. In fact, please define any so-called 'Traditional' society.

P'tit-bourgeois, conformistic, small-town pious, culturally-conservative.

That's easy as ABC.

Oh, I'm sure there are elements who are not exactly p'tit-bourgeois.
But that's irrelevant: traditional, conservative, that's the only acceptable standard.
Whatever does not conform is quite beyond the Pale.
Have you ever actually been to Ireland?

Because it is sounding like you are, to be frank, speaking from your arse.

P'tit-bourgeois, conformistic, small-town pious, culturally-conseervative.

That's easy as ABC.

So Iran is a great place, then?

So Iran is a great place, then?

*sneers* not as long as ayatollahs are more revered that Popes.

Have you ever actually been to Ireland?

Because it is sounding like you are, to be frank, speaking from your arse.

To be frank, you sound like you're speaking with a leftist mouth that needs deporting to North Korea.

Oh, I'm sure there are elements who are not exactly p'tit-bourgeois.
But that's irrelevant: traditional, conservative, that's the only acceptable standard.

Tough shit that not many agree with you then.

Whatever does not conform is quite beyond the Pale.

Ha ha :rolleyes:

*sneers* not as long as ayatollahs are more revered that Popes.

But it's traditional and conservative...

To be frank, you sound like you're speaking with a leftist mouth that needs deporting to North Korea.

Rather a leftist then a fanticist

P'tit-bourgeois, conformistic, small-town pious, culturally-conservative.

That's easy as ABC.

Well I suppose you fit in in Yorshire.

Fortunately I'm none of those things

To be frank, you sound like you're speaking with a leftist mouth that needs deporting to North Korea.
So, that's a "No, I've never been to Ireland but I feel the need to comment on it regardless... thereby making myself look foolish" then?

Ok. At least I know where your "argument" was stemming from.

Well I suppose you fit in in Yorshire.

Fortunately I'm none of those things

I might call that racism, but frankly, I consider that of very little concern -
provided it does not go to the point where one tries to change the colour of other people's skin with a molotov-cocktail.

I might call that racism, but frankly, I consider that of very little concern -
provided it does not go to the point where one tries to change the colour of other people's skin with a molotov-cocktail.

you forgot blood.

But 55% of the people in Belgium is quite to very racist.:eek:

But 55% of the people in Belgium is quite to very racist.:eek:
well they are not "french"

well they are not "french"
And then it isn't fun to bash them?:p

And then it isn't fun to bash them?:p
no,;)

I might call that racism, but frankly, I consider that of very little concern -

Yorkshirish (?) isn't a race.

But 55% of the people in Belgium is quite to very racist.:eek:

Isnt it ironic? Considering Belgium is one of EU's most eu-federalist nations, not to mention the EU capital is Brussels...