Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
Yesterday at 01:25 PM

News From Syria
December 10, 2024, 09:35 AM

New Britain
December 08, 2024, 10:30 AM

Lights on the way
by akay
December 07, 2024, 09:26 AM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
December 06, 2024, 01:27 PM

Ashes to beads: South Kor...
December 03, 2024, 09:44 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 30, 2024, 08:53 AM

Gaza assault
by zeca
November 27, 2024, 07:13 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 24, 2024, 06:05 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM

Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM

Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America

 (Read 138845 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 26 27 2829 30 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #810 - February 28, 2017, 07:55 AM

    What if their country of origin refuses to provide information about whether or not they've committed crimes or have previous terrorist involvement? Because that's exactly what's been happening.


    And you think they should resort to blanket treatment. What you are suggesting is more or less race profiling because you are asking for a whole ethnic group or race to be punished based on the action of some criminals  that belong to that group. You are really funny

    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #811 - February 28, 2017, 10:48 AM

    And you think they should resort to blanket treatment. What you are suggesting is more or less race profiling because you are asking for a whole ethnic group or race to be punished based on the action of some criminals  that belong to that group. You are really funny



    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #812 - February 28, 2017, 05:03 PM

    *snorts* Whatever Tammy

    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #813 - March 01, 2017, 01:15 AM

    You would think that a mistake on the part of the sponsoring party could be rectified by the university's lawyers. Didn't they have anyone come to meet him? So odd, to just deport instead of fixing the problem.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #814 - March 01, 2017, 06:53 AM

    *snorts* Whatever Tammy


    My name's not Tammy...was that supposed to be a cultural reference and I just don't get it?

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #815 - March 01, 2017, 08:45 AM

    Are you claiming to be unaware of the fact that, of those who traveled to Europe during the crisis, 58% were adult men, 17% were adult women, and 25% were children?



    Do you have a source for that claim?

  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #816 - March 01, 2017, 11:10 AM

    You would think that a mistake on the part of the sponsoring party could be rectified by the university's lawyers.


    Seems like it was.

    Quote
    Didn't they have anyone come to meet him?



    Yes there was a transportation service be it a person from the sponsor or hired company that reported he was a no-show to the university.

    Quote
    So odd, to just deport instead of fixing the problem.


    Denied entry. Although I used deportation by mistake. Deportation is not the same as being denied entry.

    It seems like there was no review process in which objections and checks could be made or this process was rushed. The university would have been contracted by either the agent's choice or by request of the person. The process seems to have been skipped or rushed
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #817 - March 02, 2017, 01:53 AM

    What a mess, and none of it his fault.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #818 - March 02, 2017, 02:31 AM

    What a mess, and none of it his fault.


    I do not think it is unfair to point out responsibility for having a visa in order is upon the person holding it. Not the agent, not the university. He could of gotten a J1 or B1 but didn't. He even know what the J1 was for.

    How he was treated was not his fault but his detainment is as per him admitting payment on the wrong visa type.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #819 - March 02, 2017, 08:07 AM

    This is going to be an extremely long post, one of my 3-5 page essays, but hopefully it will cut to the heart of what I see as the disagreement and how I perceive the entire argument, because I think a lot of people are totally missing my point, which is probably the result of me not articulating my ideas well enough. I'm going to underline the sentences I think are most important to help them stand out from the wall of text.

    I think, fundamentally, everyone in this thread wants the same thing: as much peace and liberty as possible at the cost of as little violence as possible.

    If there was anyone I was to question that specific formulation with regards to, it would be Cato, who appears to be a Social Marxist. Social Marxism is to Marxism as Social Marxism is to Marxism as Social Darwinism is to Darwinian evolution; that is to say, it is a misappropriation of the labels and structures of Marxism to encompass a domain to which they do not apply. That's why when Social Marxists march, they leave graffiti such as "Liberals get the bullet too":


    Although liberals may align with many of the concepts of Marxism as originally spelled out and consistently vote in favor of what would traditionally be seen as "socialist" options, such as a more even distribution of wealth, more socialization of public services such as the health service or increased public transportation, etc., they are not Social Marxists. The goals of Social Marxism do not reflect their opinions and beliefs. Social Marxism, instead of attempting to equalize the distribution of wealth via socializing the means of production, intends to equalize the distribution of power via the means of destroying "cis white hetero capitalist patriarchy", or some variation of that group. Social Marxism is inherently a radical ideology that will only lead to radicalization and by extension, violence. That's why the immediate demand is violence and the only tactic on offer is violence and intimidation.

    I think that what I want, and what most people want, is as much peace and liberty as possible at the cost of as little violence as possible, and what we are arguing about is what qualifies as violence and what violence is justified. To that end, we do not see ourselves as issuing a call to violence.

    • Liberty, in this definition, does not encompass solely what was is able to do with one's body, whether that is sexuality or drugs, working or relaxing, etc,. It encompasses economic freedom (ie do I have the ability to earn a living, and to live on the money I can earn), social freedom (for example, rights to marry or associate freely), and freedom from legislation unduly imposing on one's personal choices. I believe both Democrats and Republicans, as well as most people of most political parties, would agree with some variation of this definition and could explain their political ideology in accordance with it.
    • Peace, in this definition; is to be free from assault, undo or unreasonable fear, and to live in as much safety as is possible in an imperfect world. I would find it intolerable to live in a situation where any subgroup is unduly (ie without it being as the direct result of their personal actions) restrained, whether socially, economically, or in terms of movement.and access to institutions. I would find it similarly intolerable to live in a situation where any subgroup was ignored by law enforcement or was not held to the same legal and ethical standards as the rest of the population as a result of anything other than their own capabilities (eg, I would not hold someone with downs syndrome and the mental capacity of a 5 year old to the standard of not whipping his dick out in public, but that's the result of his capabilities, not of his condition, and I would hold someone with downs syndrome and the mental capacity of a 15 year old to that standard).
    • The definition of violence, in this formulation, is one of the things that we're having a difference of agreement on.

    I don't believe it is an act of violence to deny someone entrance to a country other than the one they hold full and primary citizenship in. What I mean by "full citizenship" is not being a holder of a temporary rite of entry, such as a green card or visa, but of full citizenship comparable to native citizens of the country. What I mean by "primary citizenship" is if, in a situation where a person has full citizenship of more than one country, and one country goes to war or is at imminent risk of going to war with the other, or their internationally recognized government dissolves or is as imminent risk of dissolving, would be the country that the person with the dual citizenship would choose to retain the citizenship of in preference to the other. So if a person (let's call him Ahmed) had dual Iranian and Canadian citizenship and Canada went to war with Iran or Iran's government was toppled by ISIS and Ahmed wished to stay in Canada, I would expect him to give up his Iranian citizenship to maintain his status as a citizen of Canada; if he refused to do so, given no other mitigating circumstances, I would have no problem with Canada sending him to Iran and having him give up his Canadian citizenship.

    I don't see how that could be formulated to be an act of violence. If you disagree, please explain your reasoning. The exception would be people for whom returning them to their nation of origin would be tantamount to extraditing them to a nation in which they had a death sentence or would otherwise be harmed, ie refugees. I believe, based on the evidence I have seen, that the majority of those who have entered Europe from the Middle East and North Africa during recent months are not in that situation and are not refugees. Ergo, returning them to their nations of origin would not be an act of violence. I believe this is also true for the majority of people who have crossed the American border from Latin America illegally.

    I think there should be a path to citizenship for those who were brought to America as children and have integrated into our society, such as the DREAM Act or something similar. I don't believe that children born in America to non-native Americans should be denied American citizenship, because that's unconstitutional, and I don't have a problem with lowering the age at which children can apply for their parents to remain in the US legally from 18 to something like 10 or 13, something that would give the child enough time to receive the American public school education to which they are entitled as citizens while being financially supported by their parents. However, I also don't see the problem with deporting people who came here to have so-called anchor babies to a country where they can raise the child safely, as long as they are citizens of that country and can reasonably be expected to be able to bring their child there. To frame the situation another way, if a woman who was 7 months pregnant were to come here from England, and while she was here she unexpectedly developed complications and had to have labor induced, I would not feel it necessary to remove the child from her custody so that it could be raised in America as an American citizen while she was returned to Great Britain. She could get an American passport and British residency visa for the child, bring the child back to Britain, raise it there, and decide over there whether she wanted to get British citizenship for the child or let the child retain its American citizenship.

    I think that the primary reason why the liberal parties have lost so many elections of late (besides the corruption; but let's be honest, that exists to about equal extents on both sides of the aisle) is that they are appealing to middle class sensibilities, as they have for decades, without noticing that the middle class has shrunk to a size where it is no longer the primary voting bloc, allowing right-wing parties to appeal to poor, working class people, which they have successfully done. The long-term solution is greater wealth equity. The short term solution is distancing themselves from the far left Social Marxists, who are mostly middle class teenagers LARPing as revolutionaries, and spending more time listening to their constituents as opposed to spending time hanging out with their 1% friends and supporters, especially those in the mainstream media.

    The mainstream media is owned by the "haves", staffed and marketed to the "have a little, want more", and entirely out of touch with and critical of the "have nots." It should be owned by the "have a little, want more", staffed by the "have nots", and marketed to and critical of the "haves".

    I don't believe the current surge in right-wing support is due to institutional racism or a desire to return to the policies of the past on the part of the electorate at large. I don't believe that "the white man", "the patriarchy", "heteronormativity" or any variation of that theme is the problem, and I don't believe that the electorate at large is being increasingly galvanized by the idea of white power--I believe they are being increasingly galvanized by poverty, and are going to the only people acknowledging their poverty and offering them hope. I believe that adequately explains why Trump won and why he won a larger percent of the votes from African Americans than any other Republican candidate in decades. I don't believe that the country is getting more unsafe as the result of minorities being inherently violent, and I don't think many people believe that. I do believe an increasing number of people see whites, men, and police as inherently violent and are attempting to curtail the freedom of certain groups as a result, and I consider that a problem.

    I believe the most important thing I or anyone else can do is try to approach questions with rationality and civility, to try to be as charitable towards those with whom one disagrees as possible, to keep one's reactions to other people's actions proportional to the situation, and to not allow emotions to overwhelm one's sense of perspective.

    I hope this has helped clear up my perspective on what I see as the greater issues involved here.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #820 - March 03, 2017, 01:51 AM

    I do not think it is unfair to point out responsibility for having a visa in order is upon the person holding it. Not the agent, not the university. He could of gotten a J1 or B1 but didn't. He even know what the J1 was for.

    How he was treated was not his fault but his detainment is as per him admitting payment on the wrong visa type.


    Oh? I thought the university was responsible for procuring the visa.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #821 - March 03, 2017, 02:12 AM

    The refugees currently entering the US are not refugees from recent months, but refugees from about two or three years ago.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #822 - March 03, 2017, 10:31 AM

    Big LOL

    Hey Tammy,Do you call everyone who doesn't agree with your views on immigration  policies a "Socialist Marxist" .I don't know where I give you the impression that I am Marxist or "Socialist Marxist" which I never was and I have never agree with most of their views. If you were knowledgeable on political philosophy you would have known Mikhail Bakunin(Whose words I have quote below) is a critic of Karl Marx ideas and maybe that would have give you a clue before you blindly call me Social Marxist,Not that I'm offended but rather amused on how you arrived to that conclusion

    Also your arguments on immigration lacks an important context which is "Socio-economic!" Which matters most in this topic but you either seem to be ignorant of it or oblivious to that aspect. Who  knows, Wallahu  Ahlam (assuming there is one). That makes it frustrating enough to engage in argument with you

    And I also generally  disagree on what you think led to the current surge of far right wing and why Trump won.


    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #823 - March 03, 2017, 10:58 AM

    From the standpoint of what you'd want to happen or think should happen. I'm not sure if this is exactly the same as what you'd see as a moral standpoint, and I'm not entirely sure I understand the distinction you're making.


    One moral vs law argument idea is basically there are moral grounds for breaking a law thus the punishment of the law breaking is questionable or immoral outright. For example if one is starving it is justifiable to steal in order survive. Loss of property is the lesser evil than loss of life. If one stops the theft they face moral judgement from the previous justification as if they are preventing a person from avoiding death. This is a simple example.

    A more complex example would involve rights. There are two people involved with this example. One is a taxi driver that has had his job for years. Years of experience with customers of all types in many locations creates perceptions of people. One perception created is due to the taxi driver being robbed in certain area by young black males. Lets say he was robbed 5 times. He was not robbed in other areas nor by other types of people. So this taxi driver is more wary of young black males in one area than any other people. The other person is a young black male. However this person has no criminal record nor criminal intent rather he is a good citizen and a university student. These two people have point of interaction. This interaction is the student is trying to wave down a taxi. From the taxi driver's perception the student falls within a high risk category based on the taxi driver's experience in comparison to other types of customers. The taxi driver decides to ignore the student as he does not wish to take the risk he associated with the student.

    Do you think the taxi driver has a right to deny service based on experience and perceptions?
    Do you think the taxi driver has a right to avoid situations they believe places them in harms way?
    Do you think the student has a right to a service?
    Do you think the student has right not to be profiled? (this is what the perception actually is but profiling is usually from an organization perspective.)
    Do you think one broke the law?
    Who's rights win?

    I think Gal may understand the point I am getting based on my evaluation of what she has post. Correct me if I am wrong.

    Anyone is free to answer these questions and/or to put forward points not covered. However I advise everyone to really think about both scenarios.

    To answer your question I would need to know how long said members have lived in America, when they immigrated, how they did so (parents choice or individual choice), their criminal record, their work history and financial information. There is no one size fits all identification in my opinion. I think those that have positive records outside of crime should be consider as a high priority for citizenship than those that are not. Those that committed crimes it depends on the crime. Major crimes like murder, assault with intent, theft, etc should be deported as they have already committed acts that are damaging to a society. I would also need to know their level of involvement with organized crime. Are they part of a gang or other criminal organization? This plays into intent as they people are willingly becoming involved with the criminal world at a far greater level. For example a drug dealer is more involved with criminal activities than the user.

    So unless people here are willing to come forward with some sort of information I can use to evaluate their character and history the only answer I can provide is in bold. Also consider what I have written about specific people can apply to the larger illegal immigrant issue. I think the issue has come to a point that compromise is in order rather than general amnesty or general deportation. It will not please everyone.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #824 - March 03, 2017, 11:02 AM

    Oh? I thought the university was responsible for procuring the visa.


    It was responsible as in it provided it for him type responsible. He is legally responsible for having his documents in order
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #825 - March 03, 2017, 11:06 AM

    If you were knowledgeable on political philosophy you would have known Mikhail Bakunin(Whose words I have quote below) is a critic of Karl Marx ideas and maybe that would have give you a clue before you blindly call me Social Marxist,Not that I'm offended but rather amused on how you arrived to that conclusion






    Dropping a name does little to establish what views you hold.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #826 - March 03, 2017, 12:07 PM

    Dropping a name does little to establish what views you hold.


    You need to get into some debates with schizo then, for a rollicking good time. Grin

    Miss him. :(


    how fuck works without shit??


    Let's Play Chess!

    harakaat, friend, RIP
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #827 - March 03, 2017, 12:19 PM

    You need to get into some debates with schizo then, for a rollicking good time. Grin

    Miss him. :(



    Me too.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #828 - March 03, 2017, 12:21 PM

    You need to get into some debates with schizo then, for a rollicking good time. Grin

    Miss him. :(




    Did schizo also drop a name as if it explained anything as well?
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #829 - March 03, 2017, 12:48 PM

    Big LOL

    Hey Tammy,Do you call everyone who doesn't agree with your views on immigration  policies a "Socialist Marxist" .I don't know where I give you the impression that I am Marxist or "Socialist Marxist" which I never was and I have never agree with most of their views.



    I still don't know who Tammy is.

    And if you'd read the post, you'd see that Social Marxism is not Marxism:
    Social Marxism is to Marxism as Social Darwinism is to Darwinian evolution; that is to say, it is a misappropriation of the labels and structures of Marxism to encompass a domain to which they do not apply. Social Marxism, instead of attempting to equalize the distribution of wealth via socializing the means of production, intends to equalize the distribution of power via the means of destroying "cis white hetero capitalist patriarchy", or some variation of that group.

    I don't think you're a Marxist. I don't think Social Marxists are Marxists.

    If you were knowledgeable on political philosophy you would have known Mikhail Bakunin(Whose words I have quote below) is a critic of Karl Marx ideas and maybe that would have give you a clue


    He appears to have been an anarchist. Many social marxists are anarchists. Let me give you a list of some people and groups that I believe fall under the general label of "social marxism" as I laid out in the definition I provided above: Bell Hooks, Anita Sarkeesian, Milo Stewart, black bloc protesters (the ones of the past 3 months, not of all time), almost all BLM organizers, Antifa. That's all I can name of the top of my head at almost 6 am but I'm sure if I put more than two minutes of thought or five minutes on youtube into it, I could compose a more complete list.


    Also your arguments on immigration lacks an important context which is "Socio-economic!"


    Oh you mean this context from the third to last paragraph?

    I don't believe the current surge in right-wing support is due to institutional racism or a desire to return to the policies of the past on the part of the electorate at large...and I don't believe that the electorate at large is being increasingly galvanized by the idea of white power--I believe they are being increasingly galvanized by poverty, and are going to the only people acknowledging their poverty and offering them hope.


    And I also generally  disagree on what you think led to the current surge of far right wing and why Trump won.



    You disagree with the socio-economic context (that I supposedly ignored) being the reason?  rofl

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #830 - March 03, 2017, 01:22 PM

    I still don't know who Tammy is.

    And if you'd read the post, you'd see that Social Marxism is not Marxism:
    Social Marxism is to Marxism as Social Darwinism is to Darwinian evolution; that is to say, it is a misappropriation of the labels and structures of Marxism to encompass a domain to which they do not apply. Social Marxism, instead of attempting to equalize the distribution of wealth via socializing the means of production, intends to equalize the distribution of power via the means of destroying "cis white hetero capitalist patriarchy", or some variation of that group.

    I don't think you're a Marxist. I don't think Social Marxists are Marxists.

    He appears to have been an anarchist. Many social marxists are anarchists. Let me give you a list of some people and groups that I believe fall under the general label of "social marxism" as I laid out in the definition I provided above: Bell Hooks, Anita Sarkeesian, Milo Stewart, black bloc protesters (the ones of the past 3 months, not of all time), almost all BLM organizers, Antifa. That's all I can name of the top of my head at almost 6 am but I'm sure if I put more than two minutes of thought or five minutes on youtube into it, I could compose a more complete list.


    There is a huge difference between Anarchists and Social Marxist,Tammy,and I'm not the latter but I'm honoured that you grouped me with the likes of bell hooks and any BLM activists  cool2(another topic where you displayed your naivety and ignorance the other time especially  a part where you make silly comparison between BLM and Black Panthers)

    Quote
    Oh you mean this context from the third to last paragraph?

    I don't believe the current surge in right-wing support is due to institutional racism or a desire to return to the policies of the past on the part of the electorate at large...and I don't believe that the electorate at large is being increasingly galvanized by the idea of white power--I believe they are being increasingly galvanized by poverty, and are going to the only people acknowledging their poverty and offering them hope.

    You disagree with the socio-economic context (that I supposedly ignored) being the reason?  rofl


    That is not socio-economic context you provided rather an unrelated simplistic and naive reasons you gave, silly Grin



     Besides I don't even know why you brought that up to my face when we are talking about immigration /Muslim Ban Which I thought we have let that die by agreeing to disagreeing except you want to bait me into arguing about something else. Hmmm Tammy Roll Eyes

    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #831 - March 03, 2017, 01:56 PM

    There is a huge difference between Anarchists and Social Marxist,Tammy,and I'm not the latter but I'm honoured that you grouped me with the likes of bell hooks and any BLM activists


    And you're still portraying yourself as being confused about why I did? I think you're intentionally misdirecting from my points instead of simply misunderstanding, failing to read, or failing to agree with them.


    (another topic where you displayed your naivety and ignorance the other time especially  a part where you make silly comparison between BLM and Black Panthers)


    I did not equate the two movements, I used two analogies to express similarities in the relationship that the two groups as a whole had to other coeval groups and in particular to the government. This, again, appears to be misdirection.


    That is not socio-economic context you provided rather an unrelated simplistic and naive reasons you gave, silly Grin


    Then please expand on your ideas with regards to the interplay between right wing support, immigration, and poverty. I think I've demonstrated more than enough times my willingness to do just that and to read and consider the responses. You, unfortunately, have offered no similar politesse and have instead preferred to misrepresent my positions and reassert your own without supporting the latter.

    Besides I don't even know why you brought that up to my face when we are talking about immigration /Muslim Ban except you want to bait me into arguing about something else. Hmmm Tammy Roll Eyes


    I explained in some detail what I consider to be the relevance of socio-economics and class conflict to both immigration and the rise of the right. You, in return, asserted that I hadn't taken socio-economics into consideration while formulating my political opinions. I countered that I did and had explained my view on the interplay previously in the thread. You then accused me of attempting to add socio-economics to the discussion as a form of misdirection. This is exactly why I believe you are being intentionally obtuse as opposed to being incorrect or uninformed.

    Tl;dr: that's your face you're screaming at in the mirror, not mine.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Re: Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #832 - March 03, 2017, 02:26 PM

    And you're still portraying yourself as being confused about why I did? I think you're intentionally misdirecting from my points instead of simply misunderstanding, failing to read, or failing to agree with them.


    Yeah I'm confused please lecture me about how there is no distinction between Social Marxism and Anarchism. The almighty knowledgeable one!

    Quote
    I did not equate the two movements, I used two analogies to express similarities in the relationship that the two groups as a whole had to other coeval groups and in particular to the government. This, again, appears to be misdirection.


    I don't argue with people that employ  semantic arguments to defend themselves  but if that's your style then I will keep that in mind. Types like you don't fool me with that nonsense

     
    Quote
    Then please expand on your ideas with regards to the interplay between right wing support, immigration, and poverty. I think I've demonstrated more than enough times my willingness to do just that and to read and consider the responses. You, unfortunately, have offered no similar politesse and have instead preferred to misrepresent my positions and reassert your own without supporting the latter.


    No,you haven't. What happened was that I ask Bogart about Muslim ban then you just swooped in with your long winded ass opinion and bringing up about Germany mass sexual assault in relation to Muslim ban hence a different argument about it ensue which I thought we ended up agreeing to disagreeing but then you came back about me being a social Marxist and whatnot. Now you are accusing me of misrepresenting your positions. Lol, you are seriously a funny person.



    Quote
    I explained in some detail what I consider to be the relevance of socio-economics and class conflict to both immigration and the rise of the right. You, in return, asserted that I hadn't taken socio-economics into consideration while formulating my political opinions. I countered that I did and had explained my view on the interplay previously in the thread. You then accused me of attempting to add socio-economics to the discussion as a form of misdirection. This is exactly why I believe you are being intentionally obtuse as opposed to being incorrect or uninformed.

    Tl;dr: that's your face you're screaming at in the mirror, not mine.


    But you didn't, that is the problem. The funny thing is that you are accusing me of the things you are doing like misdirection of discussion or whatever and I believe you are deliberately trying to bait me into an unrelated argument. Let's keep talking in circles if that's what keeps your edge on


    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #833 - March 03, 2017, 05:11 PM

    [...]
    If there was anyone I was to question that specific formulation with regards to, it would be Cato, who appears to be a Social Marxist. Social Marxism is to Marxism as Social Marxism is to Marxism as Social Darwinism is to Darwinian evolution; that is to say, it is a misappropriation of the labels and structures of Marxism to encompass a domain to which they do not apply.
    [...]
    Although liberals may align with many of the concepts of Marxism as originally spelled out and consistently vote in favor of what would traditionally be seen as "socialist" options, such as a more even distribution of wealth, more socialization of public services such as the health service or increased public transportation, etc., they are not Social Marxists. The goals of Social Marxism do not reflect their opinions and beliefs. Social Marxism, instead of attempting to equalize the distribution of wealth via socializing the means of production, intends to equalize the distribution of power via the means of destroying "cis white hetero capitalist patriarchy", or some variation of that group.
    [...]

    [...]
    Do you call everyone who doesn't agree with your views on immigration  polici a "Socialist Marxist" .I don't know where I give you the impression that I am Marxist or "Socialist Marxist" which I never was and I have never agree with most of their views. If you were knowledgeable on political philosophy you would have known Mikhail Bakunin(Whose words I have quote below) is a critic of Karl Marx ideas and maybe that would have give you a clue before you blindly call me Social Marxist,Not that I'm offended but rather amused on how you arrived to that conclusion
    [...]

    Dropping a name does little to establish what views you hold.

    Actually I think in this case it does give a good idea of what views Cato holds, and which I think for the most part I'd agree with. I did consider replying to Gal on this yesterday but left it on the basis that Cato is perfectly capable of defending his own views. I'd say what Gal is doing here is lumping together several different ideological approaches that might, more or less, have a shared position on immigration and freedom of movement. There's a kind of radical identity politics that is more prevalent in the US than in most of the rest of the world and Gal seems to be attributing this kind of politics to Cato, when it seems clear to me that his views are very different.

    I'd say Gal is combining Marxist social democracy with nationalism. It is possible to be Marxist and anti-nationalist, and I see Marxists of a more libertarian kind denying that it's possible to be a Marxist and a nationalist. I think they're wrong and that Gal has as much claim to be a Marxist as they have. In any case I wouldn't call myself a Marxist and I'm against any kind of nationalism. For the most part I'm in favour of people being able to travel, live and work where they want, and ultimately I'd rather national boundaries didn't exist. I'm not really expecting that people will agree with me, or that anyone will change their mind. Beyond that I'd prefer to agree to disagree.
  • Re: Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #834 - March 03, 2017, 05:22 PM

    For the most part I'm in favour of people being able to travel, live and work where they want, and ultimately I'd rather national boundaries didn't exist. I'm not really expecting that people will agree with me, or that anyone will change their mind. Beyond that I'd prefer to agree to disagree.


    This!

    I dont support the idea of Nationalism and Statism, To begin with. If that makes me radical or "utopian"(which makes me lol tbh when someone calls me that) then so be it. I'd prefer to agree to disagree as not many will be open to the idea itself.

    For the record, I don't even like Marxists or any adjectives attached to Marxists like Socialist Marxist (if those really exists) or Authoritarian Marxists.

    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #835 - March 03, 2017, 06:19 PM

    This sounds like something that a Xenophobic South Africans would say about Nigerians bringing drugs,scam and prostitutions to their beloved rainbow nation.

    I've only been to South Africa once and that was thirty years ago, before the end of apartheid. One thing that struck me then was reading the views in the liberal English language press on freedom of movement for blacks. This was at a time when pass laws still existed and many black Africans were legally considered as citizens of one or other Bantu 'homeland' rather than as citizens of the republic of South Africa. There was something jarring about reading the opinions of white liberal journalists on why getting rid of pass laws and allowing freedom of movement and residence was impossible. And, to repeat, this was the mainstream liberal view, from people who would probably have insisted that they weren't racist. Certainly there were other white liberals who would have been completely opposed to this but they weren't the voices that prevailed in the mainstream media. I think it would be hard to find anyone now who would even attempt to justify pass laws and Bantustans, but to me they look rather like a microcosm of the current situation with freedom of movement between the rest of the world and the global North.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #836 - March 03, 2017, 07:37 PM

    That's an interesting perspective,  I have read about the white liberals in South Africa on how they justify their reasons from Blacks being terrorists or radicals or uneducated or to an extreme extent of using social Darwinism trope now on a global scale we have people,politicians and governments in the global North using terrorism, religious extremism,drug crimes and now of recent, sex crimes as an excuse to scapegoat a group of people and restrict their movements into their country . In US case, It's quite ridiculous to see an American talking about banning or restricting immigrants into his country when he is not originally from the country or his grandparents or forefathers were immigrants themselves. It's like as if they have been on the soil since man evolved meanwhile forgetting or being oblivious to the fact they have uprooted the natives and eliminate 80% of them. And they are still snatching their lands to drill for oil and build pipelines. (Inb4 some American patriots criticise this)

    Freedom of movement is not a privilege,it is a right owed to any human being regardless of their colour of their skin,ethnicity and religion. If one doesn't agree with that then one has a sad perspective of this world and life

    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #837 - March 03, 2017, 08:58 PM

    Actually I think in this case it does give a good idea of what views Cato holds, and which I think for the most part I'd agree with.


    No it doesn't as Bakunin has had his view develop over time nor does it explain Cato's own view rather it only shows the views of Bakunin. Should I also include the radical anti-semantic views of Bakunin as a view Cato holds? After all such views are part of his political philosophy (Using SOAS's argument here). Is Cato anti-semantic? What about the type of violence endorsed by Bakunin? Does this mean Cato also endorses said violence? This is what happens when you name drop as if it explains anything in details.

    As for Gal's ideas of Marxism I do not agree with all claims of socialism being Marxist in origin.  Marxism is common knowledge given history. A history which itself is distorted covering a lot of ideas that are labeled as such.

    I wanted a response to the thread topic at hand from his point of view not a hypothetical political philosophy and required revolution then an answer.   
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #838 - March 03, 2017, 09:08 PM

    That's an interesting perspective,  I have read about the white liberals in South Africa on how they justify their reasons from Blacks being terrorists or radicals or uneducated or to an extreme extent of using social Darwinism trope now on a global scale we have people,politicians and governments in the global North using terrorism, religious extremism,drug crimes and now of recent, sex crimes as an excuse to scapegoat a group of people and restrict their movements into their country . In US case, It's quite ridiculous to see an American talking about banning or restricting immigrants into his country when he is not originally from the country or his grandparents or forefathers were immigrants themselves. It's like as if they have been on the soil since man evolved meanwhile forgetting or being oblivious to the fact they have uprooted the natives and eliminate 80% of them. And they are still snatching their lands to drill for oil and build pipelines. (Inb4 some American patriots criticise this)

    Freedom of movement is not a privilege,it is a right owed to any human being regardless of their colour of their skin,ethnicity and religion. If one doesn't agree with that then one has a sad perspective of this world and life


    Freedom of movement is a right based on what? Grand claim

    Crimes of the past do nothing to address the issues of the present. Taking note is important but in itself is not an argument. Beside anyone can draw an arbitrary line. Those natives displaced other tribes, whom displaced other tribes until we get back to the into history with no real records. Your line only goes so far back until you can find an identifiable victim within a modern context. Also you history is lacking as disease wiped out the majority of that 80% not all out violence and genocide. There was a cultural genocide no doubt.
  • Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from America
     Reply #839 - March 03, 2017, 09:32 PM

    No it doesn't as Bakunin has had his view develop over time nor does it explain Cato's own view rather it only shows the views of Bakunin. Should I also include the radical anti-semantic views of Bakunin as a view Cato holds? After all such views are part of his political philosophy (Using SOAS's argument here). Is Cato anti-semantic? What about the type of violence endorsed by Bakunin? Does this mean Cato also endorses said violence? This is what happens when you name drop as if it explains anything in details.

    As for Gal's ideas of Marxism I do not agree with all claims of socialism being Marxist in origin.  Marxism is common knowledge given history. A history which itself is distorted covering a lot of ideas that are labeled as such.

    I wanted a response to the thread topic at hand from his point of view not a hypothetical political philosophy and required revolution then an answer.   


    Are you seriously that dense to type this nonsense? Because you are just ripping everything out of context. We are talking about Anarchism here but hey go ahead and talk about how violent  and anti-semitic Bakunin was and brush aside his views on authority and hierarchy,and I'm not implying thay i endorsed all his views that he expressed in his lifetime.


    Freedom of movement is a right based on what? Grand claim


    It's not a grand claim if you are open minded but I guess that's what happen when one is too cynical

     
    Quote
    Crimes of the past do nothing to address the issues of the present. Taking note is important but in itself is not an argument. Beside anyone can draw an arbitrary line. Those natives displaced other tribes, whom displaced other tribes until we get back to the into history with no real records. Your line only goes so far back until you can find an identifiable victim within a modern context. Also you history is lacking as disease wiped out the majority of that 80% not all out violence and genocide. There was a cultural genocide no doubt.


    Then you are either blatantly ignorant of the history and how it still currently relevant or you are being in super denial. I can't argue with such type that is going to deny or downplay a genocides that took place and whitewash it with fancy words like "cultural genocide".



    You don't have to agree with me and neither do I have to agree with you. It's simple

    I question politics,it's systems and it's  institutions just like I questioned religions.






    "I'm standing here like an asshole holding my Charles Dickens"

    "No theory,No ready made system,no book that has ever been written to save the world. i cleave to no system.."-Bakunin
  • Previous page 1 ... 26 27 2829 30 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »