|
Post by MC anunnaki on Jan 24, 2005 3:42:22 GMT -5
By the way, Annunaki, I realize your parents brought you to Sweden. But they're free-riders. Instead of going the distance (as obviously Europeans have done) to make Iran a better place, its intellectuals flee to western countries (esp. those with welfare states). Why not to Japan or South Korea? Hmm? Why Sweden? Actually, they went to Spain first and later moved to Sweden because my dad got a job here. Call them free-riders if you like. It's very easy for you to say that when it's not your family being threatened. I know you don't want Sweden flooded with Muslim immigrants because they'll tear down the social constructs you rely on. Your parents (or even yourself) are like border crossing Mexicans that once established in the USA, denounce OTHER Mexicans for crossing the border. I don't mind Muslims who adapt to Swedish society and customs. I mind however Muslims, Poles, Russians and whatnot who come here and don't do that. And leave my parents out of this, they don't share my political opinions. It's a free rider issue, a classic prisoner's dilemma. And only collective action will solve it i.e. closing the borders, repatriation (forced if necessary). Well, in your dreams. That's the problem with racists - they just can't stay in the real world and realize that repatration of people who've lived here 30, 40, 50 years and who's offspring is most likely mixed with the natives just isn't possible (not without mass killings and brute force). Third World people collectively refuse to solve their issues, rather many flee to the west, dragging it down in the process. One day, when there is no 'First World' and no 'Whites' left to take as trophies or whatever, maybe then Iranians or Africans or whoever, will help themselves. Sadly, the first one's up to the task will be the casualties. My parents didn't flee poor conditions in Iran; they had it quite well there. They fled intellectual and religious oppression. Pardon us if we didn't want to die out. I seriously doubt you'd stick around if your government threw you in jail for nothing and threatened your family. Perhaps you place country above family - my parents didn't.
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Jan 24, 2005 3:46:23 GMT -5
So what will the future bring? A half-breed and brown population in Sweden that is neither truly White nor comfortable with its Third World heritage? That type of estrangement is felt by many Black-White mixes in the United States. Mixed groups tend to associate with their non-White heritage (unless of course it isn't visible, as CAN be the case with Whites of half Amerindian and Middle Eastern descent). If Iran looses its excess population on Sweden (with only 15 millions), then eventually Sweden will be brown and Iran will still be Iranian. So? If Swedes chose to mix then they chose to mix. How's that your problem? And what's wrong with being brown? European ethnic groups have in common both culture and phenotype. Indeed, European academics believe that nation-states are centered on ethnic groups. Keep telling yourself that. It's not like Swedes look at Poles and think 'hey we're the same'. Having been born in Sweden, Annunaki barely poses a disturbance to Swedish culture. But to phenotype? Perhaps. Not nearly so much as an African or Chinese. And when children (including half-breeds) grow up, they tend to seek out their roots - and cannot discount their part Iranian, or African, or Asiatic heritage. More bullshit. If a pure Iranian isn't interested in Iranian roots, why should a half-Swede who grows up culturally Swedish be? You're just typing down what you most wish for, that all half-breeds must come out of the womb torn apart by the fact that they're half-breeds. Perhaps it's true about adopted people, but if you're 50/50 something then you're not more Iranian and less Swedish or the other way around. Half-Swedes are still more Swedish than you'll ever be and Sweden is still more their country than it it yours just because you happen to be pale in skin colour. It would be most interesting if all these 'Europe is going under in the blaze of a holy race war RAHOWA!!!'-freaks could take a trip to say Sweden and ask the locals here if they a) think race-mixing is horrible and bad and b) if precisly everyone who has a drop of immigrant blood should be repatriated. You're in for a surprise.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jan 24, 2005 4:10:53 GMT -5
I just knew someone would have come out with the "Serbs and Croats, Hutu and Tutsi have different cultures ... "; quite easy, as long as you can distinguish two groups, they have a different culture .. ... so name an ethnic group that lives with another ethnic group and has exactly the same culture. It is a matter of degrees. Europe is flooded with people from Africa and China, and you say Serbs and Croats have different cultures? They are as Indians and Japanese Hello? And there NEVER was multiculturalism in Yugoslavia. It was a communist country and the government did all it could do to erase any sense of appartenence to ethnic groups in the citizens. Plus, consider the German Jews during IIWW. Some were very prominent figures of German academic and scientific world; many were among the "producers" of German culture. Also, many saw themselves much more as Germans than as Jews. I think German Jews and Germans shared the same culture as mach as two still recognizable groups can. And consider what happened.
|
|
|
Post by ulvesang on Jan 24, 2005 13:17:51 GMT -5
Ah, it seems Imperator-et-Rex hasn't seen REAL cultural solidarity. Do you really think that someone can NEVER be considered part of an accepting culture, due to their skin color? Live in these cultures yourself and you'll truly realise the beauty of knowing what you are. It lets you see those that are like you also. Listen to annunnaki... "Jeder ist Auslaender!" If she lives like one, she is a Swede, no matter what her parents might think or do. No one has "pure" genes from any country. We're all humans, and we're all related to an extent. If we ship off all the immigrants, what time period do we have to start from? Only working from 1990 onward is a little unfair, isn't it? Let's just kill off all the brunette Swedes, because God forbid they might have some non-Swedish ethnicity buried in there somewhere! Wanna hear some real accepting cultures? I was born in the USA, and still have a US citizenship, but know the German life better, and know Germany better than the US. I also look like a Serb (and not the "pure" German "Aryan") even though my family had come from Germany anyway. But to my countrymen, I am just as German as them. This is even the kicker: To the Danes I know well, I AM DANISH. And to my Icelandic friends, I AM AN ICELANDER. And I don't even consider myself Danish, let alone Icelandic. In Denmark I stick out like a sore thumb, but somehow I DON'T stick out. In fact, when in Sweden, the archetypical "American" no matter HOW Nordic-blonde-looking he is, will be spoken English to and treated far differently than this little phenotypical Serb, genotypical German, political American, and identified German (someday a Swede ) P.S. goddamn Unicode problems...
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Jan 24, 2005 16:08:28 GMT -5
Ah, it seems Imperator-et-Rex hasn't seen REAL cultural solidarity. Apparently not. Thank you Ulvesang for your most insightful post. It seems like certain people just can't accept the fact that culture isn't written in our DNA. I agree with you - if you live like a Swede and feel loyal to Sweden, you pose no threat to the country or its people.
|
|
|
Post by ulvesang on Jan 24, 2005 19:41:54 GMT -5
You go girl! ;D Next time I visit Sweden I should meet the great Swede born from welfare-seeking employed Iranian border-hoppers. Skaal, anunnaki av sverige!!!
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Jan 25, 2005 3:52:01 GMT -5
SKÅL!!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by jay (mulatto) on Feb 21, 2005 23:43:39 GMT -5
I just knew someone would have come out with the "Serbs and Croats, Hutu and Tutsi have different cultures ... "; quite easy, as long as you can distinguish two groups, they have a different culture .. ... so name an ethnic group that lives with another ethnic group and has exactly the same culture. It is a matter of degrees. not sure exactly what u mean by ur recognition of different ethnic groups like Serbs & Croats, or Hutus & Tutsis. but if ur talking about phenotype then i disagree. the United States non-hispanic white population is a mix of different ethnicities (German, English, Irish, Scottish, Swedish, Norweigian, Italin etc. ). they're a composite of different ethnicities, and phenotypically there is a difference between a non-hispanic white american of norweigian ancestry, and a non-hispanic white american of irish ancestry, or german ancestry, or italian ancestry. the differences are in your face, we can spot their ancestry, it's why Sylvester Stalone doesn't look like Bill Clinton, and why Britney spears doesn't look like Madonna. So the US non-hispanic white population is comprised of dozens of different european ethnic groups, and their phenotypes are visible in much of the population, some are a mix of different euro ethnicities some are more pure. But guess what they're all seen as non-hispanic white americans, fully functioning as good as possible. now we can even apply the same situation to the British Isles. The White British & White Irish have a mixture of various sub-racial types from invasions/migrations, vikings, saxons, normons, celtic iberian meds, berbers etc. now despite it being obvious the differences in looks between white britons, due to their different centuries old ethnic heritage & mixtures, these phenotypical differences don't play a role in how they're racially seen. their accent is more of a discrimator. essentially the White population in the UK is comprised of White British, White Irish, and White Other. And that's exactly how it is, the difference between these groups I can assure you is based almost soley on accent. As soon as an Irishman loses his accent and has a British accent he's perceived as White British, another member of the club, and this applies to many white ethnicities in europe. So here we're talking about red heads, blondes, brunettes, pink skined, clear skinned, olive skinned, straight hair, wavy hair, curly hair, all eye colors, upturned noses, straight noses, down turned noses etc. - these all cluster with different geographical regions, and therefore ethnicities/sub-racial types. but all these groupings of peoples are accepted under the White British banner, provided they have the accent, and British cultural norms. So now I want you to think about that, and ask yourself, if these phenotypically diverse people can get along together, and see eachother as equals (minus the silly stereotypes of blondes being dumb etc.). then why should it be any different if we had a hybridised society, where people's skin tone had a larger range from pink skin to jet black, and people's nose shapes, eye shapes, head shapes etc. varied bit more than they do right now in a white society. provided all the people had the same or very similar culture? unfortunately i don't have an example of a society where blacks, whites, east asians, amerindians etc. live together and treat eachother as if race didn't exist. but i can say i think, some of the Latin american countries probably have the best integration of these original racial ethnic phenotypes into singular groups, hence in many the association is based on just complexion rather than their actual racial background e.g. brazil white-mixed(or brown )-black (branco, pardo, preto). or we could take the Afro-American ethnic group, all of it's people are BLACK, regardless of how much white/non-black ancestry they have. they don't recognise any ethnic differences, they'd only recognise visible phenotypic differences mostly skin tone or hair texture (just like whites would recognise red-heads/blondes/brunettes, straight/wavy/curly, light eye/dark eye, pink skin/clear skin/olive). but that's all, this aint no "that person is a chinaman, let's treat him different, she's iranian, let's treat her differently". the discrimination is fueled by cultural/socio-economic differences between groups. and these cultural/socio-economic differences tend to be associated to different phenotypes. take away the cultural/socio-economic differences, and the assoications will weaken. perhaps the blondes are dumb stereotype, came from a centuries old immigration of vikings that were at the bottom of british society?
|
|
|
Post by jay (mulatto) on Feb 21, 2005 23:44:22 GMT -5
btw where did someone get the 600,000 immigrants/year into spain figure from? according to CIA factbook spain takes in only like 1 immigrant per 1,000. that's only 40,000/year (net flow). the uk is on 2.2 immigrants per 1,000 which is 132,000/year (net flow). although i know don't trust the CIA factbook, most of it's facts are outdated. but still that's quite a big difference 40,000 vs 600,000. IIRC uk takes in about 200,000-250,000/year (net flow - a lot of britons are leaving, so immigration of non-britons could be higher ). which makes the CIA factbook figure for the UK and undernumeration too.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Feb 23, 2005 11:08:52 GMT -5
Jay: I meant that when you can take two group apart, it means they have a different culture to some degree, that's all. Even the groups of the so called hypenated americans (Italian-Americans, Irish- Americans etc.) have their own "cultures" (and a great book about it is Ethnic America by Thomas Sowell). Of course you may argue that they are more similar between each other than they are to the citizens of their former nations (and I think this is correct: Americans have a very distinct culture of theyr own). this doesn't affect the fact they are different from each other. By the way, how can the difference between Irish and English be just an accent, when they have different religions, different beers and often different faces? About the conclusion you make, I never said that it can't be and will never be a peaceful multiracial society; I just said that the presence of different ethnicities in the same state is more problem than an asset. As we are debating immigration to Europe, why should we choose to have a problem?
|
|
|
Post by tatc on May 16, 2005 16:42:56 GMT -5
Its a difficult question to be honest..
|
|
|
Post by henerte on May 16, 2005 17:18:52 GMT -5
Close the borders, deport all (some exeptions naturally) non-whites from Europe. That probably sound terrible, but I don´t want my race to vanish into a brown mass of consumer kapitalistical utilitarists. I personally don´t think that a multiracial, nor a multicultural society works. History tells us that many conflicts and wars arise simply because different peaple for some reason are forced to live together. To melt the races into one races is not the answer to that problem. Understanding and segregation works better. Why change something when its not really neccesairy? I must say I'm really surprised! Sweden is usually thought to be severely anti-racist. Is this kind of attitude common is Sweden?
|
|
|
Post by tatc on May 16, 2005 18:10:15 GMT -5
Well. Its definetly intressting..
|
|
|
Post by Ponto Hardbottle on May 17, 2005 2:14:19 GMT -5
There is a finite number of immigrants that can be absorbed in Sweden and other low population countries. Immigrants, illegal or legal, go to wealthy countries because they are wealthy not because they think they will be free there. Too many immigrants will ruin the economy and lower the living standards and make Sweden as attractive as any third world rathole. What is needed is the reversal of the 'streets of London are paved with gold' syndrome by showing potential immigrants in the other world the reality of living in a foreign country with different cultures, customs, religions, foods, attitudes and prejudices. Many people in Asia and Africa think Europe is Eldorado. Anyway I thought Sweden had tough immigration laws and those 'accent' tests for identifying place of origin of illegals. I am an immigrant, three times, though the first time was my parents' doing and I have had no problems fitting in as my background was similar. Even so, I have never wanted to become a national of the countries I lived in and will remain my nationality until I perish. That is the thing about immigration and immigrants; most do not want to assimilate or became natives. So it is natural for natives to be anti immigrant. I don't fault them for that.
|
|
|
Post by amksa on May 17, 2005 9:23:44 GMT -5
Wow, three persons voted "Extermination of non-Whites in Europe" ! What's the definition of extermination here ? Expulsion ? Teletransportation ?
|
|