[Foo.mp3]

(Original post by smaragda)
Multiculturalism, when mismanaged, can lead to more people embrassing right-wing and rasism overall

If by that you mean that Breivik has horrified/embarrassed/disheartened much of the (far) right wing through his actions, then yes, that's undeniable

However, people who feel strongly about the principals can separate them from those who twist them e.g. 'moderate' vs. radical Islam

Someone taking the wrong kind of action on an issue does not negate the issue itself, it merely inflames, then quietens the debate, for a while..

(Original post by smaragda)
Breivik is a sociopath, he probably just needed an excuse to kill, if it wasn't multiculturalism it would be something else

He does not present an outright psychopath/sociopath ~ hence the need to put his ipod on and apparently get into a mental state akin to feeling as though he were playing one of his video games

He knew what he was doing, was purportedly in a clear minded/lucid state and clearly felt very strongly about his cause, hence all the planning, prep, and lengthy manifesto, video spiel etc

He's not mentally ill but instead fanatical about the idea that multiculturalism threatens his society, and paranoid about Muslims taking over in Europe in particular

There probably is an element of filling a void in his life, finding a calling to answer etc, but few such callings would lead a guy like that to the conclusion that mass murder is the answer

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by effofex)
Right and Left refer specifically to the economic policy pursued by the state.

Left-wing policy - protectionism, state ownership of industry, price-setting, restricted movement of labour to capital (e.g. North Korea, China - outside the metropolises).

Right-wing policy - free markets, privatized economy, free movement of labour to capital, high migration rates, business friendly economic policy.

Multiculturalism is also right wing. People who want the government to 'preserve and protect the culture' are promoting a left wing position in which the government intervenes in society to prohibit foreign cultures.

[effofex]

(Original post by Brutal Honesty)
Multiculturalism is also right wing. People who want the government to 'preserve and protect the culture' are promoting a left wing position in which the government intervenes in society to prohibit foreign cultures.

An authoritarian government would actively intervene in society on the basis of culture.

A libertarian government would pursue a much more hands-off approach.

[Freier._.lance]

Anyone who thinks that Breivik was the logical outcome of multiculturalism needs to have their head examined.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
Immigrants ---> demand for niche stores ---> niche stores dominating local neighbourhood.

I'd rather see a niche store than a dilapidated, vandalised lot. Migrants haven't forced the previous owners out, the previous owners have evacuated the property because they were not receiving enough custom. It seems people complain about something when it's gone despite never having used it in the first place.

[Formerly Helpful_C]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
I'd rather see a niche store than a dilapidated, vandalised lot. Migrants haven't forced the previous owners out, the previous owners have evacuated the property because they were not receiving enough custom. It seems people complain about something when it's gone despite never having used it in the first place.

And we return full circle.

What if the previous tenants had been doing well until the shift in demographic? Are we to still believe that it is their own fault? When buying/renting a shop, I doubt owners could have predicted such an occurrence.

[Cheese_Monster]

"The last time there was real democracy in Europe was when Hitler came to power"

This man must be either seriously uneducated or did not pay attention in his politics lessons. Moreover, his task to defeat 'multilculturalism' by killing many Norwegian nationals is even worse.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
And we return full circle.

What if the previous tenants had been doing well until the shift in demographic? Are we to still believe that it is their own fault? When buying/renting a shop, I doubt owners could have predicted such an occurrence.

Migrants don't displace the customers, the customers choose to relocate or cease shopping there. I fail to see how any blame can be imputed to the migrants.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Migrants don't displace the customers, the customers choose to relocate or cease shopping there. I fail to see how any blame can be imputed to the migrants.

Most rational people blame the govt, specifically new labour. Obv people would rather be here and only took that opportunity. It's a non sequitur really.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Most rational people blame the govt, specifically new labour. Obv people would rather be here and only took that opportunity. It's a non sequitur really.

How did the taking of this opportunity effectuate a decline in existing shops?

[Bonged.]

(Original post by RightSaidJames)
Are you accusing me of being a Champagne Socialist? For the record I've also lived in Brussels, Michigan and, for the past 4 years, Cardiff.

Yeah, I know that culture clashes often cause tension, violence and other problems, but from a wider perspective immigration is an overwhelmingly positive force. Even if it wasn't, in an age of globalisation there's nothing anyone (be they terrorist or politician) can do about it.

A wider, wealthier perspective? More cheap labour/increased competition on the ground?

I swear we're supposed to live in a democracy?

We're perfectly able to survive without mass immigration and state multiculturalism. We just need to massively reduce the welfare state.

[whyumadtho]

I think most people would agree that online shopping, supermarkets and shopping malls are the principal drivers of the decline in local commerce. If niche shops are the only things that maintain an area's vitality, why are they still criticised?

[Formerly Helpful_C]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Migrants don't displace the customers, the customers choose to relocate or cease shopping there. I fail to see how any blame can be imputed to the migrants.

Really? We both know that you're smarter than that.

Have you ever heard of "white flight"? If we presume - because that's all we can do - that a local shop had a decent revenue derived from the custom of white people, how can migrants not be to blame for the shop going out of business? By moving to the area, they have driven out the shop's customers - making the business unprofitable.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
How did the taking of this opportunity effectuate a decline in existing shops?

Less customers.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
Really? We both know that you're smarter than that.

Have you ever heard of "white flight"? If we presume - because that's all we can do - that a local shop had a decent revenue derived from the custom of white people, how can migrants not be to blame for the shop going out of business? By moving to the area, they have driven out the shop's customers - making the business unprofitable.

Then it is the fault of the 'white' people who chose to leave the area and their businesses behind. Migrants haven't displaced them and so cannot be blamed for other people's decisions.

(Original post by Bonged.)


Less customers.

An immigrant does not force a resident out of their house and cause a loss of a customer, they cohabit a particular area. The existing customer's ability to shop there remains unhindered.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
I think most people would agree that online shopping, supermarkets and shopping malls are the principal drivers of the decline in local commerce. If niche shops are the only things that maintain an area's vitality, why are they still criticised?

You would have to look at locality of course. Manningham in Bradford isn't exactly pub friendly, therefore pubs close down. Little to do with online shopping etc.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Then it is the fault of the 'white' people who chose to leave the area and their businesses behind. Migrants haven't displaced them and so cannot be blamed for other people's decisions.

An immigrant does not force a resident out of their house and cause a loss of a customer, they cohabit a particular area. The existing customer's ability to shop there remains unhindered.

You're using immigrants to hide behind again. Changing demographics (the fault of the government) produce a wholly different atmosphere, especially if the natives are outnumbered. Find me one example of a locality in the UK where whites are the minority where crime rates are low. That is why "white flight" occurs, along with the fact that people don't like being in a minority in their homeland. Which is perfectly reasonable of course.

[whyumadtho]

There is an incompossible duality of individualism ("I'm going to move out and leave my area and community behind") and collectivism ("I dislike how this area is being overrun by migrants"). It is the actions of the individual that impact on the wider community; how can somebody execute an action as an individual that directly causes what they don't want as a collective?

[SpongebobSquarepan]

What he has done is sick and twisted and deserves to be locked up for life.

But there is definitely an islamification of europe on the rise. Most shops now serve halal food without telling us.

When I have been through muslim poluated areas of england it is spot the white guy. They don't want to mix with the english.

For example I went to school a mainly white one but the muslims were really friendly and mixed well I have some good muslim friends. but when I went to college it shifted 50:50 and the muslims that had come from these manily muslim towns would not speak with the whites.

Integration has failed.

[itsmyname]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
I'd rather see a niche store than a dilapidated, vandalised lot. Migrants haven't forced the previous owners out, the previous owners have evacuated the property because they were not receiving enough custom. It seems people complain about something when it's gone despite never having used it in the first place.

Exactly This. It's how capitalism works. You can't cry when things aren't going your way