Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is Brevik the logical outcome of "multiculturalism"

Announcements Posted on
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Also where you go into mainly muslim areas there are loads of charity shops for islamic aid, no other charity shops. Just these ones.
    • 8 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    I don't think being against mass immigration and against giving 90% of newly created jobs to foreigners means you will be a mass murder. This guy believed in something. He went to extremes. What I'm scared of is terrorists using guns if this incident has proved to kill more people than 7/7 did without using bombs.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
    So, even though these people would have stayed without immigration, they are to blame for the shop losing its customers? I don't think it is as simple as you are making it. Immigration has directly led to "white flight" and the closure of local shops.

    I don't disagree with immigration but, when you allow 3.2 million (I believe) people to settle, you are going to change the demographic of certain areas. This will directly affect existing businesses, causing many to close.
    It hasn't directly led to anything. These people, as autonomous agents, have made a private, individualistic decision to move out of their area, and then ironically complain about the loss of 'white' people and 'white' businesses in the area they have evacuated.

    (Original post by Bonged.)
    So in your view, the right of the immigrant to "individualism" should override the right of the native to collectivism. Except that you don't have a problem with collectivism when it is not amongst the native community.

    dogma.
    I don't see how this relates to anything I've said. :confused: Can you reconcile my examples of the sentiments I believe to be incompossible? If people want 'white' businesses and 'white' majorities, they cannot take an individualistic decision that is inimical to this desire by moving out of the area. If people want their individualism, they cannot complain about the collective trend when they are not privately contributing to its desired reversal.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    It hasn't directly led to anything. These people, as autonomous agents, have made a private, individualistic decision to move out of their area, and then ironically complain about the loss of 'white' people and 'white' businesses in the area they have evacuated.

    I don't see how this relates to anything I've said. :confused: Can you reconcile my examples of the sentiments I believe to be incompossible? If people want 'white' businesses and 'white' majorities, they cannot take an individualistic decision that is inimical to this desire by moving out of the area. If people want their individualism, they cannot complain about the collective trend when they are not privately contributing to its desired reversal.
    I don't accept your pedantic, reductionist argument

    Are you seriously saying that your average, non uni educated person knows full well about how they should be upholding the values of individualism? People vote with their feet, and they have done in these cases. People don't like dealing with increased crime or being in a minority in their own homeland.

    Again I will ask you to provide an example of a locality in the UK where whites are the minority where crime rates are low. That is why "white flight" occurs.

    Deal with these if expecting reply. :pierre:
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    Erm, if they go into manningham they'll get battered? Which co-incidentally sounds exactly like displacement.
    Who moved out and facilitated the creation of this demographic pattern?

    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.
    This has no bearing on this discussion, seeing as crime incidence can be geographically paired with the incidence of unpropitious socioeconomic variables. The calibre of migrants in question move to areas that are already deprived. The same question can be asked about areas that are principally 'white' and have high crime rates, like parts of Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester. Is it possible for 'white flight' to be precipitated by the actions of 'white people'? If not, why does the same behaviour from 'non-white people' induce a different effect?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minniiee)
    multiculturalism suggest the full integration and therefore acceptance of people of all cultures in any given community
    therefore, had there been true multiculturalism, the incident would never have happened because people like breivik wouldnt exist...
    I believe this has hit the nail on the head. On This World: Norway's Massacre, there was a section towards the end that highlighted the current social problems. In Oslo there is a clear divide between the East and West. That isn't multiculturalism by any stretch of the imagination. It's segregation.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    I don't accept your pedantic, reductionist argument

    Are you seriously saying that your average, non uni educated person knows full well about how they should be upholding the values of individualism? People vote with their feet, and they have done in these cases.
    It doesn't take an education to realise the individual makes the community. If they take the individual choice to move out, they cannot complain about the collective trend of people moving out—it's just stupid, really. :erm:

    The other points have received a response in my previous post.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    Who moved out and facilitated the creation of this demographic pattern?

    This has no bearing on this discussion, seeing as crime incidence can be geographically paired with the incidence of unpropitious socioeconomic variables. The calibre of migrants in question move to areas that are already deprived. The same question can be asked about areas that are principally 'white' and have high crime rates, like parts of Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester. Is it possible for 'white flight' to be precipitated by the actions of 'white people'? If not, why does the same behaviour from 'non-white people' induce a different effect?
    lol, well if you want to look back far enough "white" people (I'll humour you) are to blame for literally everything wrong in Britain. Presuming that you want to collectivise based on race, which I find you increasingly doing. Only about white people of course.

    So, you can't find one. K. Now do you think that people are likely to want to stay in a place where they are becoming outnumbered. Keep in mind that they are actually in their homeland.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    lol, well if you want to look back far enough "white" people (I'll humour you) are to blame for literally everything wrong in Britain. Presuming that you want to collectivise based on race, which I find you increasingly doing. Only about white people of course.
    Can you answer my question directly?

    So, you can't find one. K.
    I haven't looked, as I don't see the relevance.

    Now do you think that people are likely to want to stay in a place where they are becoming outnumbered. Keep in mind that they are actually in their homeland.
    You're attempting, and failing, to reconcile the individual with the collective. If they (individual) don't want to stay in a place where they (collective) are becoming outnumbered, they (individual) are contributing to their (collective) own outnumbering. Ipso facto, the area was originally majority 'white' British, so mass individualism is evidently responsible for any outnumbering that is occurring.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    It doesn't take an education to realise the individual makes the community. If they take the individual choice to move out, they cannot complain about the collective trend of people moving out—it's just stupid, really. :erm:

    The other points have received a response in my previous post.
    It also doesn't take much education to realise that people do not always act as individuals, and that trends specific to groups increase the likelihood of certain traits manifesting in the individual.

    Of course, also most non english people have not had their sense of community or collectivism knocked out of them as the English have done. So you've got this bunch of people that have leftists dancing around them ready to shout racist if they say something like "I'm proud of being English", and on the other side a bunch of people that have leftists dancing around fawning over their other-ness, telling them they don't need to integrate. This creates a disparity as we can see through white flight.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Knowing that people like Breivik -with his capabilities and intentions- actually exist in the world, makes me feel physically sick
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    It also doesn't take much education to realise that people do not always act as individuals, and that trends specific to groups increase the likelihood of certain traits manifesting in the individual.
    What has this got to do with anything? If they take an individual action that is inimical to the wants of whatever collective of which they feel a part, they are clearly displaying a pretence of affection for this collective.

    Of course, also most non english people have not had their sense of community or collectivism knocked out of them as the English have done. So you've got this bunch of people that have leftists dancing around them ready to shout racist if they say something like "I'm proud of being English", and on the other side a bunch of people that have leftists dancing around fawning over their other-ness, telling them they don't need to integrate. This creates a disparity as we can see through white flight.
    Nobody forced them out of their area. If they felt an affinity with their neighbourhood/community/local businesses, they wouldn't have abandoned them. It is evident that whilst they were a majority, the community cohesion wasn't strong enough to retain this majority, which is why individualism has taken precedence with the act of leaving their community behind.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    Can you answer my question directly?

    I haven't looked, as I don't see the relevance.

    You're attempting, and failing, to reconcile the individual with the collective. If they (individual) don't want to stay in a place where they (collective) are becoming outnumbered, they (individual) are contributing to their (collective) own outnumbering. Ipso facto, the area was originally majority 'white' British, so mass individualism is evidently responsible for any outnumbering that is occurring.
    Sho.

    White people, though of course if you want to look back far enough "white" people (I'll humour you) are to blame for literally everything wrong in Britain. Presuming that you want to collectivise based on race, which I find you increasingly doing. Only about white people of course.

    So you concede that there is not a majority non white locality with a low crime rate. That goes some way for explaining white flight.

    Why are you bestowing each of these individuals you talk about with such high levels of agency? You know very well (unless you're just stupid) that the individual is influenced massively by the collective. There is something really quite sick in running poor whites out of cities throughout the country, then turning around and saying "lol well it's white peoples fault you shoulda been more individualistic!". I mean get a grip for christ sake.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    What has this got to do with anything? If they take an individual action that is inimical to the wants of whatever collective of which they feel a part, they are clearly displaying a pretence of affection for this collective.

    Nobody forced them out of their area. If they felt an affinity with their neighbourhood/community/local businesses, they wouldn't have abandoned them. It is evident that whilst they were a majority, the community cohesion wasn't strong enough to retain this majority, which is why individualism has taken precedence with the act of leaving their community behind.
    Or they feel that the ongoing process is irreversible and it's best to get out while they can?

    Rising crime, falling standards of living, falling wages that come with immigrant communities I would say play a larger part in forcing people to move than their "betrayal of their community". lol.

    That's simply a lie, residents can't decide who moves into their area, why are you making it sounds like they are somehow complicit?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    So you concede that there is not a majority non white locality with a low crime rate. That goes some way for explaining white flight.
    I can't confirm or deny, as I haven't looked. I would like to know why the same actions committed by a non-migrant and a migrant induce different effects.

    Why are you bestowing each of these individuals you talk about with such high levels of agency? You know very well (unless you're just stupid) that the individual is influenced massively by the collective.
    Indeed. That said, if the collective was so strong prior to migration, how was it progressively undermined? People clearly don't care about their area or the community if they decide to take the individualistic action to leave it.

    There is something really quite sick in running poor whites out of cities throughout the country, then turning around and saying "lol well it's white peoples fault you shoulda been more individualistic!". I mean get a grip for christ sake.
    If this isn't a Freudian slip, you have completely misinterpreted my argument.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    Or they feel that the ongoing process is irreversible and it's best to get out while they can?
    :laugh: Who makes it irreversible? Is it perhaps their individualism? Migrants can't move into an occupied house.

    Rising crime, falling standards of living, falling wages that come with immigrant communities I would say play a larger part in forcing people to move than their "betrayal of their community". lol.
    They couldn't move in without people moving out. Evidently, people don't care about their communities.

    That's simply a lie, residents can't decide who moves into their area, why are you making it sounds like they are somehow complicit?
    If they were a true collective, people wouldn't move out and enable the intromission of migrants, as doing so would be inimical to the preservation of a 'white' majority and community.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    I can't confirm or deny, as I haven't looked. I would like to know why the same actions committed by a non-migrant and a migrant induce different effects.

    Indeed. That said, if the collective was so strong prior to migration, how was it progressively undermined? People clearly don't care about their area or the community if they decide to take the individualistic action to leave it.

    If this isn't a Freudian slip, you have completely misinterpreted my argument.
    There isn't. I just looked. So we'll note that down as being a major factor in white flight.

    People didn't get to choose who moved in and out. You seem to have the view that majority communities have ultimate control over the demographics of their neighbourhood.

    How so?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whyumadtho)
    :laugh: Who makes it irreversible? Is it perhaps their individualism? Migrants can't move into an occupied house.

    They couldn't move in without people moving out. Evidently, people don't care about their communities.

    If they were a true collective, people wouldn't move out and enable the intromission of migrants, as doing so would be inimical to the preservation of a 'white' majority and community.
    Why do you try to ascribe blame to a person? You know full well that a high crime ethnic enclave is not going to have natives moving back in.

    I think you're just goading now to be honest, we've been over the fact that there isn't a vote on every road to decides who moves in, so don't be so disingenuous.

    ..I'm not sure what you mean by that? What is different about them that means that they aren't a "true" collective.
    Again you are ascribing vast levels of education and agency to the average person, which is a blinkered way of viewing the world. I suppose it does nourish your dogma though. Out.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bonged.)
    There isn't. I just looked. So we'll note that down as being a major factor in white flight.
    Until I decide to undertake independent research, I reject your position and remain neutral. In any case, I would like to know why the same actions committed by a non-migrant and a migrant induce different effects.

    People didn't get to choose who moved in and out. You seem to have the view that majority communities have ultimate control over the demographics of their neighbourhood.
    If this majority demographic also has a psychological affinity and a shared outlook, they do. Under a system of true collectivism, nobody in the collective would take an action that undermines the vitality of the local 'white' businesses (shopping online or elsewhere) or majority demographic (moving out). Evidently, collectivism creating a shared goal by the mere incidence of being 'white' or living in a particular area is not present, else people wouldn't individualistically undermine this apparently shared goal.

    How so?
    "There is something really quite sick in running poor whites out of cities throughout the country, then turning around and saying "lol well it's white peoples fault you shoulda been more individualistic!". I mean get a grip for christ sake."

    Replace 'individualistic' with 'collectivist'. And I'm not saying all 'white' people should, just those who move out of an area then complain about people moving out of that area.
    • 37 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    This isn't my opinion just a discussion starter

    And yes I know I've spelt Breivik wrong in the title
    Not really.

    In Breivik's Manifesto, he targets Islam and, what he thought, was its spread into European Culture. Breivik had never mentioned anything against any other culture, just Islam. Therefore, its anti-Islamism, not anti-Multiculturalism and therefore cannot be called the end result of multiculturalism.

    Breivik's belief is shared by many throughout Europe. The EDL, Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party, etc. However, this is still the minority of people.

    If anything, Breivik ironically achieved the opposite from what he'd hoped. People began to see the dark side of Right Wing Nationalism and extreme right politics, Breivik's actions can arguably be stated to be the outcome of the above, not Multiculturalism.

    I watched a show on BBC Iplayer stating the same point, that people became more understanding, moderate and accepting as a result of what Breivik did. The man butchered 77 people, most of them teenagers at a politics camp; when you try and raise awareness against Left-Wing Immigration Policies by murdering familes' children, it doesn't exactly fill your queue with support.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: June 1, 2012
New on TSR

Find out what year 11 is like

Going into year 11? Students who did it last year share what to expect.

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.