Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Phoebe Buffay)
    Could you please explain, with evidence, why you are describing these people as 'neo-nazis' and 'fascists'. Because I looked at the article you gave, and see nothing of the sort.
    Because they have a different opionion

    (Original post by Multiculturalism)
    Care to explain? I think Hitler was a fascist, and he was just a little against multiculturalism!
    Well, that didn't take long

    \thread
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vennec)
    I disagree very strongly with this attitude. Attacking people personally is no way to solve an argument, it just creates more and makes people angry. You say QED, so what is your proof?
    The proof is in the pudding fact is the nazis were beaten back to where they came from.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thomb)
    Oh right ok so I should attack them for disagreeing with policy or something well ok I personally would rather just keep up this *****ing and stop pissing around with these *******s.
    No you're right there has been no point to this its just infuriating when one is in denial about the existence of nazis at the protest and the other sympathises with nazis and then you say they've won a logical argument.
    But that's rather the point. The protest was against ISIL, and more broadly the protest was against the immigration policy currently in place across the EU. To respond to this with a lot of 'oh but the protestors are all nazis' doesn't do anything to suggest that being opposed to immigration is a bad thing. In fact, it does rather the opposite. It makes it look as though you don't have any objective reason to disagree with their stance on immigration, so you're resorting to just pointing out that some of them are neo-nazis and trying to defame the point of view that way.

    It's why I've never really understood why anyone would use an ad hominem; they're painfully obvious and just make the contrary point of view look weak. I've not read through all of the comments, but anyone suggesting that nobody at the protest was a neo-nazi is deluded; as I understand it, there was a substantial neo-nazi presence there. But to suggest that that fact alone is reason enough to say that we should ignore misgivings about immigration and welcome everyone in is equally deluded.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vennec)
    Ah, my apologies. I was somewhat close, but I should still brush up on my fallacies. You are correct.
    You were pretty much there :P
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lacesso)
    Oh boy.
    I believe in an evolution where we will no longer need politics or the law.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    But that's rather the point. The protest was against ISIL, and more broadly the protest was against the immigration policy currently in place across the EU. To respond to this with a lot of 'oh but the protestors are all nazis' doesn't do anything to suggest that being opposed to immigration is a bad thing. In fact, it does rather the opposite. It makes it look as though you don't have any objective reason to disagree with their stance on immigration, so you're resorting to just pointing out that some of them are neo-nazis and trying to defame the point of view that way.

    It's why I've never really understood why anyone would use an ad hominem; they're painfully obvious and just make the contrary point of view look weak. I've not read through all of the comments, but anyone suggesting that nobody at the protest was a neo-nazi is deluded; as I understand it, there was a substantial neo-nazi presence there. But to suggest that that fact alone is reason enough to say that we should ignore misgivings about immigration and welcome everyone in is equally deluded.

    Well I don't agree that everyone should be let in but I don't think everyone is a terrorist people should vet those they are considering with political and religious background checks.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XxSophie01xX)
    This reminded me of a time when there was a Muslim conference of sorts at my university, and females were segregated from the men and had to use a different doorway. I was discussing it with a female lecturer (a feminist one at that, actually) who explained that she disagreed with it, but would never dream of voicing that publicly as she'd not want to have her career destroyed by smears of racism'. Really, really bizarre.
    Fixed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    You were pretty much there :P
    Pretty much. Thanks for the correction!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thomb)
    Well I don't agree that everyone should be let in but I don't think everyone is a terrorist people should vet those they are considering with political and religious background checks.
    Which is one of the issues I personally have with the open-door immigration policy. The numbers entering europe would be impossible to vet if they were entering through routine channels, never mind the fact that a huge number of them are being illegally smuggled into europe. We have no way of knowing who has come into Europe and where they came from, which has culminated in the attacks on Paris and Brussels.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phoebe Buffay)
    People like you need to grow up, and get out of the bizarre delusion that protesting against migration, or against terrorism, or even against Islam is 'far right'.
    Crashing a vigil for the dead is pretty ****ing digusting. Whether they're far-right or not seems like a petty distinction to quibble about.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vennec)
    Pretty much. Thanks for the correction!
    No problemo I see you're new on TSR. If you spend more than a couple weeks looking at contentious threads, you'll become more than accustomed with every logical fallacy under the sun It's pretty funny just trying to get your head around the 'logic' some of these people try to use
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unkempt_One)
    Crashing a vigil for the dead is pretty ****ing digusting. Whether they're far-right or not seems like a petty distinction to quibble about.
    Are they not allowed to pay their respects too?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phoebe Buffay)
    Are they not allowed to pay their respects too?
    Harassment and yelling is a pretty innovative way of paying respects, it has to be said.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    No problemo I see you're new on TSR. If you spend more than a couple weeks looking at contentious threads, you'll become more than accustomed with every logical fallacy under the sun It's pretty funny just trying to get your head around the 'logic' some of these people try to use
    Oh absolutely. I love trying to figure people out. Thanks for the advice, too! I'll definitely look around more.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    Which is one of the issues I personally have with the open-door immigration policy. The numbers entering europe would be impossible to vet if they were entering through routine channels, never mind the fact that a huge number of them are being illegally smuggled into europe. We have no way of knowing who has come into Europe and where they came from, which has culminated in the attacks on Paris and Brussels.

    Sorry but this is too difficult an issue for me to address. How would you stop terrorism whilst stopping innocent people from dieing in the middle east?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unkempt_One)
    Crashing a vigil for the dead is pretty ****ing digusting. Whether they're far-right or not seems like a petty distinction to quibble about.
    Its a fact they're nazis. Oops I mean so you think their views on immigration are petty? Tell me what you think is petty about immigration? Do you think the far rights views on immigration should be endorsed?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vennec)
    Oh absolutely. I love trying to figure people out. Thanks for the advice, too! I'll definitely look around more.
    Someone on here once posted this link, which I thought was pretty funny. And a lot of people on TSR could do with looking at it https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    Someone on here once posted this link, which I thought was pretty funny. And a lot of people on TSR could do with looking at it https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
    Oh man! I remember this site! I found this years ago and forgot about it.

    Thanks.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    This thread has died.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thomb)
    Sorry but this is too difficult an issue for me to address. How would you stop terrorism whilst stopping innocent people from dieing in the middle east?
    If I had the answer to that I'd probably be given a knighthood and a position in the Cabinet It'd be pretty lengthy, to give my entire views on the issues surrounding the middle east, but in brief I think we've got to prioritise. The first priority should be weeding out those who are economic migrants rather than refugees. So I think we should issue papers (naturally forge-proof like our banknotes are) to those who appear on europe's borders as legitimate refugees giving them the right to stay as asylum seekers. Anyone who is found in europe without these papers would be deported, in a bid to deter people from being smuggled into the EU. Similarly, anyone already in Europe who couldn't prove there legitimacy as an asylum seeker would be deported. I'd also give the secret services - on a temporary basis - much broader powers to undergo surveillance operations without warrants. Further, I'd temporarily bring back border controls on every European country to give further knowledge of who is where in Europe.

    Then the next step would be to commit serious resources to building proper refugee shelters in countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Jordan, Lebanon and the like. And given the privileges these countries enjoy from the West, I'd make our aid conditional on their accepting refugees. I'd also commit boots on the ground to deal with IS. As much as there is little appetite for another ground offensive in the middle east, the fact is leaving IS functioning seems to me to be an ever greater threat. I think that sooner or later, NATO forces will be required on the ground.

    There are huge difficulties facing all of this, but that's just my two cents on what I think the optimal way of dealing with this situation is. Of course, people far more qualified than myself are sweating over these issues, so the above should be taken with plenty of salt.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.