Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Thinking the unthinkable; Reassessing the BNP! Watch

    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Joseph90)
    Have you read High Society by Ben Elton?

    I like the theory of legalising drugs and prostitution so the government can regulate it, but wouldn't that make the ideas totally non-Libertarian? Also they would be difficult to regulate due to the amount of forms you'd need to sign to fund your habit rather than just arranging a meeting with your dealer.
    No I haven't read that ...

    But there is no reason for drugs and prostitution to be nationalised or anything, it's definitely not libertarian to tell consenting adults of a sound mind that they can't exchange sex for money or smoke a joint.

    And I don't see why forms are required? Do you sign a form anytime you buy alcohol? Other drugs would be handled exactly like alcohol is - and it would decrease usage, crime and deaths. As well as giving people civil liberty, of course.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CandyFlipper)
    No I haven't read that ...

    But there is no reason for drugs and prostitution to be nationalised or anything, it's definitely not libertarian to tell consenting adults of a sound mind that they can't exchange sex for money or smoke a joint.

    And I don't see why forms are required? Do you sign a form anytime you buy alcohol? Other drugs would be handled exactly like alcohol is - and it would decrease usage, crime and deaths. As well as giving people civil liberty, of course.
    Yeah that's good in theory. It would also protect people from going into industries such as prostitution to fuel their drug habit that costs them extortionately. Making drugs legal could halve the prostitution industry. Though at the same time it could make London more like Amsterdam.

    Libertarianism makes sense but policy would take time to implement.
    Offline

    12
    (Original post by Joseph90)
    Yeah that's good in theory. It would also protect people from going into industries such as prostitution to fuel their drug habit that costs them extortionately. Making drugs legal could halve the prostitution industry. Though at the same time it could make London more like Amsterdam.

    Libertarianism makes sense but policy would take time to implement.
    I don't actually understand what your qualm is anymore. :woo:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The amount of BNP threads on here are ridiculous now. Hourly at best. It's just not interesting anymore. Same posters. Same arguments.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paul_r)

    Consider the Massai tribe, consider the rich cultural past, the centuries of continuity based upon shared ancestry, the traditions the customs the unique way of live.
    True they have a rich cultural tradition, but they also live in extreme poverty. Modern multiculturalism may destroy some of the good things about individual cultures but you can hardly argue that coca cola is worse than stoning people to death for adultery or females castration. While today's 'homogeneous society' may not be all that interesting, I would argue that in many places it is far superior to the 'traditional culture' and if we have sacrificed a national identity to rid Britain of the inequality and poverty of the Victorian era I would say it was a sacrifice well worth making.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Now imagine Gerry from Newcastle turning up, and Pete from NYC exporting his Coca-cola and free market capitalism, imagine Richard Dawkins ridiculing there stuperstitions and Antonio from Italy showing them that spagetti bolognase is tastier and more nutritious than root vegetable. All of a sudden the culture wanes... and my much eulogised multi-culturalism has a lot to answer for...
    God how evil of western capitalism to go and rape those cultures and make them wealthier, healthier and more educated in the process. If I could choose between living in the prosperous modern world with its laws, healthcare, education, air travel, internet and the myriad possibilities and opportunities for self advancement; and subsistence farming or foraging about for roots day in day out for 40 years before I die of exhaustion with no hope of a better fate I'd definitely pick the latter.

    Your attitude smacks of the French arisocrats just before the revolution: They had little toy farms where they could spend their mornings idling about pretending to live the 'ideal life of the noble peasant' among nature before heading off to balls with the other nobles in the evening; all while the real peasants starved because there was no bread.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renner)
    I've always said this about the left, they shout from the roof tops about multi-culturalism but will fight for the right of some Amazonian tribe to keep there identity and independence. Hypocrisy at its highest
    thats not hypocrisy!! disliking multiculturalism really is quite different to defending against cultural imperialism. multiculturalism means allowing people to enter your country retaining their own cultures and practices- integrating with our culture however much they want to. fighting for the right of 'some amazonian tribe' is just recognising the importance of cultural differences. those against multiculturalism dont want the entire world to adopt their views and practices they just want a greater feeling of society and social cohesion in their own country.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by FT90)
    thats not hypocrisy!! disliking multiculturalism really is quite different to defending against cultural imperialism. multiculturalism means allowing people to enter your country retaining their own cultures and practices- integrating with our culture however much they want to. fighting for the right of 'some amazonian tribe' is just recognising the importance of cultural differences. those against multiculturalism dont want the entire world to adopt their views and practices they just want a greater feeling of society and social cohesion in their own country.
    Nah, being anti-multiculture usually always boils down to wanting everyone to conform to some prescribed 'national culture', and which is usually of a conservative nature. Social cohesion is all good and well but I'm not going to let the BNP tell me what food I should eat, what music I should listen to, what flag I should wave, or when I should wave it, what religion I should follow or what clothes I should wear, whether I'm white or not and whether I'm a recent immigrant or not, or whether I'm the offspring of a recent immigrant or not.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ninety_nine)
    The amount of BNP threads on here are ridiculous now. Hourly at best. It's just not interesting anymore. Same posters. Same arguments.
    Then maybe don't read them.

    Your not obliged to spend your whole life reading every TSR thread.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    Nah, being anti-multiculture usually always boils down to wanting everyone to conform to some prescribed 'national culture', and which is usually of a conservative nature. Social cohesion is all good and well but I'm not going to let the BNP tell me what food I should eat, what music I should listen to, what flag I should wave, or when I should wave it, what religion I should follow or what clothes I should wear, whether I'm white or not and whether I'm a recent immigrant or not, or whether I'm the offspring of a recent immigrant or not.
    hey dont get me wrong i dont approve of the BNP at all! but i dont think its fair to say that it always boils down to wanting everyone to conform to a national culture. thats the other extreme to multiculturalism..

    "But Britishness does not mean a single culture. Integration is the co-existence of communities and unimpeded movement between them, it is not assimilation." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3600791.stm
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trichomania)
    God how evil of western capitalism to go and rape those cultures and make them wealthier, healthier and more educated in the process. If I could choose between living in the prosperous modern world with its laws, healthcare, education, air travel, internet and the myriad possibilities and opportunities for self advancement; and subsistence farming or foraging about for roots day in day out for 40 years before I die of exhaustion with no hope of a better fate I'd definitely pick the latter.

    Your attitude smacks of the French arisocrats just before the revolution: They had little toy farms where they could spend their mornings idling about pretending to live the 'ideal life of the noble peasant' among nature before heading off to balls with the other nobles in the evening; all while the real peasants starved because there was no bread.
    I think I'll rep you tomorrow. What an awesome post.

    Incidentally, opposition to multiculturalism isn't always demanding that we all follow an arbitrarily set culture, Oswy... I oppose multiculturalism because I don't think the Government should have "culture policies."
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by FT90)
    hey dont get me wrong i dont approve of the BNP at all! but i dont think its fair to say that it always boils down to wanting everyone to conform to a national culture. thats the other extreme to multiculturalism..

    "But Britishness does not mean a single culture. Integration is the co-existence of communities and unimpeded movement between them, it is not assimilation." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3600791.stm
    Well I think of muliculturalism as being mostly an overt commitment to liberty in cultural life, provided people live within the law. If, in the era of accelerating globalisation, this means 'national' cultures (however they are described or prescribed) are perceived to be fading away as people choose to live their lives in any number of different ways within any given national setting, then so be it.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Bagration)
    ... Oswy... I oppose multiculturalism because I don't think the Government should have "culture policies."
    So you don't oppose the stated liberty of all individuals to live, culturally, as they choose, whether in relation to religion, food, dress, music, sexual practices, and so on? This is the idea of multi-cultural society as I tend to think of it and defend it. Governments and their policies relating to culture deserve a Gramsci-infused thread of their own, lol
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    So you don't oppose the stated liberty of all individuals to live, culturally, as they choose, whether in relation to religion, food, dress, music, sexual practices, and so on? This is the idea of multi-cultural society as I tend to think of it and defend it. Governments and their policies relating to culture deserve a Gramsci-infused thread of their own, lol
    No, I don't. What I do oppose is the Government making policy, policy proposals, and initiatives, regarding culture. You can go and pray in a Mosque and wear a Burqa, that's your right. And I can think badly of it, and thats' my right too. As long as no laws are made concerning their right to practice their culture or my right to disrespect their culture, then I'm fine. But I don't think thats multiculturalism. To me, multiculturalism means state forced acceptance of foreign cultures at the expense of the native culture.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trichomania)

    God how evil of western capitalism to go and rape those cultures and make them wealthier, healthier and more educated in the process. If I could choose between living in the prosperous modern world with its laws, healthcare, education, air travel, internet and the myriad possibilities and opportunities for self advancement; and subsistence farming or foraging about for roots day in day out for 40 years before I die of exhaustion with no hope of a better fate I'd definitely pick the latter.

    That's because you live in a capitalist society, it's all you know.

    Please don't make the assertion that just because we have "healthcare, education, air travel, internet etc" we're somehow superior. The by product of this enterprise is the social expense, we have a very individualistic way of living, that is detrimental to community. Its not all sun shine and happiness over here actually...

    You seem to have divided the world into "rich capitalists" and "poor peasants" as if its the duty of the "rich capitalists" to enlighten the the "poor peasants" out of there primal and backward lifestyles...

    This isn't actually the case, the wealth of society is not at all times proportional to social well being. Take Buddhists in Sikkim they are not wealthy but there spiritual fufillment and appreciation of life often surpasses hectic western lifestyles. Or the South pacific island (can't remember its name?) which is statistically the "happiest place on earth" despite living in what we would consider an impoverished lifestyle...

    Ofcourse there are cases in Africa where things aren't so harmonious I dare say greater western influence would be beneficial.

    Yet you seem to have implied that the mass scale reproduction of westernised systems, is unremmitingly superior to other cultures which to me shows a form of cultural arrogance which I deplore. Perhaps is I'm a French Aristocrat then your an early British imperialist...

    Western models can be good, but also can be corrosive and is certainly not the divine and absolute solution that you suggest.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Bagration)
    .... To me, multiculturalism means state forced acceptance of foreign cultures at the expense of the native culture.
    What a curious choice of words for a libertarian. Why should it matter if my cultural life is 'foreign'? Doesn't liberty trump all? Indeed if I practice it then in what sense is it still 'foreign' anyway?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    What a curious choice of words for a libertarian. Why should it matter if my cultural life is 'foreign'? Doesn't liberty trump all? Indeed if I practice it then in what sense is it still 'foreign' anyway?
    I don't care where it comes from. Many people would say that curry has become a part of British culture. That doesn't annoy me. What annoys me is the propaganda the state sends out and the legislation it creates against "racial hatred" and other forms of equality laws. I don't advocate either the Left or the BNP position. I advocate a return to what we used to have, that is, no policy whatsoever.

    What you seem to be denying is that the Government has a role in our present system of multikulti, which is just nonsense.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paul_r)
    That's because you live in a capitalist society, it's all you know.

    Please don't make the assertion that just because we have "healthcare, education, air travel, internet etc" we're somehow superior. The by product of this enterprise is the social expense, we have a very individualistic way of living, that is detrimental to community. Its not all sun shine and happiness over here actually...

    You seem to have divided the world into "rich capitalists" and "poor peasants" as if its the duty of the "rich capitalists" to enlighten the the "poor peasants" out of there primal and backward lifestyles...

    This isn't actually the case, the wealth of society is not at all times proportional to social well being. Take Buddhists in Sikkim they are not wealthy but there spiritual fufillment and appreciation of life often surpasses hectic western lifestyles. Or the South pacific island (can't remember its name?) which is statistically the "happiest place on earth" despite living in what we would consider an impoverished lifestyle...

    Ofcourse there are cases in Africa where things aren't so harmonious I dare say greater western influence would be beneficial.

    Yet you seem to have implied that the mass scale reproduction of westernised systems, is unremmitingly superior to other cultures which to me shows a form of cultural arrogance which I deplore.

    Capitalism can be good, but also can be corrosive and is certainly not the divine and absolute solution that you suggest.
    Nonsense. When half of your children die at childbirth, some more die because the water they drink is infected, and the rest, including your family and your village die of malaria, then you can make the claim we shouldn't give these people the right to choose between tribalism and civilisation. Perhaps when your parents are butchered by a murderous dictator for no other reason than ethnicity, you can claim we shouldn't give these people the right to choose between tribalism and civilisation. When you still think the most effective way of building a house is by using mud and thatch instead of brick and mortar, etc.

    We can give them the option of living in a western style society. Of course if they see what we have and decide they don't want it, like the Red Indians, they have the right to deny it... but they deserve it to be offered to them in the first place.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Bagration)
    I don't care where it comes from. Many people would say that curry has become a part of British culture. That doesn't annoy me. What annoys me is the propaganda the state sends out and the legislation it creates against "racial hatred" and other forms of equality laws. I don't advocate either the Left or the BNP position. I advocate a return to what we used to have, that is, no policy whatsoever.

    What you seem to be denying is that the Government has a role in our present system of multikulti, which is just nonsense.
    Ok, but you're now talking about laws relating to racism, not culture as such. I'm not denying that governments involve themselves in such things as 'culture' and 'heritage', both on the left and the right as it happens, and I'd even agree that it's dangerous territory. But I would defend 'racial hatred' laws because I think it is behaviour which causes real harm to innocent parties. The liberty of a Jew not to have to endure Nazi chanting outside their synagogue is more important to me than the liberty of the neo-Nazi to do the chanting, if this has me at odds with right-libertarians then so be it, I won't lose any sleep over that.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Nonsense. When half of your children die at childbirth, some more die because the water they drink is infected, and the rest, including your family and your village die of malaria, then you can make the claim we shouldn't give these people the right to choose between tribalism and civilisation. Perhaps when your parents are butchered by a murderous dictator for no other reason than ethnicity, you can claim we shouldn't give these people the right to choose between tribalism and civilisation. When you still think the most effective way of building a house is by using mud and thatch instead of brick and mortar, etc.

    We can give them the option of living in a western style society. Of course if they see what we have and decide they don't want it, like the Red Indians, they have the right to deny it... but they deserve it to be offered to them in the first place.
    Stop patronising "inferior" cultures, they're not all run by blood thirsty tyrants. I've accepted that where there is extreme poverty, Rwanda or Zimbabwae then it would be great to establish some form of industry protected by a constitutional government...

    But you can't market this as a blanket solution, as I say there are places in this world where people don't need Coca cola, Perez Hilton and internet cafe's, essentially the byproducts of westernised culture.

    I'm not averse to the idea of a take it or leave approach in theory, but in practice we know that its not the CHOICE of the grass roots of a culture. Its doesn't take many businesseman to transform the landscape of the society.

    Look at China, ofcourse what they have now is not necessarily worse than Maoism but I don't necessarily believe the children working 15 hour days in sweat shops are that grateful for our westernised models...
    I wonder is it a huge improvement on the Traditional Chinese way of life of centuries ago?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 21, 2009
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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

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