Sigh. The EU fucks up again
-
Nevertheless, Sunday's vote marks a significant shift in German politics, with initial projections showing the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party winning over 13 percent of the vote[^] 94 seats will be won by the AFD. Who are they? The party was founded on opposition to Germany's financial support of other Eurozone states and the third main point of its initial platform called for Germany to cede no further elements of its sovereignty to the EU without approval via a referendum[^] Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe, if it had not forced ever closer union on Europe, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of Europe, there would not be an AFD. There would not have been a Brexit. The far right would not have gained such support across europe. The EU by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will continental Europeans learn for fucks sake.
-
Nevertheless, Sunday's vote marks a significant shift in German politics, with initial projections showing the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party winning over 13 percent of the vote[^] 94 seats will be won by the AFD. Who are they? The party was founded on opposition to Germany's financial support of other Eurozone states and the third main point of its initial platform called for Germany to cede no further elements of its sovereignty to the EU without approval via a referendum[^] Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe, if it had not forced ever closer union on Europe, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of Europe, there would not be an AFD. There would not have been a Brexit. The far right would not have gained such support across europe. The EU by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will continental Europeans learn for fucks sake.
The EU is the modern incarnation of the House of Bourbon, of whom it was said that they learnt nothing and forgot nothing. :sigh:
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Nevertheless, Sunday's vote marks a significant shift in German politics, with initial projections showing the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party winning over 13 percent of the vote[^] 94 seats will be won by the AFD. Who are they? The party was founded on opposition to Germany's financial support of other Eurozone states and the third main point of its initial platform called for Germany to cede no further elements of its sovereignty to the EU without approval via a referendum[^] Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe, if it had not forced ever closer union on Europe, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of Europe, there would not be an AFD. There would not have been a Brexit. The far right would not have gained such support across europe. The EU by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will continental Europeans learn for fucks sake.
Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the US had not forced immigration on the States, if it had not forced ever closer union on South America, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of the States, there would not be a Trump. There would not have been a Wall. The far right would not have gained such support across the States. The States by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will the USA learn for f***s sake. Sorry could not resist. By far you did not understand the election and it's results. Also you did not check back the actual results. Like most from across the pond or even in Europe you don't understand how the politics work in Germany.
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
} -
Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the US had not forced immigration on the States, if it had not forced ever closer union on South America, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of the States, there would not be a Trump. There would not have been a Wall. The far right would not have gained such support across the States. The States by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will the USA learn for f***s sake. Sorry could not resist. By far you did not understand the election and it's results. Also you did not check back the actual results. Like most from across the pond or even in Europe you don't understand how the politics work in Germany.
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}HobbyProggy wrote:
By far you did not understand the election and it's results
So I am British, have lived in many countries in Europe, including Germany. So tell me what I dont know about German politics. Tell me where you think what I said is wrong?
-
Nevertheless, Sunday's vote marks a significant shift in German politics, with initial projections showing the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party winning over 13 percent of the vote[^] 94 seats will be won by the AFD. Who are they? The party was founded on opposition to Germany's financial support of other Eurozone states and the third main point of its initial platform called for Germany to cede no further elements of its sovereignty to the EU without approval via a referendum[^] Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe, if it had not forced ever closer union on Europe, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of Europe, there would not be an AFD. There would not have been a Brexit. The far right would not have gained such support across europe. The EU by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will continental Europeans learn for fucks sake.
-
SO if the EU had implemented far right policies, we wouldn't have to worry about the far right now? Riiiight....
I dont even know if I should respond to such a childish reply, but here goes: The EU has ignored, by trying to erode national borders, by trying to erode the sense of race, the sentiment of the people. This has lead to the rise of the far right across europe as a response, not because the people want a far right, but is only the far right that is talking to their concerns. The EU doesnt have to implement far right policies to win these people back, it just has to let the process of integration and a true European nation happen naturally, over centuries, and not try to force the issue in 10.
-
I dont even know if I should respond to such a childish reply, but here goes: The EU has ignored, by trying to erode national borders, by trying to erode the sense of race, the sentiment of the people. This has lead to the rise of the far right across europe as a response, not because the people want a far right, but is only the far right that is talking to their concerns. The EU doesnt have to implement far right policies to win these people back, it just has to let the process of integration and a true European nation happen naturally, over centuries, and not try to force the issue in 10.
Uh... "some people", if you please, not "the people". The majority of Europeans (and even Brits, I'd wager, despite the recent Brexit vote) are behind the EU. That there are vocal and ugly nationalist voices being raised now has less to do with open borders than with the disaster that deregulation of the financial sector has wreaked upon the economies, and some people are looking for an easy target to blame. Of course, immigrants and foreigners provide such an easy target. IF these people had any sense they'd know who their real enemy is: the 1%.
-
Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the US had not forced immigration on the States, if it had not forced ever closer union on South America, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of the States, there would not be a Trump. There would not have been a Wall. The far right would not have gained such support across the States. The States by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will the USA learn for f***s sake. Sorry could not resist. By far you did not understand the election and it's results. Also you did not check back the actual results. Like most from across the pond or even in Europe you don't understand how the politics work in Germany.
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}I wouldn't compare Europe to the US; the latter is a semi-functioning collection of states with similar interests. You can hardly say that the Dutch have the same interests as the Greeks, nor that they share common goals. Dutch newspapers opened with "Merkels victory feels like a defeat", with the AfD gaining one million votes. Meaning they gained a vote for every refugee entering Germany in 2015. Mr. Macron congratulated Merkel on Twitter, calling for more Europe. It looks like the voters are moving in the opposite direction. You can wave the idea of a global community goodbye :) How long since there was a right party in the Reichstagsgebäude?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Uh... "some people", if you please, not "the people". The majority of Europeans (and even Brits, I'd wager, despite the recent Brexit vote) are behind the EU. That there are vocal and ugly nationalist voices being raised now has less to do with open borders than with the disaster that deregulation of the financial sector has wreaked upon the economies, and some people are looking for an easy target to blame. Of course, immigrants and foreigners provide such an easy target. IF these people had any sense they'd know who their real enemy is: the 1%.
A_Griffin wrote:
The majority of Europeans (and even Brits, I'd wager, despite the recent Brexit vote) are behind the EU.
And exactly what evidence do you have for that claim? The majority of Europeans, I suspect, are in favour of the Common Market (which we voted for 40 years ago), but not the EU superstate (which none of us voted for).
-
A_Griffin wrote:
The majority of Europeans (and even Brits, I'd wager, despite the recent Brexit vote) are behind the EU.
And exactly what evidence do you have for that claim? The majority of Europeans, I suspect, are in favour of the Common Market (which we voted for 40 years ago), but not the EU superstate (which none of us voted for).
-
Nevertheless, Sunday's vote marks a significant shift in German politics, with initial projections showing the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party winning over 13 percent of the vote[^] 94 seats will be won by the AFD. Who are they? The party was founded on opposition to Germany's financial support of other Eurozone states and the third main point of its initial platform called for Germany to cede no further elements of its sovereignty to the EU without approval via a referendum[^] Anti islam, anti immigration, anti gay, anti AGW, etc, the usual. If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe, if it had not forced ever closer union on Europe, if it had not dictated and instead listened to the people of Europe, there would not be an AFD. There would not have been a Brexit. The far right would not have gained such support across europe. The EU by its very dictatorial idealism is in fact destroying itself. When will continental Europeans learn for fucks sake.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe
The EU Needs A Three-Child Policy – And China Should Pay For It! | Zero Hedge[^] So, an economic move by Europe, not humanitarian one as Merkel promotes it. It is not about saving people from war elsewhere, it is about our workforce and its economics. Sounds very honest of our patriottic politicians, who are paid to work in our interest, and who would technically ensure a democratic process. The EU is as democratic as a drunk Juncker :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Well, no more hard evidence than you for your claim - but despite the rise of the right, most recent elections in Europe are returning pro-European parties to power, albeit with reduced votes.
-
Uh... "some people", if you please, not "the people". The majority of Europeans (and even Brits, I'd wager, despite the recent Brexit vote) are behind the EU. That there are vocal and ugly nationalist voices being raised now has less to do with open borders than with the disaster that deregulation of the financial sector has wreaked upon the economies, and some people are looking for an easy target to blame. Of course, immigrants and foreigners provide such an easy target. IF these people had any sense they'd know who their real enemy is: the 1%.
A_Griffin wrote:
IF these people had any sense they'd know who their real enemy is: the 1%.
..which is a reason to be against the EU. It seems that democracy in Europe is determined in Brussels, mostly based on economic motives. With Draghi stealing money and people inventing new forms of inflation just to keep things looking "normal" :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Well I didn't claim hard evidence. I merely said that is what I suspect, from reading news items, listening to discussions and talking with other people. Which of the two main parties in the UK would you class as pro-European (whatever that means)?
The UK's a special case, after Brexit. Both the Tories and Labour now have their knickers in a twist over the issue. Both have a split down the middle of their supporters, and both parties are afraid to alienate either half. We're screwed, here, most likely to end up with the worst of everything, with both parties caught in a trap of our own making.
-
A_Griffin wrote:
IF these people had any sense they'd know who their real enemy is: the 1%.
..which is a reason to be against the EU. It seems that democracy in Europe is determined in Brussels, mostly based on economic motives. With Draghi stealing money and people inventing new forms of inflation just to keep things looking "normal" :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
It would be if our own governments were any better. But this whole sorry mess was kicked off not by the EU but by Thatcher and Reagan. Thinking that Brexit will enable us to "take back control" and be democratic here is a idiotic as the US thinking Trump would do the same for them. Forget democracy, freedom and privacy. They are dead. They were an historical anomaly that flourished briefly in the 20th century, that's all. They were, as Ghandi said about democracy, "a nice idea", but we've lost them now, their Achilles Heel having been exposed once too often to the poisoned arrow of stupidity. Meanwhile, the planet is in real danger, and it requires global solutions. There is no point in country X adopting policies to reduce population, CO2, debt, war, migration, famine if country Y is doing the opposite. Countries need to come together, not break apart.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
If the EU had not forced immigration on Europe
The EU Needs A Three-Child Policy – And China Should Pay For It! | Zero Hedge[^] So, an economic move by Europe, not humanitarian one as Merkel promotes it. It is not about saving people from war elsewhere, it is about our workforce and its economics. Sounds very honest of our patriottic politicians, who are paid to work in our interest, and who would technically ensure a democratic process. The EU is as democratic as a drunk Juncker :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Well, whatever the case, if Europe needs more people, surely it's better to bring in migrants who need and want to work than to increase the birth-rate. Whatever the economy needs, the planet does not need an ever increasing population. There are people already born queuing up to work - use them!
-
It would be if our own governments were any better. But this whole sorry mess was kicked off not by the EU but by Thatcher and Reagan. Thinking that Brexit will enable us to "take back control" and be democratic here is a idiotic as the US thinking Trump would do the same for them. Forget democracy, freedom and privacy. They are dead. They were an historical anomaly that flourished briefly in the 20th century, that's all. They were, as Ghandi said about democracy, "a nice idea", but we've lost them now, their Achilles Heel having been exposed once too often to the poisoned arrow of stupidity. Meanwhile, the planet is in real danger, and it requires global solutions. There is no point in country X adopting policies to reduce population, CO2, debt, war, migration, famine if country Y is doing the opposite. Countries need to come together, not break apart.
A_Griffin wrote:
Forget democracy, freedom and privacy. They are dead. They were an historical anomaly that flourished briefly in the 20th century, that's all.
Haha, yes, let's ignore Athens again :D If democracy is dead, then we can save a lot of money by not having elections at all, but I doubt that idea would find widespread support.
A_Griffin wrote:
Meanwhile, the planet is in real danger, and it requires global solutions. There is no point in country X adopting policies to reduce population, CO2, debt, war, migration, famine if country Y is doing the opposite. Countries need to come together, not break apart.
That's the globalist advert, and it is nonsense. If there's a need for an international solution or action, it will follow. We did so with Ebola and other occasions. If there is no global support for reducing CO2, then that must be because not everyone is convinced about the necessity. The only way you can "make" them if you can't convince them is by conquest. Now why would any country refuse to partake if the danger is that obvious? :D Pro-Europeans seem to be confused about what is happening; Catalonia does not have the same goals as Spain, Holland does not have interest in the debts of Italy, and some East-European countries simply say "Fuck You" to Europe. Any farmer will explain that a single crop (a monoculture) is more risky than a diversified crop. Stock-traders will explain the same thing. Breeders will explain the same thing. A large single entity is more fragile, with small problems in one area rippling through the entire entity. Or simpeler; If Italy (or Greece) goes bankrupt, would you rather see all other countries bankrupt too? Or would you prefer a border that dampens the effect? That is Europe on this moment - a group of countries going bankrupt together. The age of the globalist is ending :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Well, whatever the case, if Europe needs more people, surely it's better to bring in migrants who need and want to work than to increase the birth-rate. Whatever the economy needs, the planet does not need an ever increasing population. There are people already born queuing up to work - use them!
We don't need more people. Whether or not we do is not even part of the discussion, because we're simply "saving people from war".
A_Griffin wrote:
There are people already born queuing up to work
No, they're not lining up. They are making headlines, but not in those terms. Which is understandable and predictable.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
A_Griffin wrote:
Forget democracy, freedom and privacy. They are dead. They were an historical anomaly that flourished briefly in the 20th century, that's all.
Haha, yes, let's ignore Athens again :D If democracy is dead, then we can save a lot of money by not having elections at all, but I doubt that idea would find widespread support.
A_Griffin wrote:
Meanwhile, the planet is in real danger, and it requires global solutions. There is no point in country X adopting policies to reduce population, CO2, debt, war, migration, famine if country Y is doing the opposite. Countries need to come together, not break apart.
That's the globalist advert, and it is nonsense. If there's a need for an international solution or action, it will follow. We did so with Ebola and other occasions. If there is no global support for reducing CO2, then that must be because not everyone is convinced about the necessity. The only way you can "make" them if you can't convince them is by conquest. Now why would any country refuse to partake if the danger is that obvious? :D Pro-Europeans seem to be confused about what is happening; Catalonia does not have the same goals as Spain, Holland does not have interest in the debts of Italy, and some East-European countries simply say "Fuck You" to Europe. Any farmer will explain that a single crop (a monoculture) is more risky than a diversified crop. Stock-traders will explain the same thing. Breeders will explain the same thing. A large single entity is more fragile, with small problems in one area rippling through the entire entity. Or simpeler; If Italy (or Greece) goes bankrupt, would you rather see all other countries bankrupt too? Or would you prefer a border that dampens the effect? That is Europe on this moment - a group of countries going bankrupt together. The age of the globalist is ending :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Well I'm not arguing for a single European super-state, but a confederation of semi-autonomous nations would be better equipped to confront global issues than a load of fully independent ones. A farmer, if you want to use that as an analogy, will rotate crops, not treat each field independently - the whole farm has to work as one. Independent countries each selfishly following what they perceive at any one moment as their own best interests is not in the long term best interests of everyone (including them).
-
We don't need more people. Whether or not we do is not even part of the discussion, because we're simply "saving people from war".
A_Griffin wrote:
There are people already born queuing up to work
No, they're not lining up. They are making headlines, but not in those terms. Which is understandable and predictable.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Yes, unfortunately the way the MSM works such headlines are indeed understandable and predictable... Most people, in any group, want to work. Terrorists are a (very small) minority. Benefits slackers are a (pretty small) minority. Both within indigenous populations and immigrant ones. The vast majority of people want to contribute and feel useful and earn money.