I think it will be hard to combat these movements because they don't just benefit from racial sentiments. These movements feed off a general sense of dissatisfaction, one that likely stems in part from a feeling a large part of society has of being neglected and essentially under siege in today's world. A world that is increasingly globalized, one where states are no longer necessarily the most powerful actors on the international stage, an age where we are relentlessly assaulted with news of wars, disease, disasters and extremism around the globe. These things feed a general dissatisfaction with politicians that are perceived to be doing nothing to stem the tide of what people see as major threats to their safety and prosperity.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
How can Europe combat its far-right nationalistic & racist political movements?
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
- Status
lol
It should be pointed out that 'Anglo-Saxons' refers to the Germanic tribes that migrated to Great Britain during the 5th century, as well as the indigenous population that adopted aspects of the culture and language. In fact the term 'Anglo-Saxons' translates as The English Saxons.
Anglo = English
Ayato Kanzaki
Member
Most of the people agreeing at least in part with the far-right aren't much concerned with the preservation of their culture, and much more about the economic impact of failed immigration.
The medias are for the most part biased toward the right ( if only because they're owned by some very rich individuals, and right-wing policies tend to favor them). So those medias jump on any opportunitty to depict the immigrants on a negative light.
And many other factors coupound the problem. There's Rap, who often describe the authorities, and especially cops, as the enemy. The cops are also doing their part by concentrating identity checks on anyone who isn't white. I'm white and over thirty, and I got such ID check only twice so far. Then there's the banlieues, low-cost areas where the cops won't dare enter unless in numbers, and only for major crimes like murder.
At last, it's much harder for the youth living in those areas to find a job. I've got a recruiter tell me that he won't interview someone from those areas, because public transports are often sabotaged, inducing many cases of being late, and because he don't want to worry about his workplace going up in flames if he has to fire that guy later. That's how serious this perception issue is.
If that weren't enough, there's also many cases of abuse of the social services, and the medias are making damned sure we know about it. Nevermind the fact that tax evasion and "fiscal optimisation" cost the country much more that those abuses.
So, many middle-aged or old men and women are leading toward the right and far-right. Because of anecdotic, personal experiences of rude, abusive behaviour or low-criminality were minorities are overly represented, because the medias are influencing them, and because their assets accumulated through a life of effort are less threatened by policies that want to crack down on socialism.
What can you do about it? Nothing. It just need time. Time for the age pyramid to favor the younger. Time for the minorities to increase in number so that other people would have more positive experience with them and realise that what the medias are telling them is bullshit.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
I want to give you a fistbump for there being another GAFfer who enjoys martial industrial and neofolk.
Anyway, it's not an easy issue to solve. Unchecked immigration is undeniably a problem, but mainly the problem stems from failed integretion into society. Partially due to some people just not WANTING to be integrated, and instead create their own little societies.
As a further ellaboration of my theory about extreme right wing resurgence being a reaction against a failed multiculturalist left wing ellectoral strategy, there's another obbvious variable in play: It is not only about economic class per se, but about its culture.
Thing is, multiculturalism advances at the expense of the local culture. And consequently, that strategy is bound to cause rejection among the people who prices said local culture. Which tends to be, invariably, the native lower-middle classes. Don't get me wrong: I do love cosmopolitianism, but I admit what it is: A luxury for middle-upper class urbanites such as myself. Rural dwellers and lower class urban populations doesn't have the same level of access to the good side of multiculturalism (expensive "ethnic" restaurants, high end foreign cultural activities) yet they have to deal with the bad, aka ghettoes and increased competition for lower paid jobs.
But in order to understand the hate, you have to add an additional ingredient: Hypocrisy coupled with said cultural agression. Hypocrisy, because as multiculturalists claims how different cultures are "enriching", multiculturalism displaces local culture yet they don't give a damn about it. Multiculturalists care about every single culture on Earth, except one: Their own. The double standard is sickening, and the message is clear: Different cultures, aka, exotic cultures are valuable. But your own? Boring traditional white men cultures sucks. Let them rot in order to pave the way for our glorious multicultural future. Oh, and if you have any problem with that state of affairs, that is not because you love your culture in the same way that inmigrants love theirs (equality goes both ways, right?) but rather because you are an evil racist, of course. Because multiculturalism is awesome and welcomes everyone, but your particular local culture must end since it's not valuable anymore (to rich urbanites, for whom folklore was always something un-glamorous) and despicable (to the left wing college students or ex-students that comprises the bulk of left wing party higher echelons).
The fixation with muslim inmigration exist because that is the most flagrant case of that double standard bullshit when it comes to multiculturalism: So local traditional culture is backwards, despicable and doesn't fit in this wonderful left wing big tent world despite of being shared by the bulk of the local working class, yet somehow the hardcore religious conservatism sposed by many muslim inmigrants is something wonderful, worth of being celebrated, cherised, defended in public and wholly in tune with the ideals of a modern left wing party? And people who dares to critisize it are automatically de facto fascists, even when they have been true, actual anti-fascist partisans like Oriana Fallacci? Seriously? Seriously?
From the bottom of my heart: Fuck. That. Shit. Fuck it with the sound and fury of a thousand drunken titans.
The problem is that the way the public has channeled that wrath and screamed that 100% deserved "fuck you" toward their (ex) left wing representatives has been these extreme right wing groups, because they feel angry and attacked, yet the public rarely reflect about where their anger and agression comes from. Enter the opportunistic racists popullists, and the rest is history.
Even if the public rarely reflects about their own rage (and consequently, said rage can be easily redirected and manipullated with ease), the support for these extreme right wing parties is not born out of rage against inmigrants per se (sorry Le Pen), but rather against the left wing ellites with vested interests in pushing their multicultural ellectoral strategy over the corpse of the of the native working class culture. That is what truthly angers them, even if they are not wholly aware of it,
In order to illustrate that point, take the case of that Breivik fucker-murderer: For all his self-agrandizing rethoric about racial purity, scary muslim invasion and other hateful imbecile sheanigans, his actions spoke far louder than his words: In the end he went out to kill not inmigrant children as his racist words would suggest, but perfectly white, albeit left winger children.
When you stop to think about what does it mean, the implications are enormous. I've said it before: stop trying to fit this phenomenom into a simple "everything is racist" neat narrative. It is not. Racism has always existed and will probably always exist in some form in every society, unfortunately. But these political movements are, then again, something else entirely.
Thing is, multiculturalism advances at the expense of the local culture. And consequently, that strategy is bound to cause rejection among the people who prices said local culture. Which tends to be, invariably, the native lower-middle classes. Don't get me wrong: I do love cosmopolitianism, but I admit what it is: A luxury for middle-upper class urbanites such as myself. Rural dwellers and lower class urban populations doesn't have the same level of access to the good side of multiculturalism (expensive "ethnic" restaurants, high end foreign cultural activities) yet they have to deal with the bad, aka ghettoes and increased competition for lower paid jobs.
But in order to understand the hate, you have to add an additional ingredient: Hypocrisy coupled with said cultural agression. Hypocrisy, because as multiculturalists claims how different cultures are "enriching", multiculturalism displaces local culture yet they don't give a damn about it. Multiculturalists care about every single culture on Earth, except one: Their own. The double standard is sickening, and the message is clear: Different cultures, aka, exotic cultures are valuable. But your own? Boring traditional white men cultures sucks. Let them rot in order to pave the way for our glorious multicultural future. Oh, and if you have any problem with that state of affairs, that is not because you love your culture in the same way that inmigrants love theirs (equality goes both ways, right?) but rather because you are an evil racist, of course. Because multiculturalism is awesome and welcomes everyone, but your particular local culture must end since it's not valuable anymore (to rich urbanites, for whom folklore was always something un-glamorous) and despicable (to the left wing college students or ex-students that comprises the bulk of left wing party higher echelons).
The fixation with muslim inmigration exist because that is the most flagrant case of that double standard bullshit when it comes to multiculturalism: So local traditional culture is backwards, despicable and doesn't fit in this wonderful left wing big tent world despite of being shared by the bulk of the local working class, yet somehow the hardcore religious conservatism sposed by many muslim inmigrants is something wonderful, worth of being celebrated, cherised, defended in public and wholly in tune with the ideals of a modern left wing party? And people who dares to critisize it are automatically de facto fascists, even when they have been true, actual anti-fascist partisans like Oriana Fallacci? Seriously? Seriously?
From the bottom of my heart: Fuck. That. Shit. Fuck it with the sound and fury of a thousand drunken titans.
The problem is that the way the public has channeled that wrath and screamed that 100% deserved "fuck you" toward their (ex) left wing representatives has been these extreme right wing groups, because they feel angry and attacked, yet the public rarely reflect about where their anger and agression comes from. Enter the opportunistic racists popullists, and the rest is history.
Even if the public rarely reflects about their own rage (and consequently, said rage can be easily redirected and manipullated with ease), the support for these extreme right wing parties is not born out of rage against inmigrants per se (sorry Le Pen), but rather against the left wing ellites with vested interests in pushing their multicultural ellectoral strategy over the corpse of the of the native working class culture. That is what truthly angers them, even if they are not wholly aware of it,
In order to illustrate that point, take the case of that Breivik fucker-murderer: For all his self-agrandizing rethoric about racial purity, scary muslim invasion and other hateful imbecile sheanigans, his actions spoke far louder than his words: In the end he went out to kill not inmigrant children as his racist words would suggest, but perfectly white, albeit left winger children.
When you stop to think about what does it mean, the implications are enormous. I've said it before: stop trying to fit this phenomenom into a simple "everything is racist" neat narrative. It is not. Racism has always existed and will probably always exist in some form in every society, unfortunately. But these political movements are, then again, something else entirely.
I'm not sure if you meant it that way, but I think that another important aspect is that these movements are based on how people feel things are. There was a thread a few months back (I think) about how bad people are at guessing various aspects of the society they live in, such as the number of immigrants, Muslims, people on welfare and so on.
This of course makes it even harder to combat. Sure, at one point or another "feelings" have a connection to reality, but it's really hard to get people convinced that reality isn't as exaggerated as they think it is.
Well, I also chimed in on that post, so there's at least
Bingo, it's why UKIP (right-wing) in Britain have capitalised on the Lib Dem (left-wing) "anything but Labour/Tory" vote now that Clegg's fucked up the left side of British politics for the next fifteen years.
How do we deal with the right-wing? That has to start at an educational level, and we won't see the benefits for a while yet. But just having people stand up and say "never again" to mark 70 years since the end of the Second World War would be a start.
What's your point? Crazy people exist in all cultures, that doesn't mean the whole culture is like the psycho(s) in question. Do you generalize the same way when Brevik was murdering people?
maniac-kun
Member
Well its not an isolated incident of a lunatic if you follow the news.
There was a public outcry all over the westen world when Brevik did his dispicable shit.
Where is the public outcry in the ME when attacks in the name of islam happen?
Good post, lot of food for thoughts. I think especially in Germany it's true that the 50s generation kicked everything in the balls which smelled German. And with lots of applause because after the nazis nothing could have redeemed this country. And the left movement from the late 60s was indeed super elitist. They were the brains, the freshness, the fashion, the hot thing really but they were not able to implement something akin to a common culture exactly because they didn't really care or listen to the "little" people. Of course it was all superficial and with the past they kinda cut off the lifeline of the country. Just recently approximately 2006 we found a new image of what it is to be German to identify with.
Add the former citizens of eastern Germany that were too old to adapt to the new system that now form a majority of the Pegida movement and you have a big source of frustration. They feel left out.
I think this is very valid. There are accounts about changing Christmas greetings to just s "Happy Holidays", Christmas tree taken down because its' "offensive" (see eg this link)<., even soccer/football teams changing the logo because it may be offensive and people that are against this are labelled racist or Islamophobe by these multiculturalism people, while at the same time it feels those other religions other than local one are protected, with restaurants and other services apologising just because they have certain meats on their menus. These are specific problems but I meant this as a general perception from the native culture pov about an external one.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Still salty about missing out on Laibach when they played here (Oslo) last year.
Exactly -- so much of it is a perceived loss of importance or influence, whether or not real or imagined. And these far right wing politicians legitimize these feelings. Part of the effect of globalization that would naturally diminish the importance of a specific culture, but there's also the perceived threat from an external force that comes from a general dissatisfaction. There's the feeling that "they" don't care about me.
To clarify this - post-Roman Britain was settled by three main groups: the Saxons, the Angles, and the Jutes. The Jutes seem to have assimilated into the Saxons and disappear from our history quite early on.
It is from 'Angle-land' that we get the modern 'England'. So the term Anglo-Saxon essentially points to the two principal Germanic cultures that created 'England'.
Incidentally, we can still see traces of these lost kingdoms in place-names like Essex ('Kingdom of the East Saxons') and East Anglia ('Kingdom of the East Angles').
jimbobsmells
Member
This is an excellent summation of how I perceive these people are feeling.
When I first moved to London I lived in Tower Hamlets for a couple of years and HOLY SHIT was that an eye opener. I completely understand how someone who lived in that area and saw it change over the last few decades would feel like they need to jump aboard the right-wing bandwagon - but there has to be a better solution.
petran79
Banned
still this doesnt change the fact that WWII was won mainly thanks to the sacrificices of Soviet troops and population.
Well, yeah, just trying to fight back against the neo-Stalinist revisionism that seemed to be creeping into this thread.
While it doesn't quite speak to you point, I am sometimes sympathetic to the concept of affirmative action, but it has needlessly radicalized a fair number of working class whites, and the current American political apparatus will never acknowledge that there are other issues involved (even if the current system is more or less de facto class based).
I wish parts of this country weren't so gawdammed racist so we could have a real discussion of the issue.but I'm not exactly optimistic when half the people I know listen to Alex Jones. Given that whites are eventually going to become more of a minority as time goes by, it's probably inevitable that there will probably be more self-styled racial "leaders" and "spokesmen" from the community as time goes on.
Canis lupus
Member
Immigrants will never assimilate but they will and have to integrate, people can perfectly integrate and be part of society without losing their cultural identity. Assimilation is a crime against humanity like the president of Turkey once said and I've never agreed with him or his government. We will not disregard our languages, religion or traditions, thankfully this will never happen. We can become successful without changing our names to Dave or John. So far it has worked well for me and millions of other people from immigrant families.
I dunno, some traditions like FGM or killing apostates or selling children into marriage should probably be disregarded...
Fenderputty
Banned
It's still a massive generalization though. Congrats!
You wrote a long and interesting post but for my purposes I'm just going to quote the one line.
I read a book once that discussed multiculturalism from the perspective of the native American and contended that it was a failure in Canada because the cultures remain notably secondary to the primary (white European) culture. Essentially, the argument is that white Canadians aren't really experiencing other cultures but merely appropriating them; we get steel drums playing Let it Be and jerk chicken but that's about as Caribbean as anyone will ever get. I once read a study (can't find it unfortunately, so you're going to have to take my word for it that it exists) that looked at theatre that represented primarily black casts and how the tendency for funding and popularity trended heavily towards this kind of superficial appropriation (in this context, think African drums) as opposed to plays exploring African/African diaspora themes written by black playwrights.
The point here is that I believe that the fear over an association between immigration and cultural displacement is entirely unfounded because the majority still rules in the places with the highest immigrant population in the world. Minorities are struggling to get more representation in a country that actively claims to represent all cultures. I therefore fail to see how being lenient about immigration and, y'know, not being racist poses any threat to the culture and laws of any democratic nation with a constitution.
I see this argument a lot and I can't help but feel you're conflating making people conform with our culture with making people conform with our laws. Nobody's saying we should allow immigrants to bypass consent in marriage so why is that even worth talking about? Furthermore, while selling children into marriage may not have been a European conception, it was definitely a thing in Europe until very recently so there's even less of a reason to believe that such a cultural characteristic would be permanently defining of a group of people.
StealthGoblin
Banned
Depends if that sub-community is segregating themselves from the rest of society in lots of ways. Islamic families tend to only really interact with other muslims unless it is unavoidable some of the time. They would obviously not be called 'German' or 'British' when they aren't making any effort to become part of that new community.
If they are making the effort and are living inside as a full member of that new community, they should of course be referred to as 'German/British/French' etc.
A strongly held opinion is that people aren't willing to sacrifice aspects of their own 'culture' while still wanting the benefits of the new culture. It'll never work like that. Has to be give and take. Not just take and complain or wonder why they aren't getting the respect they think they are entitled to or the political establishment says they deserve.
I'm from Essex in the UK and we have a high level of immigration. Maybe as a society we haven't been as welcoming as we should have been, but there is a deep feeling of that some immigrants while being in Rome, are not doing as the Romans do.
Is this actually true? Are there even statistics on this topic?
Even if it is true, is it really a surprise that Muslims would avoid integration when they are treated with contempt and hostility? If anything, the existence of proto-racist parties and attitudes only encourages them to be insular.
EDIT: This reminds me of how people feel about the Chinese where I live and it seems to me that the only reason that this argument is dead in public discourse is that the Chinese population has been here almost as long as the European population and people like Chinese food.
I don't think it's a failure of either wing but a result of the main parties becoming far too central to each other. People are feeling that there is no real choice anymore; this combined with the 'easy' target of immigration for the blame during a dire economic period means far right parties are more likely to win out from the alternative vote.
That makes sense. I've seen the US immigration model contrasted with the "European" system quite often, and pretty ignorantly assumed that British multiculturalism is the same as what exists in France.
The word "multiculturalism" is really never used stateside, which made me think that Britain (a country in which the word is used) treated its immigrants fundamentally differently.
Wow, thanks for the feedback, guys! I am glad to be able to defend the opposite point on a good manner 
This will keep happening as whites becomes a minority and double standards kept applying. You cannot seriously expect that preferential treatment, even if it is "positive discrimination", will not enrage even the most non-political, indifferent everyday joe. This is what the left wing refuses to acknowdegle, and it drives me mad. It is not racism, it is the most basic, primary of our own human emotions. If the other monkey is getting a grape, we want a goddamn grape too, not a crappy cucumber. Any other argument about historic reasons, structuralism or multicultural mumbo-jumbo becomes moot in the face of that sweet delicious grape that you're not getting.
I agree with the affirmation that "melting pot" cultures rarely assimilates foreign cultures 100%, as you can probably see with cuisine: What we in the west call "Chinese food" would make a mainlander Chinese barf, for example. But this "not quite Chinese, not quite western food" is, indeed, different from your local western cuisine too. It is a third product born out of blending these two things (Chinese and Western food). And as it makes inroads into the receptor culture, it makes them at the expense of the pre existing cultural landscape. Which is not something bad per se, but you get my point.
There's also another hugely important factor in play here that Americans usually overlook, and that it is crucial in order to understand that feeling of displacement: Class. Let me focus into this assertion:
This is not entirely true. The ruling class is the same that it ever was, inmigrants or not, yes. But the lower native classes are as under-represented as they ever were, similar skin color or not, it doesn't matter: Two Princenton graduates from wealthy families yet with different ethnicity have more in common than one poor white southern farmer and George Bush.
The thing is that in the past, elites shared (or at least, pretended to share) a cultural link with the lower classes: Well, I am mightily rich yet you're poor, yes, but lo and behold, we're both German / American / French / whatever! We have so many things in common! We speak the same language, dress in the same way, have the same hobbies, yadda, yadda. With multiculturalism, said link is broken: It is the elites that have access to that "not quite authentically foreign, yet exotic enough" type of culture, while their poorer constituents can't. This shatters the very fiber on which the nation state was born since nationalism is afterall, substained trought folklore and common customs. Without that bond, the poor native working class feels abbandoned, and the ruling class loose legitimacy in their eyes.
You cannot trow the baby and the bathwater, and I am quite convinced that a big part of Canada's multicultural success was, precisely, to retain key aspects of its original national culture as that book pointed out.
Laws and culture are 100% interwoven. Hell, the first constitution, the Roman "Mos maiorum", wasn't written because they were, literally "traditions of our elders", as in "these rules are so damn ingrained into our society that we don't need to write these norms down, we only write laws in order to develope them".
It is also understandable that as the ellectorate stop believing in a particular norm, they will push for legal changes so the legislation can reflect their personal beliefs, like it is happening with marijuana or gay marriage right now. Hence why is worrying that a majority of the muslim inmigrants holds blatantly retrograde views like thinking that blasphemy ought to be punished, even if said punishment doesn't necessarily means death, and even if there are laws on place that prevents that from happening (from now).
This will keep happening as whites becomes a minority and double standards kept applying. You cannot seriously expect that preferential treatment, even if it is "positive discrimination", will not enrage even the most non-political, indifferent everyday joe. This is what the left wing refuses to acknowdegle, and it drives me mad. It is not racism, it is the most basic, primary of our own human emotions. If the other monkey is getting a grape, we want a goddamn grape too, not a crappy cucumber. Any other argument about historic reasons, structuralism or multicultural mumbo-jumbo becomes moot in the face of that sweet delicious grape that you're not getting.
I agree with the affirmation that "melting pot" cultures rarely assimilates foreign cultures 100%, as you can probably see with cuisine: What we in the west call "Chinese food" would make a mainlander Chinese barf, for example. But this "not quite Chinese, not quite western food" is, indeed, different from your local western cuisine too. It is a third product born out of blending these two things (Chinese and Western food). And as it makes inroads into the receptor culture, it makes them at the expense of the pre existing cultural landscape. Which is not something bad per se, but you get my point.
There's also another hugely important factor in play here that Americans usually overlook, and that it is crucial in order to understand that feeling of displacement: Class. Let me focus into this assertion:
This is not entirely true. The ruling class is the same that it ever was, inmigrants or not, yes. But the lower native classes are as under-represented as they ever were, similar skin color or not, it doesn't matter: Two Princenton graduates from wealthy families yet with different ethnicity have more in common than one poor white southern farmer and George Bush.
The thing is that in the past, elites shared (or at least, pretended to share) a cultural link with the lower classes: Well, I am mightily rich yet you're poor, yes, but lo and behold, we're both German / American / French / whatever! We have so many things in common! We speak the same language, dress in the same way, have the same hobbies, yadda, yadda. With multiculturalism, said link is broken: It is the elites that have access to that "not quite authentically foreign, yet exotic enough" type of culture, while their poorer constituents can't. This shatters the very fiber on which the nation state was born since nationalism is afterall, substained trought folklore and common customs. Without that bond, the poor native working class feels abbandoned, and the ruling class loose legitimacy in their eyes.
You cannot trow the baby and the bathwater, and I am quite convinced that a big part of Canada's multicultural success was, precisely, to retain key aspects of its original national culture as that book pointed out.
Laws and culture are 100% interwoven. Hell, the first constitution, the Roman "Mos maiorum", wasn't written because they were, literally "traditions of our elders", as in "these rules are so damn ingrained into our society that we don't need to write these norms down, we only write laws in order to develope them".
It is also understandable that as the ellectorate stop believing in a particular norm, they will push for legal changes so the legislation can reflect their personal beliefs, like it is happening with marijuana or gay marriage right now. Hence why is worrying that a majority of the muslim inmigrants holds blatantly retrograde views like thinking that blasphemy ought to be punished, even if said punishment doesn't necessarily means death, and even if there are laws on place that prevents that from happening (from now).
D
Deleted member 125677
Unconfirmed Member
That's tough one. For starters we will have to find a way to channel ignorance and idiocy in a more constructive direction. If only we could convince people that xenophobia, laziness, illitteracy, lack of culture, and environmental hazards are stealing our jobs, girls and tax money we would be going somewhere!
I'm not convinced that culture is a zero-sum game. You assert that we gain it at the expense of the pre-existing cultural landscape, but how is that? What did we lose in exchange for American Chinese food? It's still very, very easy to get American food that has not been influenced by the imposition of soy sauce and MSG. More generally, I see no evidence that European culture is being impeded in any way by other cultures except that the cultural precepts of Europeans are now being looked at critically instead of taken for granted (resulting in the critical analysis of traditional gender roles, for example), which is universally good.
I strongly disagree that this was ever the case, and multiculturalism is not affecting this. The socioeconomic gap between the bourgeoisie and everyone else meant that their lives had almost nothing in common, and wealth gaps in previous eras were even larger. It's hard to imagine this being the case in a world where, for example, the music of the upper class was not even remotely accessible economically to the working class.
They didn't make an effort to preserve it, it's just what happened. Canada is still mostly white people despite years of immigration and white people do white people things without anyone having to force them to do so, either economically or socially.
I think that a Muslim majority would be no more dangerous than a Christian majority if it occurred in a first-world country with the requisite church-state separation. Nevermind that such a thing happening in a European country would probably never happen and, if it did, would doubtless come with like, a century of warning.
ReplacementPelican
Member
Those links you posted don't seem to back your point. Real Madrid's decision was because they wanted financial aid, it was a business decision and the first one isn't even about a Christmas tree being taken down it's about Brussels having a 'modern art' Christmas tree and it even contains this:
Your link is actually about people being stupid and overreacting to a modern art Christmas tree with a 'political correctness gone mad!' attitude.
and businesses and schools say 'Happy Holidays' to be nice, it's a nice thing to do and I will never understand people getting uppity because people are trying to be nice and inclusive, it makes you seem petty and ridiculous quite frankly.
I've been enjoying reading this thread but I really, really felt the need to call this out.
appaws
Banned
Ikael, your posts are some of the most worthwhile I have read on GAF. Thank you.
petran79
Banned
The peculiarity with DDR, unlike other socialist countries, is that it wasnt liberated but rather bought by BRD
Phantast2k
Member
Charlie Hebdo attack: first attempts at apologism in Germany.
Ken Jebsen (Moustafa Kashefi) is an Iranian-German tv moderator who was fired for antisemitism and is now the face of German truthers / Putin fans.
His analysis of the attack: https://www.facebook.com/KenFM.de/photos/a.402486811582.184264.352426141582/10152518546596583
Basically: "Just like 9/11, riiight?" "Just like MH17, riiight?" USA, NATO, NSA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bushido is a German-Tunisian rapper, allegedly affiliated to a Lebanese crime syndicate.
(posted yesterday)
Both of them are not devout Muslims (afaik), but both of them are certainly perceived as Muslims by parts of the German society. They are not helping the topic at hand, that's for sure.
Ken Jebsen (Moustafa Kashefi) is an Iranian-German tv moderator who was fired for antisemitism and is now the face of German truthers / Putin fans.
His analysis of the attack: https://www.facebook.com/KenFM.de/photos/a.402486811582.184264.352426141582/10152518546596583
Basically: "Just like 9/11, riiight?" "Just like MH17, riiight?" USA, NATO, NSA.
https://twitter.com/TeamKenFM/status/553519842654175234
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bushido is a German-Tunisian rapper, allegedly affiliated to a Lebanese crime syndicate.
(posted yesterday)
Both of them are not devout Muslims (afaik), but both of them are certainly perceived as Muslims by parts of the German society. They are not helping the topic at hand, that's for sure.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked