Right wing parties in Europe are mostly atheistic or agnostic, because christians are a minority that is getting smaller and smaller. Right wing parties in Europa are not even conservative in a way that the USA is using that terminology. Almost every right wing party is for example pro abortion and seeks to separate religion from schools and politics. They see themselves as liberals and atheists and try to defend the local (progressive) way of living. Therefor they are against islamic fundamentalists because they are a threath against those values. Those ideas are mostly pretty mild like sending the criminal immigrant back to his/her former country if they still have a passport from that country and closing the borders for illegal immigrants. I am not sure if they will cause problems like introducing a bad sprea of racism. The bigger problem is that most of those parties are led by politically incompetent people that suddenly get more political power that they can handle. They are sort of a one issue party and not ready to tackle other issues. The parties grow big very fast, introducing more inexperienced luck seekers and the party fail to rule the country in a very bad way. We have seen this with the LPF a few years back and also Geert Wilders from the PVV has not a political party that will be able to rule the Netherlands for 4 years with success. They already had numerous internal fights and scandals. But people still want to vote for these parties because they are the only ones brave enough to tell the truth.
Thanks for the knowledge! Interesting difference in dynamics between the right wing in Europe and US, quite a difference. Always good to hear about an issue from someone who is on the front lines so to speak.
Yes and these parties are only going to increase in strength. Perhaps my labels are a bit hyperbolic, but there are enough to cause trouble I assure you. I think the semantic problem you are probably having with me is the use of Christianity, you are correct I am not well versed in European politics to know the religious demographic of right wing parties to know whether they are mostly Christian or not.
Right wing parties in Europe are mostly atheistic or agnostic, because christians are a minority that is getting smaller and smaller. Right wing parties in Europa are not even conservative in a way that the USA is using that terminology. Almost every right wing party is for example pro abortion and seeks to separate religion from schools and politics. They see themselves as liberals and atheists and try to defend the local (progressive) way of living. Therefor they are against islamic fundamentalists because they are a threath against those values. Those ideas are mostly pretty mild like sending the criminal immigrant back to his/her former country if they still have a passport from that country and closing the borders for illegal immigrants. I am not sure if they will cause problems like introducing a bad sprea of racism. The bigger problem is that most of those parties are led by politically incompetent people that suddenly get more political power that they can handle. They are sort of a one issue party and not ready to tackle other issues. The parties grow big very fast, introducing more inexperienced luck seekers and the party fail to rule the country in a very bad way. We have seen this with the LPF a few years back and also Geert Wilders from the PVV has not a political party that will be able to rule the Netherlands for 4 years with success. They already had numerous internal fights and scandals. But people still want to vote for these parties because they are the only ones brave enough to tell the truth.
"Right wing xenophobic facist Christians". Where in Europe do we have those in such great numbers that they will cause problems? You are not from Europe arent you? No, there will be a (I hope just cold) war between right wing Islamic fundamentalist and the average native citizen of Europe. There is a xenofobic (towards islam) political party (which I do not support) in the Netherlands called the PVV and they already have more votes than there are active christians in the Netherlands. Those active christians tend to vote for the CU and the SGP which are (obviously) christian political parties and they are generally very generous towards refugees and immigrants. Although the SGP occasionally warns about some of the bad habbits of the islamic fundamentalists.
Yes progressive socialism will die. Just because it's not sustainable when millions of illegal immigrants invade your country. Not because the citizens like to see it go away. I prefer socialism too, but there is already 52% tax on my income, 21% tax on everything I buy and up to 70% tax on gasoil, gas, electricity, water and basically everything that you need on a daily basis. I pay tax for the roads I drive on. I pay tax for the house I live in. I pay tax for the land I own. I pay tax for the dog, for the use of the toilet, for the fact that there are dikes and they need to be maintained. I even pay tax for the money I own and if I die I pay tax for the things I left behind. There is not much financial room left for tax increases. There is already a problem that for incomes below 1800 euro a month a social income is more lucrative and you don't even need to work anymore. That's because the social incomes have tax relieves on almost everything.
Yes and these parties are only going to increase in strength. Perhaps my labels are a bit hyperbolic, but there are enough to cause trouble I assure you. I think the semantic problem you are probably having with me is the use of Christianity, you are correct I am not well versed in European politics to know the religious demographic of right wing parties to know whether they are mostly Christian or not.
Perhaps if we changed this thread title to the end of European Progressive Socialism maybe the discussion would be different? Seems to me this whole situation will do nothing but produce a culture and religious war between right wing Islamic fundamentalist and right wing xenophobic facist Christians who will do nothing but gain power as the on the ground problems of everyday European citizens cause the frustration to mount at the ineffectiveness of the progressive governments to protect them and their progressive way of life. The ultimate losers will be women, minorities of all types and social progressives which is the irony of it all.
"Right wing xenophobic facist Christians". Where in Europe do we have those in such great numbers that they will cause problems? You are not from Europe arent you? No, there will be a (I hope just cold) war between right wing Islamic fundamentalist and the average native citizen of Europe. There is a xenofobic (towards islam) political party (which I do not support) in the Netherlands called the PVV and they already have more votes than there are active christians in the Netherlands. Those active christians tend to vote for the CU and the SGP which are (obviously) christian political parties and they are generally very generous towards refugees and immigrants. Although the SGP occasionally warns about some of the bad habbits of the islamic fundamentalists.
Yes progressive socialism will die. Just because it's not sustainable when millions of illegal immigrants invade your country. Not because the citizens like to see it go away. I prefer socialism too, but there is already 52% tax on my income, 21% tax on everything I buy and up to 70% tax on gasoil, gas, electricity, water and basically everything that you need on a daily basis. I pay tax for the roads I drive on. I pay tax for the house I live in. I pay tax for the land I own. I pay tax for the dog, for the use of the toilet, for the fact that there are dikes and they need to be maintained. I even pay tax for the money I own and if I die I pay tax for the things I left behind. There is not much financial room left for tax increases. There is already a problem that for incomes below 1800 euro a month a social income is more lucrative and you don't even need to work anymore. That's because the social incomes have tax relieves on almost everything.
Society in western Europe is on the verge of breaking down amid chaotic violence caused by economic dislocation, mass immigration and terrorism. This is not the view of some ‘crazy survivalist’ but of the head of the Swiss Armed Forces.
Lieutenant-General André Blattmann has issued a warning to the Swiss people that society is dangerously close to collapse and advised those not already armed as part of the Swiss Army reserve to take steps to arm themselves. Blattmann has been head of the Armed Forces since, 1 March 2009 and his words carry very significant weight in a country in which several Citizens’ Initiative referenda against burqas and mosques have proven enormously popular as concerns grow about immigration and Islamisation.
In the last two World Wars, the Swiss combination of mountains and armed citizenry preserved the country’s peace and neutrality, but in the coming conflict, Switzerland already has its own massive fifth column.
According to the newspaper Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten:
The situation is growing increasingly risky, Blattman begins.
“The threat of terror is rising, hybrid wars are being fought around the globe; the economic outlook is gloomy and the resulting migration flows of displaced persons and refugees have assumed unforeseen dimensions.”
Blattmann: “Social unrest can not be ruled out”, the vocabulary in public discourse will “dangerously aggressive.”
“The mixture is increasingly unappetizing” Blattmann sees the basis of Swiss prosperity and society, “has long been once again called into question.”
He recalls the situation around the two world wars in the last century and advises Switzerland, to arm themselves.
The Swiss Armed Forces have in the past held general manouvres in which the starting point was social unrest in neighbouring countries. They, of course, include France and Austria, both of which face massive problems with immigration, Islamisation and elite repression of popular concern about what is going on. The Lieutenant-General’s warning echoes that of Rear Admiral Chris Parry in 2006, when he said that the combination of immigration and Islam would cause “a civilisational collapse on a par with the fall of the Roman Empire”.
At the time, Parry was quizzed by hostile journalists but stuck to his guns, as did the then head of the British Armed Forces, who defended him on the basis that he hadn’t said that it definitely would happen, but was only warning what would happen unless the politicians addressed the problems. Needless to say, they failed to do so, in fact, they actually speeded the whole process up.
The frightening conclusion presented by the Armed Forces army chief in an internal document.
- It is absolutely seriously. It is about preparing for the worst, says General Anders Brännström.
Draws parallels to the 30's
Brännström says to Aftonbladet that the serious security situation in Europe and the world is behind the conclusion.He highlights the terror group IS and unrest in Russia and Ukraine as concrete dangers.
- One can draw parallels to the 1930s. A great uncertainty and great dynamics which then led to that it was a great war. This time we managed to keep us out. It is not at all certain that we succeed this time, he says.
Is this your personal opinion or the Armed Forces in general?
- That there is a serious position shared by most. It is a completely different situation than it was ten years ago.
- It is much stronger now focusing on national defense.Just listen to Peter Hultqvist. It is absolutely seriously. It is about preparing for the worst.
Perhaps if we changed this thread title to the end of European Progressive Socialism maybe the discussion would be different? Seems to me this whole situation will do nothing but produce a culture and religious war between right wing Islamic fundamentalist and right wing xenophobic facist Christians who will do nothing but gain power as the on the ground problems of everyday European citizens cause the frustration to mount at the ineffectiveness of the progressive governments to protect them and their progressive way of life. The ultimate losers will be women, minorities of all types and social progressives which is the irony of it all.
if you think I am going to get into a pissing match with someone who wants to interpret all available evidence to justify his biased slant then think again.
Nobody is saying this is easy, nobody is saying it is not going to be without problems. Nobody is saying this is even going to make Europe better in any purely utilitarian sense. It might well not. It might make Europe even more messy, chaotic, and unpredictable. You could also interpret that to mean more colourful, diversified and interesting. But these are all subjective terms and in the end all your arguing is a purely subjective rant against people who are different from you. You are just scared of them and scared of change. Your thoughts are also fundamentally at odds with most of the ideas that have made Europe great.
That's exactly the behaviour that is destroying Europe right this moment. You are above the negative facts. You embrace change. You belong to the good side. You better ignore the ramblings of the bad side. They are wrong. They just are plain wrong because they say things that are politically incorrect. Your side made Europe the nice place you live in. The bad side did all the bad stuff like WOII and the enviromental polution.
Ok, lets see what the good side has to say: http://nos.nl/artikel/2082786-timmermans-meer-dan-helft-vluchtelingen-heeft-economisch-motief.html It's a Dutch article from a "one open europe for everyone" politician. Even he is starting to admit that 60% of the refugees are economic refugees. They do not come from warzones like Syria, but from for example Marocco and Tunesia. These are facts from Frontex (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontex) Like Sweden and Germany the Dutch "good side" also tried to ignore and hide the facts, but since Cologne and Paris I see a change in direction by even the most "Look at me, I embrace my new islamic friends"-politicians. There is a reason for that. There is a reason that Merkel now admits that she has a problem. There is a reason that countries like Germany and France reissued border patrol. My rants are about the fact that I do not see Syrian families ariving in the Netherlands but men from a broad spectrum of nationalities. And (not like in the USA) they are here to work, but to enjoy the social income that is intended for the sick and the poor Dutch citizen. I have shown that work participation on former economic refugees from these countries is very low (46%) and they contribute for almost 50% of the criminal acts in the Netherlands. These are not biased slants or subjective rants, but facts.
I have many friends from different orrigin and I normally embrace change. I like that for example Polish people see chances in our country. They come here to work. They contribute to the economy and society. I have friends from Ukraine, Zambia, Columbia and South Africa. I don't care about skin colour or orrigin. I do care about the country I live in and my working and Dutch speaking immigrant friends do too. That makes the difference.
if you think I am going to get into a pissing match with someone who wants to interpret all available evidence to justify his biased slant then think again.
Nobody is saying this is easy, nobody is saying it is not going to be without problems. Nobody is saying this is even going to make Europe better in any purely utilitarian sense. It might well not. It might make Europe even more messy, chaotic, and unpredictable. You could also interpret that to mean more colourful, diversified and interesting. But these are all subjective terms and in the end all your arguing is a purely subjective rant against people who are different from you. You are just scared of them and scared of change. Your thoughts are also fundamentally at odds with most of the ideas that have made Europe great.
Well said. I don''t think you should have restricted it to Europe.
if you think I am going to get into a pissing match with someone who wants to interpret all available evidence to justify his biased slant then think again.
Nobody is saying this is easy, nobody is saying it is not going to be without problems. Nobody is saying this is even going to make Europe better in any purely utilitarian sense. It might well not. It might make Europe even more messy, chaotic, and unpredictable. You could also interpret that to mean more colourful, diversified and interesting. But these are all subjective terms and in the end all your arguing is a purely subjective rant against people who are different from you. You are just scared of them and scared of change. Your thoughts are also fundamentally at odds with most of the ideas that have made Europe great.
In Sweden yesterday a 22 year old female migrant centre worker was stabbed to death by a 15 year old asylum seeker. The police are under orders to cover up the identities of criminals and will not readily admit when asylums seekers are the perpetrators.
It’s hard to recognise some of the stories coming out of Sweden nowadays. Yesterday, a 15-year-old at an immigration centre stabbed and killed one of its female employees in Mölndal, near Gothenburg. It’s the kind of story that shakes the country to its bones. Sweden has taken a staggering number of unaccompanied children, so the government has to act in loco parentis to tens of thousands. It’s a very tough ask, a job that many Swedes fear is simply beyond the competence of government. In such circumstances, appalling things can happen.
A police spokesman had this to say:
‘It was messy, of course, a crime scene with blood. The perpetrator had been overpowered by other residents, people were depressed and upset. These kinds of calls are becoming more and more common… We’re dealing with more incidents like these since the arrival of so many more refugees from abroad.’
What makes this worse is that in Sweden, the police refuse to say if the suspect was an asylum seeker or not. This happens time and time again: a weird and unusual crime (say, a stabbing in Ikea or a rape on a ferry) and the Swedish police (and press) refuse to say whether the perpetrator is an immigrant – as if this would somehow feed anti-immigrant feeling.
The failure to level with the Swedish people is having the opposite effect. News of an attack brings grief and outrage, but the sense that the authorities are not telling the whole truth brings a new level of anger and suspicion. All of this further undermines public support for immigration, and hands votes to the Sweden Democrats.
Ivar Arpi wrote earlier this month:-
As Peter Ågren, police chief in central Stockholm, put it: ‘Sometimes we do not dare to say how things really are because we believe it will play into the hands of the Sweden Democrats.’ As we now know, police officers in Stockholm are instructed not to reveal the ethnicity or nationality of any suspects lest they be accused of racism.
And, in this way, a xenophobic populist backlash is being incubated in the most open country on earth. It really does take some doing.
there's so much wrong and lop-sided with the above I really don't know where to start... 1. unemployment has been trending downwards for about ten years and is currently at roughly 5%. 2. Germany is facing a demographic time bomb and urgently needs an influx of young new people. 3. Since the EU the concept of the national state is anyway being constantly diluted. In many German cities there are more non-Germans now than native Germans.. and you know what? No one gives a toss. This is Europe. 4. Curiously, those regions in Germany most vociferous in denouncing the influx of refugees are those with the highest rates of vacant residential space. well, doh... 5. Where I live there is true cross-party consensus that we need to handle this together. It is not a party issue at all and Merkel should get a lot of credit for this. 6. Most of the people living around me who have half a brain can see the parallels between the refugees caused by WWII and the current ongoing war in Syria. This is first and foremost a humanitarian issue. Shame on you that you cannot see that. 7. Nobody here is "losing out" due to the influx of refugees. On the contrary. They will be a boon to the economy and, apart from the odd exception, most of them really are truly grateful to be here. 8. The world is now a village.. don't be scared. Come out and play. 9. oh, and btw, those heartless politicians you denounce have still managed to secure you a welfare state that most other people on the planet would sell a kidney for, so stop your bleating and try giving something back to the society that nurtured you. /rant
Hahaha, unemployment rates have nothing to do with working refugees but with an economy that is restoring. 1. Refugees are not allowed to work until they get a status. That last parts takes a few years upto 10 years in the Netherlands. 2. Refugees with a status have really high unemployemt rates. They differ between countries of orrigin. On average its 18.6% where people from east Europe mostly work and lower the average greatly. The biggest reasons for this is lack of scholing and the abiltity to speak Dutch. Yes, that's right. There are second and thirth generation immigrants not speaking the local language and dropping out of school. Edit: I found additional facts from CBS. The work participation of natives is 69% and that's already critically low. The participation of non-western immigrants is 49.9%. Thats 45% from Marocco and 46% from Turkey. From Syria isn't counted yet because historically we don't have many Syrians living in the Netherlands but I bet it is comparable to Turkey. That means that in the future 54% of them will be depended of a social security income. (They are not all counted towards the unemployment rate because they do not actively search for work but they get an income from the state.) 3. There are 215 460 registered and solved crimes. 111 370 done by native Dutch people. 102 580 by immigrants. There are 3m immigrants and 13.5m natives. Just do the math. 4. Immigrants in the Netherlands complain all the time. There are video's on the web of refugees in the Netherlands demanding a fridge and a flat screen on their rooms. They also complain about the smell of wood and they have to eat bread in the morning. 5. The refugee crisis is causing problems on several grounds. 10% of police capacity is used for this alone and they have said this can not be sustained any longer. The cheap homes for rent for the lower social class have waiting lines of around 7 years in the bigger cities. The refugees with a status get homes and do not have to wait so the waiting line increases and people get angry. The costs of the refugees is 1 billion a year in the Netherlands and increasing. That's excluding the cost of the 3m immigrants that already stay in the Netherlands. 6. I don't see the parallels between the refugees caused by WWII and the ongoing war in Syria. They have nothing to do with each other. Or are you blaming Israël for the (Islamic) mess in Syria? That's just insanely foolish. 7. The current politicians are standing on the shoulders of people who worked for the fundaments of the economy in the 1950-1970. Our countries are working machines for years now and thinking that the current politicians are responsible for our good economy is again foolish. 8. The behaviour we saw on new years day was just the tip of the iceberg about how they new saviours value our society. Don't be naive. 9. 80% of the refugees are males between 16 and 30. How are they causing a better birth rate? And will they work for money? I don't know where you live but lets see what will happend in 5 years. Let's bet a few beers on it. If Europe is improved because of the refugees, you get the beer. If Europe has serious problems with the islamic people not integrating in the societies I will get the beer. Agreed?
Edit: I only now saw your reference to Pegida. So you think I think like they think? You want to draw the racist card? Ok, fine. Let me be a racist when I value the rights of women, jews, christians, gays and the general Dutch society. Call me a racist when I want refugees/immigrants speak our language and work like normal people do. Call me all you want but within 5 years you will share my opinions and regret your naive thinking. History has proven that mixing cultures results in tensions and wars. I am not against cultures, as long as they accept other cultures. And there is the problem. The islamic culture does not accept other cultures. This will result in problems. It already has. Already forgot Paris and cologne?
