And here are his views on Women and Rape:Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
http://www.stepfordwives.org/diary/w..._and_woman.jpg
Printable View
And here are his views on Women and Rape:Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
http://www.stepfordwives.org/diary/w..._and_woman.jpg
This seems to be the heart of the text, the message so to speak:
Many women seem to be walking a tightrope now. Their qualities of love, openness, and gentleness were too deeply enmeshed with qualities of dependency, subservience, and masochism. How do you love — without being dependent? How do you be gentle — without being subservient? How do you maintain a relationship without giving up your identity and without getting strung out? How do you reach out and give your heart to your lover, but maintain the soul which is you?
So Women can't love or be gentle without being subservient and dependent on men? How progressive!Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
It seems ridiculous now but these were relevant questions for 2nd wave feminists questioning the gender roles of the 50s (i.e. their parents).
Seem to be stupid questions regardless of when they were asked. And Third Wave Feminists weren't too happy about the essay either when it started floating around.Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
He must be a wizard. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zqq5lY0l5J...y%2BWizard.jpg
Don't forget his revolutionary economics:
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...ps9ur5bhl0.jpg
You must be reading a very different article.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
That was completely about gender roles in society. It had literally nothing to do with rape, and it had very little to do with women explicitly.
It's also not wrong. You could sum it up to being a simple, "men and women tend to grow into what society expects them to be".
It's almost as if the leaders of Europe are abject failures that let down their people. And if they all like Sanders...Quote:
If the US were to welcome more than 3.500.000 refugees in less than 6 months
Starving yourself is not the answer, man.Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
Instead, feed yourself on knowledgeable arguments, courtesy Thomas Sowell:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TGkfjaxFWs
Point of Interest:
-Before Minimum Wage laws, African Americans had higher labor participation than whites for 40 years between 1890 to 1930 (before civil rights!) - the first minimum wage laws coming about in the 1930s. In fact, unemployment among black teenagers was equitable to white teenagers in the 1930s (and lower than it is now). After minimum wage laws, black participation fell and unemployment rose despite black populations as a whole becoming more educated and skilled, which is a trend that continues today. Empirically, price-fixing hurts the most vulnerable in a society, whether it's wage, rent, or goods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niBhPX0jMn8
Point of Interest:
-The distinction between health insurance and medical care. The USA has the best medical care in the world, precisely because it is privatized. Responses are faster, and in terms of actual quality, the US ranks near the top or the top. People confuse health insurance, and in practice, a strong medical care program (like in the USA) is far more effective than the socialized "health care" systems of Europe in terms of responsiveness and quality of care.
Listening to Sowell on these points, we can rightly conclude that Sanders is an idiot, whose world of experience comes from living in a remote rural state whose economy is based around the export of maple syrup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=645mtthz8Io
You keep electing war mongering mad men and blame Europe for taking on refugees? Nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperorIng
I do not in any way condone the war-mongering of US presidents (one of the many reasons to hate Obama, Clinton, G.W. Bush and others), but in no way should the leaders of Europe be praised for their short-sighted scheme to flood their countries with undocumented peoples. I am amazed that you can claim to live in Koln and not see how both the "refugees" and the natives are the long-term losers of Merkel's actions (the winners are EU bureaucrats - who hate borders, nationalism, and sovereignty, but love power, micromanaging, and control). You see for yourself the rapid collapse of your social programs, the rise of far-right political movements, and increased ethnic tensions - all thanks to a seriously dumb proposal, sold to the people as a "humanitarian" operation but in truth a panzi scheme to weaken local native populations and flood nations with cheap labor. Too bad Merkel and her Brussels cronies couldn't foresee just how poorly economic migrants from the Middle East (which again, are the majority of incoming "refugees" according to the EU itself) could integrate with a vastly different culture and ethos. If Sweden, Rotherham, and Koln are any indication, it is sincerely your loss.
Meddling in the middle east created this crisis, no doubt, and bad leaders should be held accountable (Bush is vilified when Hillary Clinton and Obama are no more than continuations of Bush's awful foreign and domestic policies), but the EU's "response" has proven laughable. Trump is at least honest when he says "Kill ISIS; fuck the rest" and doesn't care about getting involved with countless interminable wars in the ME.
As I wrote several pages ago in this thread: refugees are not allowed to work at all until their status is cleared. As soon as that happens they fall under the minimum wage law.
I am not a Merkel voter but I think many many people totally underestimate her. In fact people always did.
She's part of the Christian right and initially campaigned as a Neocon ("Neoliberal" is the German term for Neo-Libertarian) with a libertarian program far right of that of Margret Thatcher (or anything I've heard from any US politician). However she did change her politics shortly after she got into power.
To understand the point I am going to make by the end of this post you have to know the following about Angela Merkel: Merkel grew up in the Communist part of Germany in a religious Lutheranian family. Her family moved over voluntarily from capitalist West Germany to the communist East in the mid 50s. Merkel got her Doctorate in Quantum Chemistry and became a leader of the communist youth party in the 80s. Even when she joined the Christian right party later there were many social issues where she always remained a progressive - i.e. abortion, etc.
Long story short: she has both a humanist as well as a christian background and education. Even if she's now part of the Christian right, this remains part of her background.
As for her politics in regard to the refugee crisis: We saw people drowning by the thousands over years and no one did anything. Mothers and their babies, the elderly, little kids, etc. They fled from the civil wars in Syria, Lybia and Afghanistan and drowned in the mediterranean sea. No one cared. Especially no one here in Germany, including Angela Merkel. We paid good money so the Greece and Italians would collect the survivors and return them to their home countries.
Until this happened:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_L...rant_shipwreck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKu2RsKdbT0
This was the turning point for her.
In a speech she gave just weeks ago she said that while it's nearly impossible to protect European or even German boarders by building a wall, it is absolutely impossible to protect the shores.
I think it's pretty clear that Merkel is disgusted by her own country and is dead set on doing as much damage as possible:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Rcc7xgD2dM
Third wave feminists are about as useful as a Siamese bulldog attached to your ass. However women and men have tried to understand each other for millennia, yet we are about as close to answers as we were back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
As far as the refugees, it is not Europe's responsibility to take them in. They have their own poor and starving, their own countrymen have problems. But when the EU is basically ruled by this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Rcc7xgD2dM
They may have bigger issues than immigrants.
The problems aren't with immigration, per se, it's what people are bringing with them. I won't ruin anyone's day quoting firsthand reports, but try not to rely on corporate media sources for information on events happening outside of your field of view.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5DO49F3uf1...s640/snake.gif
Hmpf... Welcome to the human race...
ROFLMAO, nah, this has nothing to do with what she thinks about her country. I guess this is something pretty German and I can see why you guys wouldn't understand what's going on there. See, people who wave German flags are considered among the lowest forms of life. And for the most part I'd say that is a fact. What she is doing is saving her party from being a total embarrasment. - And to be honest I would not have expected that much class from her.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
In my months in Sweden I saw that and it was confusing at first. I know it's not as bad as Germany there but if someone had a big Swedish flag draped over his balcony he was trying to make a point. I'm from the US. We obviously like our flag. Both sides of the political spectrum will fly it for their cause. If someone awful from the KKK for example decides to waive the flag at worst someone might say or think " that's disgrace to the flag" . I know that's just how it is in Germany accept it etc, but I still find it odd. I mean 80m Germans waving there own flag really scares Germans more than the rest of the world? I mean this looks scary to the rest of the world ( i know it's not) not a German waving his won flag....Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4QUIUhtFjk
Why is liking your own country seen as disgusting?Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
It's not the flag itself. The colors of the German flag are those of the German revolution of 1848 - but so is the National anthem the Nazis (ab)used and which is still used today. It's this association that really taints the flag in a negative way.
The flag seems like a symbol for the continuity from Nazi Germany into West Germany. Waving a German flag while playing the very same national anthem as the Nazis did kind of has that effect on some people (myself included).
- There really should have been a new anthem. Or maye just use the one from East Germany composed by Hanns Eisler, that one wasn't too shabby: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTV92wqYjfA
I completely agree. That's what I meant with continuity. It's not so much that it really is a full continuity in everything of course but there are traditions and views that just stuck around after WW2 and which are slow to die out, if ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Lizard
It definitely is a grey area after all the Nazis didn't invent Prussian marches or really much of anything and I feel like Germans should march like Germans. At the same time it's hard to ignore the connotations though the African guy I saw in one of those videos helped.Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
In my books, Angela Merkel is a saint. The same goes for those people around the world who have opened their doors with open doors to the Syrian refugees and provided donations and assistance. Merkel could have simply taken the easy route, closed the borders, and embraced the fearmongering philosophy that other European leaders have uttered from the pulpit. I'm sure those same leaders would think otherwise if they took a small vacation to Syria or Iraq.
I can't believe that someone just made the argument that it is not Europe's responsibility to take in refugees because their own share of poverty. What a selfish comment. My finger is itching to post a 20 second video which I stumbled upon featuring a snapshot of the horror beseeching the country. I had no intention to view this clip but it just popped in my Twitter feed and within seconds began to play: In the video, a humanitarian aid worker/Syrian can be seen clutching a baby in his arms in an attempt to flee what looks like a bomb blast. As the dust settles, all appears well until the man makes his way halfway past the camera lense. He stops, takes a second to glance at the child, and is shocked to see that the left side of the child's head is ripped open. You can see into the skull's cavity. The child is clearly dead.
In closing, religious fervor need not exist in your heart in order to understand that human beings are suffering half way around the world in order to compel you to act.
People understand there's suffering going on. However there is also a point where you need to accept that if you try to help more than you can handle, you'll end up helping no one. What good do you really do in taking in so many refugees that it results in economically crippling your country while also opening it up to terrorism and possibly put's your own people in danger like we're seeing in some parts of Europe?
Let me ask this, when Rwanda was having that crisis in the 90s, where were the people inviting the Tutsi's a way to escape? Same thing with Sudan which was even closer to now than the Rwanda genocide. How about the war in Yugoslavia where the European nations not in the Balkans barely took any refugees in war more or less as brutal as the Syrian mess we have right now thought not as long lasting and more sporadic. However that dead child is an unfortunate victim of war. The same thing happened in Vietnam, WW2, basically every conflict mankind has ever fought has had civilian casualties. It sucks yes, but it's a fact you have to accept. Here is another problem we have, if it were old men, women and children running from the fighting, I don't see much of an issue. But something around 25% of them are young men of fighting age. Get back there and fight, every nation has done that from Soviet Union, Germany, the US and others that were faced with destruction. And if you are taking in refugees, don't let them run amok in the streets, put them in a refugee camp and send them back when things have died down. Let me ask another question, why the hell are Afghans going to Europe in large numbers, and without visas? Their country isn't being torn to shreds right now. Call me heartless, but nobody is really in any sort of situation to help right now, leave them to sort their own mess out. We are already seeing Sweden basically on life support right now because of this, and at one point they were a country that was doing quite well before this nonsense. Now is not a wise time to get emotional over these matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by SEGA.GENESIS1989
Quote:
Originally Posted by GriskaGyoran
That's not the first word that came to my mind...
Quote:
Originally Posted by GriskaGyoran
The whole situation is tricky.
There were plenty of people who were calling to give aid to those conflicts you mentioned. I can't speak for everywhere, but in the USA at least, they were given next to no airtime. I'd have no issues putting money on the fact that your average person either would never have heard of it, or thought it was something from the past, not something that was actively going on right now.
Same deal with boko haram. Every bit as bad as isis/isil, but you don't really see them mentioned at all here. They are not politically important to anyone, and the media all but ignores they exist at all.
Not overreaching is absolutely important. People SHOULD help, when they are able, because it's the right thing to do. I can imagine if Sweden was in the grips of a terrible civil war the likes of one of the conflicts mentioned, you'd be very grateful to other countries to help out in your time of need. No one wants to be kicked in the face and told "too bad" when they are desperate for help.
As for those coming from Afghanistan... what can I say. It's not a shock. I'm sure plenty do. It's not like their country is a land of excellent opportunity. There are issues there, as in many other countries in/around the region. I'm sure those coming are a mix of people using this opportunity to either escape a bad situation themselves, or hope to find a better opportunity.
Not much you can do about it however, it's not like all the real refugees can ask to stop being raped/murdered so they can get their passports and the like in order.
Same deal with making people fight. Not everyone is a fighter. They also lack any training or organization. Armies are not just a bunch of people grabbed off the street and kicked into combat with no training or weapons.
Those who are willing to fight are most likely there doing just that. Others are terrified and/or don't think they can make any difference. I'm sure many just want to make sure their families are safe.
You also have to remember that many of these people are coming from a culture where the man is the sole provider for the family. Sending the wife and kids off and staying to fight will, in their eyes, leave them just as assuredly dead as if they stayed.
In short, the whole thing is terribly complicated from start to finish.
You can't just lay down simple statements like "we can't help" or "we should take everyone" without causing massive problems.
What's the answer? Fuck if I know. It's going to be different for everyone, and it's certainly not going to solve everything. The situation is too big of a mess to have any kind of happy ending.
Maybe some facts to take into account :Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
1) the birth rate in Germany is dangerously low, many economists thought it's a chance to take some refugees
2) I suppose you're referring to 2015 French events. None of the terrorists were refugees. They all were born and raised in France and Belgium, their family was there for at least 2 generations. There are lots of Muslims in France, for historical reasons. Many French jihadists were young people that took the war way because of social conditions. A surprising fact is that many were from old French families, and converted themselves to Islam.
3) The terrorists in France were from Maghreb origins, not Syrian. If you think it's the same, ask the Donald to prevent Spanish to come in the US, they are the same as the Mexicans :)
4) Concerning patriotism, you may be surprised to know that a widespread opinion in France (and maybe other European countries) is that it's not well seen. Many people considers it's, with religion, the main seed to wars, and that there's no reason to be proud of a country. From what I saw, it seems very different from the US, where love of the country seems overvalued (and to be honest, it looks a little ridiculous here). I'm not saying we're right (and this way of thinking is drawing backs after the 2015 events), especially when it can go to dispise of the country, but it's not uncommon, and understandable if you think that we had uncountable wars, including two WW, on our grounds with our nearest neighbors. Even our national anthem (which is a war song) is reluctantly sung, and many persons proposed that the lyrics were changed to be more pacific.
Not talking about France at all. I was referring to the rape and violence situation that's been going on in Germany and other countries as a result. Oh right but we're not supposed to talk about that because that harms the image of them being helpless refugees.
legit bummed i missed the deadline to switch my party affiliation to vote in the primaries here
Turn on the subtitles and look...Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_OTj2CGhqA
It's just a parody though and a funny one. :P
^ I see, looks like a third world country already. Hope you guys can make it out of the collapse.
A couple of semi-random Sanders clips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEbCNEAa-70
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLKafDlKC2Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UM8F4EuUbw
But you get shitty health care out of the deal, Trekkies, and a higher minimum wage to be taxed into oblivion!
Don't forget to donate today to support the revolution, heh heh! ;^))))
But I already donated all my Life Insurance, 401K, and emptied both my savings and checking accounts to support him! Should I start donating plasma and paying with that instead? Or maybe I should sell my house and car?Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperorIng
I take it that you guys prefer presidential candidates that either are billionaires or depend on donations from billionaires or corporations.
Maäh!
http://www.alt-market.com/images/stories/sheeple1.jpg
What you're missing is that Sanders was referring to his voters, not the people attending his rallies. /wasting my timeQuote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
In other news.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suy4mWyFJbA
While Clinton creams Sanders on donations from Corporations he clearly takes them.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/c...?id=N00000528&
The billionaire at least understands economics and is successful at what he does. The billionaire at least has good solid ideas that are based in reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
So the people that attend Bernie's rallies don't vote for him? I guess that explains his constant losing. Not to mention the people violently protesting at Trumps rallies typically are Bernie supporters. If you watch the full rallies, you'll see a lot of what the news edits and clips are people finally retaliating after the protesters have either hit them or intimidated them for quite some time.Quote:
Originally Posted by retrospiel
Shush, you don't want to spoil the illusion of the kindly old man fighting for the people without the MILLIONAIH AND BILLIONAIH moneys!!! =(Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Lizard
Well doesn't really matter as his party has pretty much already decided his fate already. Doesn't help him half his "fans" don't seem to understand you can't vote for him in the Primary if they're registered independent . :roll: The open minded liberals are voting the boring safe choice while closed minded Republicans are voting for something completely out of the norm. Not that matters either as we'll be stuck with Hillary. But hey maybe the enlightened Europenos can stick a Peace Prize on her like they did with Obamers for not being a Republican.Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperorIng