British Muslims will double to 5.5m in 20 years in Britain

reply to post by awake_and_aware

that we should revolt against the goverment to emancipate the oppressed

which would normally be a natural result of oppression but unfortunately, no amount of good intentions will correct the result of using racism and bigotry to inspire revolt. it's gonna get too big to handle. in fact, it IS getting too big to handle.

reply to post by undo


Whilst marxists have admitted that racism and bigotry may seem appealing to the base (instinct) That's not an appeal to it's effiency or effectiveness. These values promote anti-humanism. Revolt doesn't HAVE to come in the form of racism and bigotry, You don't have to be a racist and/or a bigot to be a marxist.

These xenophobic characteristics appear in all political/social ideologies.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by undo

 

Whilst marxists have admitted that racism and bigotry may seem appealing to the base (instinct) That's not an appeal to it's effiency or effectiveness. These values promote anti-humanism. Revolt doesn't HAVE to come in the form of racism and bigotry, You don't have to be a racist and/or a bigot to be a marxist.

These xenophobic characteristics appear in all political/social ideologies.

edit on 5/2/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)

true, however, the race card is being played to support those things i mentioned earlier, and when combined with a huge religion like islam, who are more than willing to revolt vs. christians, who tend to avoid violent revolt, and you have yourself an eugenicists dream come true. a ready made political/social/religious system, capable of and willing to commit genocide to save the planet from whatever - pollution, over population, etc, against a generally docile population who are taught the opposite.

reply to post by undo

the race card is being played to support those things i mentioned earlier, and when combined with a huge religion like islam, who are more than willing to revolt vs. christians, who tend to avoid violent revolt, and you have yourself an eugenicists dream come true. a ready made political/social/religious system, capable of and willing to commit genocide to save the planet from whatever - pollution, over population, etc, against a generally docile population who are taught the opposite.

Can you name some examples, which goverments, which states actively encourage discrimination, which goverment plays this "race card" game you talk of?

What state or people promotes the ideologies of Eugenenics? Are you not aware the the Allied Forces were against Hitlers ideology of a master race. Not many people support the Holocaust.

I'm not sure exactly who or what goverment you are refferring to that promotes these kind of ideologies.

Perhaps you are confusing majority opinion with the opinion of a few right-wing politicians who imply this type of nonsense.? (BnP in england) a few right-wring Republicans in U.S.A especially some Christian zealots promoting anti-semitism?

reply to post by awake_and_aware


whew, you must not read the news.
most of africa is or has recently been in violet revolutions, most of which turned them into islamic
states, and which involved the massacre of christians (which carried with it, the few whites that lived there as well).

the usa has race card-itis. so does south africa. i imagine the UK and Australia does as well. in fact, i think the royal families of the planet, are behind this whole thing as it is serfdom, repackaged and renamed. they probably finance the leaders in these movements, anonymously, and when the final solutions kick in, they're already at some remote locale where they can't be hurt, but can run the whole thing from afar.

reply to post by undo


Actually i havn't even thought of the events which happened in Africa.... similar events could happen here if things aren't bought under control regarding immigration.

I see that David Cameron is getting tough on the clerics here who preach Islamic Sharia.... i also see there was another demo in Luton today between EDL & UAF groups....

Luton is a hotbed and has some hardline extremists there.... the one's who want Sharia type.... its also where the suicide bomber who went to Sweden grew up and lived...

reply to post by undo


Again, no emipricial evidence or sources as to how modern goverments advocate racism and bigotry. Is it a majority of states in america that allow for freedom, not just for whites, but for all colours and ethnicities.? Or this a minority?

U.K has discouraged racism and highlighted the parties in the UK that are racially inspired, people are aware of this xenophobia, and the majority are not guided by this sort of ignornace and inhumanity.

Encouraging cooperation of all races is something that should be a fundamental concept to a multiculural/multi ethnic civlisation. It goes without saying.

I think YOU'RE the one who is playing the race-card victim. Many have faught many years for equal right and opportunity and in MOST countries this is advocated including U.K and many countrie of Europe (France and Italy to include a few)

Please inform me of this "News" that i have been missing out on that has lead me to be ignorant in this debate.

Thanks

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by tiger5
reply to post by undo

 

Look why not start a thread on South Africa. Believe me the UK is very different. Rememebr inthe past I have tried to get the thread back on track several times. THe problems of south africa are inevitable and unique. Which other country had apartheid and changed.

Frankly I saw the problems as soon as Mandela was released that day because there were black kids looting behind him. The white power structure had not sorted the economy out and so sold him a put. You may actually see it on Youtube.

Marixsts in the UK are against racism but also against the fundamentlists.

The avowed UK tactic is interventionist but they cannot recruit fundamentalists as they are religious zealots.

i think fascism and marxism are the same thing, with the exception of who the elitists are.
fascism is just another form of serfdom and so is marxism . in fascism, the elitists are religiously motivated but the political landscape is socialistic. in marxism, the elitists are atheists and the political landscape is socialistic. i see them as two arms of the same entity, who's inevitable resolution is the eradication of white people (although most marxists and fascists of white heritage, don't see it that way, they will as that's where all this is headed).

You are american. Only in America can rampant ignorance exist where by right =left. Trust me if you drive like that you will not be derailing threads on ATS - ever. Revenant has got a whole thread on right and left.

Suffice to say MArxism and Fascism are very different.The soveit Union was marxist for three years 1mmediately after the october revolution. Read the communist manifesto and then read Mein Kampf.

Simple fact look at the marxist slogan "Workers of the world unite". Then look at the Kuch, Kinder and ther other slogan of Nazi germany! Inf act Get a political education ! Sheesh

reply to post by awake_and_aware


um, if i look up the references and provide them, will you then claim i'm off topic ? that seems to be the way these kinds of conversations go. "Prove it!" so i do. "You're off the topic of the thread!"

reply to post by tiger5


it all ends up the same. some rich religious people run everything. or, some rich atheists run everything. what's the diff? in both cases, they enforce socialism on the populace, which requires some major restructuring of the society. usually includes genocide of one kind of another (to bolster the economy and provide incentives to their supporters).

of course, i don't believe hitler couldn't make it to moscow. i think he and stalin were buds and the idea that germans couldn't fight in snow, makes me laugh. to me, they were two sides of the same coin, with similar intentions. experimenting on large groups of their populace because humans don't mean crap to these guys. that's why they are willing to sell out entire races and religious groups for the power it provides them. they are counting on their knowledge of psychology and manipulation of large groups of people.

reply to post by undo


Nope; provide criitical evidence, so we can provide a grounds to our discussion in regards to this thread. That's all.

reply to post by undo

it all ends up the same. some rich religious people run everything. or, some rich atheists run everything. what's the diff? in both cases, they enforce socialism on the populace, which requires some major restructuring of the society. usually includes genocide of one kind of another (to bolster the economy and provide incentives to their supporters).

Yup as they have done in America, Britan and france with successive socialist governments? What is wrong with your logic and observations. I just cannot understand your reasoning as you jump all over the place. What has Hitler and moscow got to do with socialism??

Anyway the situation in britain is different as non whites constitute maybe 4% of the population. I believe that Cameron will reduce immigration across the board as anything else would be racist. The Business lobby do not want to reduce immigration for the skilled workers ( many of which are nonwhite)!

I have watched the Youtube video and as someone who is knowledgeable of Marx all I can say is that socialism is needed. The whites had it there way but to throw them into the gutter is not the way forward however mandela was always a stooge.

reply to post by tiger5


The recent speech by Cameron shows that we are non-racist but we will not respect culture if it is against democratic free society, which is embedded into our Country and others like America.

Something that i am dissapointed at is that he didn't condemn right-winged groups like the EDL, although...these groups arn't exactly conspiring against the West or even forming militias that promote matyrdom and jihad.

I'm more than happy to live with multiculture, but it's illlogical to meet the demands of every culture that arrives in the UK. Dependant immigration needs to be addressed. Allow workers who desire immigrate to provide their skills to stimulate the economy and country they desire to live in.

Cameron is a complete NWO puppet - they have been putting out the multi-culti kumbya insanity for forty yrs, using PC to silence, intimidate and criminalise all disenters - and now it is far too late to prevent the complete collapse of Europe via jihadi civil war - they are suddenly 'discovering' that it wasn't such a good idea after all.

It just means that the NWO have the desired no's in place to create the results they want - complete collapse for all of mainland Europe and enough chaos for martial law in the UK.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Immigration should be reduced at a time of recession and financial uncertainty. The addition of more Moslems is coming at a timeof even more uncertainty because some will harbour fundamentalists tendencies now or mayu develop them in the future as history has proven.

Why does Multiculturalism have to meet every demand that is made on it? There is a case of fiscal representation. Non whites pay taxes like everyone else. Givng a few thousand for an event when the local government receives millions in community charges is not unreasonable.

Multiculturalism has generated a framework of mutual respect that has given non whites the confidence to step across and join English culture. It has been a brilliant success and typically British.


For Cameron to acknowledge the EDL by condemning them would have led to further problems and is quite astute. They are political rivals and he has his eyes on the next election. Perhaps that is the reason for his comments anyway.

The biggest problem is that the racists are exploiting the fundamentalist problem.

reply to post by tiger5



fascist=hitler
marxist=stalin

that's what it has to do with the rest of what i said. i dont think fascism and marxism are truly opposed concepts. you can advance a fascist goal via marxism, and when you have what you need, just put religious people in place of what would normally be atheists. easy transistion. white marxists are playing with fire.

that's why america is worried that removal of mubarak's gov in egypt, via their concept of "democracy" (marxism) may result in the muslim brotherhood, taking the forward momentum of their marxist ideals and make it fascist.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by tiger5

 

fascist=hitler
marxist=stalin

that's what it has to do with the rest of what i said. i dont think fascism and marxism are truly opposed concepts. you can advance a fascist goal via marxism, and when you have what you need, just put religious people in place of what would normally be atheists. easy transistion. white marxists are playing with fire.

edit on 5-2-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)

Well actually what you have been posting looks more like then
fascist=hitlet =marxist=stalin.

Have you heard of authoritarianism? Perahps that is what you are getting at. Sorry marxists simply do not work like that. Actually nor do fascists. You are advancinga theory of politics that I just don't recogniseas rooted inreality.

Multiculturalism just suggests a respect of other culture. Nothing more and nothing else. If you were secure in your culture you woul dnot create such a fuss. you areclearly being led by the right and do not reralise it.

Thus you discuss politics thatyou do not understand.

reply to post by JohhnyBGood


I believe the Islamists won't like his new speech, in fact they're already condeming it as "patronising":-



By no means do i support the stance the media channel takes on this issue; i think the way they broadcast aims to further polarize views on Islam. It's evident; extremist exists, it's caused by Islam in many cases. The fundamental teachings of the scripture of the Koran.

We don't mind living with different culture, but when extremism threatens our society, i believe we should stand up and condemn such ideology. It's stems from Islam itself;-

see my new thread:- www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by tiger5


what i do is look for the most basic principles involved in a subject and let it define itself. as a result of studying ancient cultures and texts, i've learned how language and etymology can make something appear like it's something it's not. and how doing so is for the purpose of re-establishing power under a system that was caught with its pants down.

reviewing modern history in the same light, i try to use the same clarity of thought. what i'm noticing is, such things are given additional descriptive words based on whether the government in question is popular or not. harsh words that sound really bad are used when the gov is not popular, yet a country next door, with the same political system, is given a more politically correct, softer description because they are currently popular, even though they have the same exact political system.

happens all the time, too.

reply to post by undo


Clarity of thought????


You are far from clear in your political discussions. I must wonder about your other studies.

The problem is that without clear definitions the very foundation of your argument is weak and or confusing. If you suggested that right and left radicalism lead to authoritarianism I would understand.

I feel generous

Please check this link once you understand this we can proceed.

www.abovetopsecret.com...