Kel Varnsen wrote:
Nope, never said that.
I never said that you said it. This is representative of what you like to say:
http://onemoreinthetolly.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=240&pid=440163#pid440163
http://onemoreinthetolly.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=240&pid=440178#pid440178
Kel Varnsen wrote:
Burnwinter wrote:
I'm just pointing out to you that if you believe UK Muslims are deeply incompatible with their country and its values today, the country is also deeply incompatible with its own values just decades ago.
So what?
So: inquiry into history incontrovertibly proves there are processes of change at work. If we view historical development rationally, it's how we theorise those changes, and use these theories to frame future change, that should guide our politics in the present.
You're very fond of picking a link to a survey or study that collects data at a point in time, and using it in isolation to buttress your political positions, which are fairly typical of a statist–nationalist–cultural-supremacist: "low-skilled" immigration is bad for the national economy, ideology and religious faith are the main determinants of personal behaviour (and immigrants have the wrong ideologies), cultural homogeneity is the bedrock of successful social democracy.
You rarely mention the vastly greater destruction of national economies by financialised capital, the dependence of wealthy and liberal social democracies on stolen and hoarded land and assets and the happenstance of the geographic distribution of scarce resources, or the successful integration of generations of "alien" migrants into western economies. There is plenty of data to fling around in relation to all these things, as you can imagine.
To understand what may happen and answer the question "what is to be done?" demands broad horizons, knowledge of history and a theory of change. In the latter half of the twentieth century, why did the UK and other wealthy, industrialised western nations grant women equal rights in the workplace and decriminalise homosexuality? Was that just the way the British are or was something else going on?
Why do many people migrating from Islamic countries of origin still hold homophobic views? What kinds of economies and social environments are they leaving, and why? What happens to those views if you stop migration or problematise it? Is the existing world system "sustainable"?
Why are you patriotic? If Norway and Saudi Arabia each sit on a massive pile of oil that guarantees their generous welfare programmes and from which those with the misfortune to be outside their borders are excluded, what is the real difference between the two?
