What was aggressive about what Ken Livingstone said, though? Do you think he said it out of cowardice or something of the sort? I can very easily see someone say the exact same thing as far as Christianity or Judaism is concerned. It's pretty tame compared to other stuff I've seen come out of London.Originally Posted by Danimal87
Not all of us are stuck in the present. We see what trends are leading us towards, and act accordingly. More over, history is filled with examples of active minorities imposing their will on the rest of society, including the British in India, American revolutionaries, whites in South Africa, and Communists in Russia. The world doesn't operate like you think it does, where numbers dictate. Determination matters.
You're confused. I used the word "aggressive" to describe Muslims... so why are you applying it to Ken Livingstone?
Western civilization is the leaves that spring from the culture whose roots are biologically European. Should its roots change, its leaves will wither and die. The rightness of our right to life negates the opinions of a portion of this generation. We have no right to give up what our ancestors built for us, and no right to deny to our descendants a good life.
You certainly are an example of your own argument, since you keep saying over and over that end is nigh and western civilization is doomed. The lack of numbers of people that agree with you isn't important, evidently, only your personal determination.
Let's not ignore cases of the majority discriminating against the minority, like we've seen in religion over the centuries. Or in the old Jim Crow laws.
I just don't think this kind of stuff upsets the majority. For whatever reason (I'm sure some of you will jump to speculate), the majority is not upset by this kind of stuff.
Because we arent scared of things that are different, and have decide to focus our efforts elsewhere, like finding ways to unite our population towards common goals, rather than attempting to find divisions that aren't there or exaggerate the inconsequential ones that are.
That's kind of what I'm leaning toward. Different strokes for different folks.
My apologies, I read it wrong.
Even so, I'd hardly think that the aggressive muslims are in the majority. The #1 issue is that the actual majority is silent when they should be stepping up to differentiate themselves from their aggressive 'brethren'.
wow a rich jew promoting yet more multiculturalism, total shocker.
the guy is a joke who will do anything to get re-elected. when he was major in the past, he did a shit job too.
EBN faggot list: The Wire Laborer. Pro American, anti-abortionist, real american hero. America, Fuck yeah!.I let my gun do the talking - kevinbacon
... I'm an example of my own argument? What? Leaving aside the majorities of people who want less immigration, leaving aside the strong tendency of people to want to associate with people like themselves, and leaving the never-ending litany of tension produced by multicultural and multi-racial societies, since when does anyone except a politician without principles let public opinion sway their thoughts? It used to be most people opposed gay marriage, but opinion has largely swayed. That only happened because activists and their supporters, holding a minority opinion, worked in spite of that fact to convince others.
Majorities oppressing minorities is intuitive and besides the point. This made the papers for a reason, so your point is rather moot.
How silly, to act as though different people are the same. You live in a fantasy world where the cores of people's identities- race, religion, culture, language, ethnicity- are "inconsequential" or "aren't there." If identity didn't matter, a Muslim in France wouldn't be facing death or imprisonment in a standoff with police after murdering French soldiers and a number of Jews. Those seven victims could've had the same opinion on these matters as either me, you, or something else entirely. That didn't alter what happened to them.
You can close your eyes and pretend the world is different than the way it is. You can hold your breath and tell yourself that air doesn't matter, but you will suffocate, and people will wonder what psychosis lead you to your death.
Go to a party where only a minority hate you or even want you dead, and then you'll understand that outside of elections, what the majority thinks often doesn't matter.
I like democracy but only when i'm in the majority cuz it reaffirms my world views
Last edited by BigMattTheHobo; 03-21-2012 at 05:04 PM. Reason: no
MUNDO SMASH
Was merely responding to your point that "more over" minorities manage to push their will on the majority. It goes both ways. So I think that point you made is rather moot.
I've never seen the majority's will push their way onto any minority.
if this was the case, retarded backward cultures would have ceased within two, maybe one generations.
*cough* religion, gay marriage, Jim Crow laws*cough*
Open your eyes or a history book. And your last comment is pants-on-head retarded.
Hardly. I said "Small" can affect "Big." You said Big can affect Small. I agreed, but why don't you explain what that has to do with my argument, or the debate in general.
All I take from this is that small groups have to work harder to impose their will on the majority. Is that your point?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote