Donald Trump's Immigration and Refugee Ban

[fkizz]

So if Britain banned the immigration of Irishmen on the off-chance that they might be members of the IRA

Interesting question but I do not know enough about the conflict to give informed reply. But personal interaction with the Irish people so far was positive experience.

scrutiny. Name one instance of anti-immigration populism that didn't purport to do it to keep out "hostile influences". In the past it was "crime", "anarchy", "Bolshevism" and even Catholicism cited as the reason.

Catholicism isn't relevant enough anymore to be seriously a source of any of that.. It lost major relevancy in XIX century, after having lost it in XVI century aswell. Much weaker force.
Bolshevicks could create "phobic" or fearful feelings if your country was under a proxy war with USSR yes. Could be interpreted as a Soviet informer of your troop movements. In Salazar Portugal you could be sent to Torture Chamber if you were openly a sympathizer with USSR. Because there was a Warfront going on where the Insurgents were supplied and trained by USSR and KGB.

[athanaric]

What are you ranting about now?

Try to follow the conversation.

I have made no statements about the Czechs, in my discussion with Sumslkilz I specifically mentioned the right of small European countries to maintain a specific cultural identity.

Glad we're making progress there. Now what about the right of larger European countries?

Your posts froth with emotion, but don't actually respond to points in my posts.

Your posts froth with adjectives, labelling, and condescension. But then I'm used to that.

Australia takes more refugees per capita than the US. While we have stopped arrivals by boat (we didn't like all the drowned corpses in the water) we have maintained a generous and liberal intake of refugees because it is the right thing to do, even though it causes problems.

Well, take more then. Walk the walk, don't just talk the talk.

Is a vile insult, a stupid ad hominem,

You're placing the interests of group A above those of group B, the latter happening to be the indigenous population. It's odd how one has to explain it to most people in the most abstract terms possible.

a clear indication your posts are based in angry emotions rather than cool reason. Alleging anti-Slavic feeling to my has a particular irony I will not go into here, but really this post is about as funny and foolish as it gets.

Depends on whether you want to call the frustration about other people's arrogance and ignorance an angry emotion.

...and I'm demonstrating your fears and rhetoric are based in a peculiar 19th century brand of nationalist rubbish.

And I'm demonstrating that you're arrogantly inferring certain motives and ideological backgrounds, out of a lack of actual information, and an unwillingness to actually research the topic.

Just a note, I am not spouting Social Darwinist nonsense, just for future reference.

No, you're just saying "mass migrations have always been there, get used to it lol".

As for Historians not dealing with morals, I am unsure what you've based that bizarre notion on.

Yes, I'm sure 20th century "historians" do that.

Many historians do investigate the past with a specific moral dimension and others compare the moral systems of the past.

That's like saying a virologist is dealing in viruses.

No I'm pretty happy to point out your posting in this exchange has been rubbish, studded with strawmen, personal abuse and generally poor quality.

What can I say but "tu quoque..."?

Nerves untouched. Your reference to criminals is interesting, you've met them?

Well yes, but more importantly I can read newspapers. Have you tried? I already gave you a keyword, should get lots of hits from a search in German news outlets.

Millions. And you gained deep insight into them all.

Deep enough for the relevant purpose.

And they were all exactly the same.

Strawman. Never said that.

I apologise if my manner appears arrogant or offends you, but this is an political forum so you should expect different opinions.

I expect informed opinions, not third or fourth parties smugly talking out of their behinds while refusing to put in the necessary research.

I am trying to be polite but if you compare my ideas to Himmler (wrongly as it turns out) you show a weak stupidity in your posting that is hard to take seriously.

The essence of your (and not just your) previous posts is " the natives, what's important is my ideals (and my tribe)".

If you are upset because you've misunderstood my posts that's not my problem, you're responsible for your own comprehension, and its clear that you've failed to comprehend my posts.

I'm upset because you misunderstand the topic.

If I am corrected in my posts I try to thank the person that has corrected me: I won't tell you how to post but if you respond to my posts with this kind of rubbish I will respond appropriately.

Well then thank me for trying to help you research the subject.

[the_mango55]

Court rules against travel ban. It remains on hold.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politi...ing/index.html

[swabian]

Breathe deeply, there's no need to panic.

I wasn't panicking at all, but this kind of insolence does make me angry after a while.

A fifth of French people today are the children of immigrants. It is changing now as it always has. The trembling hysteria about dilution of "pure national blood" is a moral panic born of the 19th century. Gallic culture (Celtic an absurd Anglicisation of an Hellenic misattribution) culture originated in the Alps and Erz mountains, not modern France, and the inhabitants of what is modern France were converted to that culture as their descendants were converted to roman, Gothic, Frankish etc etc in turn. They all "survived genetically" whatever that absurd generalisation means.

So a retarded strawman to something i put in brackets to denote it's low priority in my response is all that comes to your mind. Intriguing.

- I wasn't arguing in favour of racial purity, as is easily descernible for everybody with a sense of objectivity, except if one is misguided by strong negative emotions of course.
- You're again trivializing the challenge of cultural decline with some dubious historical examples. The Gauls were romanized by brutal force and the Germanic invasions of the Gallo-Roman cultural area were warlike as well. Are you suggesting one should sit down and watch passively if something like that were to happen in modern times, because it happened before (not that i really compared the influence of Muslim immigration to those events)? What even is precisely your argument at this point? Why shouldn't modern societies establish control over influences they don't want to have beyond a limited degree?

As for this nonsense about "the duty of existing societies to secure their future", that sounds like a Wahhabist manifesto.

That Nations care for their future is supposed to be nonsense? I hope this semblance of idiocy isn't chronic.

Society changes.

That may be so. And?

Judging "these people" for their race is racism. Judging "these people" for their culture or religion is bigotry. Both involve intolerance and prejudice.

I for one am fully aware that "not all" (TM) Muslims can be lumped together. Who says that i'm doing that? Minimizing their immigration also minimizes the growth of Islamist milieus, it's as simple as that. It's also not only about terrorism, Muslims don't tend to integrate well and they cling to their medieval moral conceptions and traditions. Why should any Western society condone the growth of undesirable subcultures.

I have made no statements about the Czechs, in my discussion with Sumslkilz I specifically mentioned the right of small European countries to maintain a specific cultural identity.

There is no rational reason to limit that to small countries, especially given how many Muslims are already allowed to live in Europe. Europe is diverse enough and it certainly doesn't have to change over night only to please the masochism of globalists (and it won't btw. so no need to be a scared kitty because of the nationalist bogeyman).

[athanaric]

Court rules against travel ban. It remains on hold.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politi...ing/index.html

Amazing huh. Almost like there isn't a fascist coup in the US, and the system of checks and balances still works.

(not that i really compared the influence of Muslim immigration to those events)?

No indeed. The magnitude of immigration today is on an entirely different level. And it's not just Muslims.

There is no rational reason to limit that to small countries, especially given how many Muslims are already allowed to live in Europe. Europe is diverse enough and it certainly doesn't have to change over night only to please the masochism of globalists (and it won't btw. so no need to be a scared kitty because of the nationalist bogeyman).

And even if all of Europe consisted of basically just one boring ethnicity, like certain big countries in Asia, there would be no right to immigration, moral or legal, and no objective need for it.

[the_mango55]

Amazing huh. Almost like there isn't a fascist coup in the US, and the system of checks and balances still works.

Not sure where you're coming from with this. This ruling isn't evidence that Trump isn't trying to seize power, it's just evidence that so far he's not succeeding.

[Cyclops]

@Cyclops: You compared my opinion to Wahhabism

When? Source please.

and you consistently show a condescending attitude towards anyone who disagrees, whilst saying little of any relevance.

I disagree, I think I have demolished some silly points.

Your comparing demographic processes in modern times to human pre-history was outright rubbish. You don't seem to have any self-awareness whilst bashing others.

I referenced the "big picture" because others did first. I think your criticism is poorly thought out and unfounded.

Nationalism isn't racism, Nationalism is Nationalism.
A French and German contention is not on the basis of race, for example.

Thats a fair point, but in many cases there is a fairly strong connection between the nation state and racism. The term "nation" refers ultimately to a group sharing a common birth, (from the latin nat or nasci refering to being born) although of course it is broader than that. The French Revolution gave a teremendous flowering to the idea of nationalism and was of course accompanied by a growth in feelings of French superiority (we get Chauvinism from M. Chauvin etc). Of course there was bigotry and what we would call racism before that, and nationalism can be unstained by racism but there have been instances where the two have been closely identified.

Try to follow the conversation.....

Yep we're done. This sort of posting is a concession you have nothing to add.

[Gaidin]

Court rules against travel ban. It remains on hold.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politi...ing/index.html

More importantly, unanimous, and one of them was Bush II iirc.

[athanaric]

I disagree, I think I have demolished some silly points.

Your level of self-awareness is astounding.

Yep we're done. This sort of posting is a concession you have nothing to add.

An elegant way of saying "I'm still unwilling to conduct research on the topic, so I'll insinuate my opponent is an uneducated spastic instead".

[ABH2]

I'm taking bets on how the Supreme Court rules, if there are any takers.

[Gaidin]

I'm taking bets on how the Supreme Court rules, if there are any takers.

I don't know. Considering it was unanimous. And it was an amusingly well documented opinion. The SCOTUS would literally have to come down on them word for word. Just for a god damn TRO.

[ABH2]

I don't know. Considering it was unanimous. And it was an amusingly well documented opinion. The SCOTUS would literally have to come down on them word for word. Just for a god damn TRO.

Well, you must be pretty confident then, right? So how about a friendly wager?

[Gaidin]

Well, you must be pretty confident then, right? So how about a friendly wager?

Spot me the 100$ I don't have and you're on. All I'm saying is this is a case where the SCOTUS is an appeals court so they can't just say " you we're god". They're hemmed in to what is handed to them. Or so you'd know by what's in the Constitution.

[the_mango55]

This case won't go to the supreme court, nor should it.

This was an appeal for an emergency stay on the first court order while the full appeal process is being prepared.

The travel ban will eventually make its way to the supreme court most likely, but I doubt it's going to be hearing this case specifically.

[Cyclops]

This case won't go to the supreme court, nor should it.

This was an appeal for an emergency stay on the first court order while the full appeal process is being prepared.

The travel ban will eventually make its way to the supreme court most likely, but I doubt it's going to be hearing this case specifically.

That's an interesting procedural point thx, I'm pretty unfamiliar with the US system. The appeal was made in the 9th circuit court which has a liberal reputation? So the work around is to play it out up to the supreme court which now has the balance leaning a little the other way, rather than argue against whether there's at least an argument to he heard.

There is a problem with the administration rushing things and this doesn't say a lot for their professionalism. For example it doesn't seem to be a surprise that say the 9th circuit court would agree to a restraining order or to hear arguments against the action. Either the administration didn't see this coming or they want an acrimonious fight.

That's of a piece with the difference between Trump's campaign promise to ban all Muslims from the US, and the reality of the EO which is a selective travel ban on a list of countries regardless of their religion, which is something completely different. Has this variation been addressed anywhere?

[fkizz]

Annnd yet another terrorist attack, this time explosion in subway. People who try to get measures against this series of coordinated terrorist attacks will be implied as having a mental disorder by leftist newspeech.

[the_mango55]

Annnd yet another terrorist attack, this time explosion in subway. People who try to get measures against this series of coordinated terrorist attacks will be implied as having a mental disorder by leftist newspeech.

Where? Link?

[fkizz]

Where? Link?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...engers-9782377
http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/...fdfa012574cc0f

Only anglosphere sources so far. It's fresh news.

Of course it had to be Paris, France yet again.

[the_mango55]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...engers-9782377
http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/...fdfa012574cc0f

Only anglosphere sources so far. It's fresh news.

Oh you mean the electrical fire on the Paris subway that happened yestderday?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/282031...e-underground/
http://www.thelocal.fr/20170209/elec...on-paris-metro

DAMN THOSE COORDINATED TERRORIST ATTACKS FROM RADICALIZED CHARGED PARTICLES!

[Gaidin]

Oh you mean the electrical fire on the Paris subway that happened yestderday?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/282031...e-underground/
http://www.thelocal.fr/20170209/elec...on-paris-metro

DAMN THOSE COORDINATED TERRORIST ATTACKS FROM RADICALIZED CHARGED PARTICLES!

750 DC voltage. That crap is nasty. And it apparently has a quest for vengeance!