Am I racist? 2.0

[oerput]

While Ottomans weren't as bad like French and British (they are the worst tho), they weren't good to their colonies like Austria-Hungary was. Kinda wish we never assassinated Franz Ferdinand, he had some awesome ideas how to reform his empire and Europe as a whole, which became reality after WWII. According to his plans Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia would get same status some of them have today and others are trying to get. Some one hundred years ago. Would also mean there would be no WWI and probably not even WWII.

im not defending ottomans. i know janissaries were slave soldier class formed by mostly serbian kids which was stolen from their families to keep their population under control and let them know that "if they rebel they would fight their own kids". also serbs are tough and big, they make good basketballers and soldiers.
yet they havent done this to the other countries they invaded or french,british,porteguisian,spanish,belgian atrocities.
if were gonna discuss imperialistic colonisation russians were the most humane because there was no people there. it was almost empty.
i hope you get the point. where theres people, there is evil.

[Xant]

i might be dumb

Well, at least you acknowledge it.

[Dalhi]

And turkey havent accepted mass immigration like european countries because we didnt butcher eachother in the 2. war  and we had enough population to keep the country going.
,,

You may want to google for "Wolfowitz Doctrine".

[Sandersson Jankins]

i might be dumb but i know why they accepted immigration, they needed to create an "inferior" gorup of people to do the jobs their own citizens wouldnt want to do. theres no other explanation there. "keep the country going" werent the right choice of words yes. but this doesnt change the fact that they screwed up or you wouldnt all be here bitching about sand people

well, you were almost partly right.

there was (and is) no necessity or need for importation of an underclass to perform manual/shitty labor at low wages- the premise that if 3rd worlders or frankly any immigration is barred, garbage would pile up in the streets for lack of garbagemen is ridiculous. that a nigga couldn't get fries at the local mcdick's, that all floors everywhere would be permanently greasy from the acute lack of janitorial staff.

there does exist certain individuals and groups that do gain quite a bit through mass importation of unskilled laborers of varying stripes, though. that is what you should look at; what industries might be paying some good dividends for this? what political forces might want such a thing, and for what reason?

[Tibes]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Sandersson Jankins]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

maybe it'll be a refreshing change to not have Oberyn do this:

the problem is that *allowing* large amounts of individuals accustomed and satisfied with significantly lower standards of living into a host nation will drive wages in many markets down (and it is folly to think that each industry or market is independent to much degree; lowered wages in construction or similar have impact besides that direct impact on native-population construction workers)

but not only driving wages down; in most Western nations, depending on jurisdiction oftentimes in the US, there are significant welfare payments available, most ESPECIALLY when multiple children are involved. the folk generally imported do have more children than the native populations in most cases.

funnily enough, Schrodinger's immigrant sorta DOES exist, just not MY job. i am also intensely aware that the lion's share of debt-spending is not on welfare parasites or their children and is instead military spending, debt maintenance (lmao), and general US Empire shit. of course, if you import ENOUGH members of the new underclass/working welfare class, the voting demographics will undoubtedly shift enough towards candidates and policies that will give more and more in welfare payments and unrestricted immigration. this kills the nation.

(unmentioned are risks of increased crime, violence, attempted religious rule particularly relevant to places like UK, Sweden, France, etc. perspective is generally geared towards where i live)

[Westwood]

well, you were almost partly right.

there was (and is) no necessity or need for importation of an underclass to perform manual/shitty labor at low wages- the premise that if 3rd worlders or frankly any immigrantion is barred, garbage would pile up in the streets for lack of garbagemen is ridiculous. that a nigga couldn't get fries at the local mcdick's, that all floors everywhere would be permanently greasy from the acute lack of janitorial staff.

there does exist certain individuals and groups that do gain quite a bit through mass importation of unskilled laborers of varying stripes, though. that is what you should look at; what industries might be paying some good dividends for this? what political forces might want such a thing, and for what reason?

To the powers-that-be there sadly does exist the need to import foreign labor to counteract population aging and decline in Western countries. Not necessarily for manual labor in particular but maintaining levels of working-age folks in general, though I have no doubt that the strength of the lobbies of certain concerned industries, such as our own very influential agricultural industry (lmao RIP Farm Bill 2018), is a factor in that equation for many politicians, as you're implying. Consider the following, from a whole 18 years ago:

https://www.un.org/press/en/2000/20000317.dev2234.doc.html

Aren't those a great couple of words? "Replacement Migration." Very Barbara Spectre. Easily my favorite UN press release of all time. You can find the same spiel in documents further decades old as well as any written yesterday by untold numbers of international treaty organizations and NGOs and such. Rather than industrial lobbies or interest groups, I would lay this at the feet of the modern welfare state itself. Social security schemes that entitle people of an arbitrary age to monetary benefits from their government, provided to them by essentially leveraging a portion of the wages of those currently employed. What does this do but make maintaining maximal employment the goal of government, to maintain its welfare scheme? That government can and will stick its fingers into a variety of pies to achieve whatever bullshit goal it finds within its purview. There are a number of other demographic reasons for Western governments to find "replacement migration" attractive, our abysmal fitness/willingness rates for military service for one, but I think the cancers we call entitlements are the most glaring and effective example.

This leads to other questions, like why are Western fertility rates so low, even accounting for rootless cosmopolitans choosing to end their lines? Is it the tofu? Or perhaps, why is it socially acceptable to import explicitly "replacement" immigrants but not to explicitly encourage native birthrates? Why is a childfree narrative encouraged so vigorously in the West while we're also told we need to be replaced by immigrants? Do Sub-Saharan Africans know about the evils of their carbon footprints?

[Tibes]

This leads to other questions, like why are Western fertility rates so low, even accounting for rootless cosmopolitans choosing to end their lines? Is it the tofu? Or perhaps, why is it socially acceptable to import explicitly "replacement" immigrants but not to explicitly encourage native birthrates? Why is a childfree narrative encouraged so vigorously in the West while we're also told we need to be replaced by immigrants? Do Sub-Saharan Africans know about the evils of their carbon footprints?

Personally my opinion is that the extensive push for individualism in a carefree safe society and lots of education, have created people who live in constant existential crisis. And people living in it, dont want to be responsible for other peoples lives, other then their own and mybe their spouses. If they have the option to avoid that responsibility they will take it in a heartbeat. Really I think people are just too invested in their own life, constantly working towards something that they can see will fulfill their need for a purpose for a very long time.

Not only that, the issue is that having children in the West is nolonger a necessity. We can survive old age with pensions and investments. People from the 3rd world constantly suffer from lack of basic needs. Having children is not only  some cool fad, so that housewives can finally partake in that neighbourhood babyshower they have been yearning to go to for so long or beerbellied dads can boast about how their kids made the local sportsteam, but a need and an investment in its own right.

[Xant]

No country is importing Africans and Middle Easterners for cheap labor. That just adds to the populace that doesn't have a job.

[Sandersson Jankins]

Personally my opinion is that the extensive push for individualism in a carefree safe society and lots of education, have created people who live in constant existential crisis. And people living in it, dont want to be responsible for other peoples lives, other then their own and mybe their spouses. If they have the option to avoid that responsibility they will take it in a heartbeat. Really I think people are just too invested in their own life, constantly working towards something that they can see will fulfill their need for a purpose for a very long time.

Not only that, the issue is that having children in the West is nolonger a necessity. We can survive old age with pensions and investments. People from the 3rd world constantly suffer from lack of basic needs. Having children is not some only cool fad so that housewives can finally partake in that neighbourhood babyshower they have been yearning to go to for so long, but a need and an investment in its own right.

good post. horrible combination of selfish hyper-consumptionist individualism coupled with strong belief in collective rights for "at-risk, vulnerable, minority, etc" populations. just fuck my shit up famalam, gimme the worst parts of individualism and collectivism and sprinkle fiat currency and debt-spending all over it

No country is importing Africans and Middle Easterners for cheap labor. That just adds to the populace that doesn't have a job.

saudia arabia is happy to do just that- what, do you reckon even the lowest of the low slumrat Saudi is gonna do some work? fuck that, they've got their own version of white trash spending all their cash on lotto tickets. they just schmooze, dick-suck, petition, and wait their way into the few over-paid government jobs where you literally don't show up

their native populace is kept in check by cheap slave labour and the idle fantasy of getting a do-nothing government job and styling on all the underclass lmao. can link a decent podcast about modern conditions in KSA if anyone is interested

"Labor force survey results showed that the number of non-Saudi employed persons for the first quarter (Q1) of 2017 reached 10,850,192 while the total number of employed persons reached 13,889,137."
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/business/2017/08/20/Foreign-Nationalities-hold-10-million-jobs-in-Saudi-Arabia.html

what the F U C K lol

[Oberyn]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[[ptx]]

Man, what would you ever do, if there were no commies or SJWs, Oberyn?

[Bittersteel]

And so he came, good meme'ing

[Xant]

The Virgin Centrist has been Summoned

[Oberyn]

That's because you're a misanthropic spiritually empty husk. Not to worry, like every single other person that has ever existed and had the same views, it's a self-correcting problem. People want to have children because evolution has selected for people who wanted to have children. And the people that will exist into the future will be the descendents of ones who wanted to have children today.