Women's rights, or Islam?

Pretty much sums it up.

In the grand scheme of things, if you look back on human history far enough. You'll see that everyone has been wrong to everyone. Everyone's ancestors have done some fucked up stuff if you turn the clock back far enough. Rather than look back in admiration of human accomplishment, they try to teach us to look at history in shame and guilt.

 

Right, "Scandanavian countries ARE mixed economies, but the mixture includes far more regulation of business and industry, more redistribution of wealth through taxes, and more welfare services and entitlement programs for their citizens. Yet they're not often thought of as a brutal authoritarian dictatorship, and are certainly not racist. Their laws benefit the great majority of the population at the expense of the filthy rich. If the Danish model is okay and not socialism, why don't we do the same? I think Corey Iacono wouln't like it though, because it's a far cry from the libertairian utopia he's pushing for. Be careful what you wish for.

 

That's eight. Stigliz and Chomsky are serious, though hardly infallible, scholars. I think they were talking about economicc and social policies that Chavez had implemented, not an overall assessment of the man himself or his overall political stance. Chomsky criticized Chavez for his "assault" on democracy. Noam Chomsky criticises old friend Hugo Chávez for 'assault' on democracy

Let's look at Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist. The comments you refer to were made in 2007 when Venezuela's economy was booming. Stiglitz said specifically that developing nations must strike a balance between public and private control of the market, so I guess that would be the "mixed" economy you mention."The key to success is to find the correct equilibrium between the private sector and the government, which is different for each nation." He also noted that while Venezuela had adopted policies to promote economic diversification, "Venezuela still faces the challenge of overcoming structural problems associated with an economy overwhelmingly geared towards oil production". He was right about that! He mentioned though that "unlike other oil producing countries, Venezuela has taken advantage of the boom in world oil prices to implement policies that benefit its citizens and promote economic development. "Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez appears to have had success in bringing health and education to the people in the poor neighborhoods of Caracas, to those who previously saw few benefits of the countries oil wealth". Stiglitz argues that "It is not only important to have sustainable growth, but to ensure the best distribution of economic growth, for the benefit of all citizens." Here his neo-liberal critics would strenuously object. Forget the poor, they say. Concentrate on neoliberal policies friendly to foreign capital, and the poor will benefit "in the long run" from the crumbs trickling down from the banquet tables of the rich. But the high world oil prices didn't last. Neither did the economy. Was it the result of a failure of "Socialism", or the plight of Third World extractive economies dependent on global economic forces beyond their control? I live in a state which has some of the characteristics of a Third World extractive economy--heavily dependent on oil revenues. Let me assure you that we don't have socialism in this state. When times were good, the legislature followed the classic conservative playbook: tax cuts and lavish tax and regulatory incentives to industry. Now that times are bad, we're in the throes of painful belt tightening, at the expense of education, roads and social services. Kansas is in the same boat. A failure for "capitalism"? I don't think so.

It's important to distinguish between economic efficiency and equity. Capitalism has proven itself to be most effective in maximizing economic efficiency, defined as the optimal production and allocation of resources given existing factors of production. Equity is the equitable distribution of wealth and benefits among the various members of society. Libertarian and neoliberal economists have been largely unconcerned with equity, assuming that the greatest number of people will benefit in the long run from the trickle down of wealth. But in the real world, wealth tends to trickle up.

 

Paul Joseph Watson works for Alex Jones. He is not a reliable source of information, often twisting and misrepresenting the people he likes to talk about. I think he needs to remove his head from his butt before he has any more hallucinations.

 

You say that the Scandinavian model isn't socialism here. ^

But you say the Scandinavian model isn't socialism here. ^

Which is it?





Venezuela is has more oil reserves than Saudi Arabia. And yes, the government did very well when oil was at an all time high, but did they do smart things with that revenue? Like hedge the price of oil so they won't have to lean so hard on the taxpayers? I'd say no. They subsidized electricity to the point it was free. And when something is free, nobody conserves it at all. So now there's an electricity shortage. With this electricity shortage, they don't have enough to extract enough oil from these reserves, therefore they're now IMPORTING oil. This is like Iceland importing ice. Let that sink in.

They were a huge player in the oil market before Chavez came along. Sure the economy may have been a lot better for Venezuelans 10 years ago, but you must remember that when you institute new economic laws of any kind, it takes indeterminable amounts of time to see the change take place.


Venezuela, thanks to socialism (not communism) has fallen into a poverty stricken sinkhole that is similar to the aftermath of war. Chavez seized the nations farms and turned them over to government bureaucrats who didn't know how to farm. Government controlled industries and price manipulation fails time and time again.

Oil Prices didn't destroy Venezuela, socialism did. Socialism always promises heaven, and delivers hell - Mises.org Venezuela's Default Disaster

You didn't watch the video.... But to be fair, it appears that Youtube took it down because it goes against their narrative.

Perhaps, if you believe women's rights and Islam can coexist peacefully, you might be able to answer me why Germany and Sweden are having women only concerts and New Years festivals to protect them from migrants. Mass assaults happened in Cologne New Years last year.


German police union chief slams NYE 'safe zone' for women

 

By the way..,..

Why are western leftists fetishizing the hijab, while REAL feminists in Iran right now are risking incarceration and death by removing theirs?

 

Women should have the right to choose either way, that's feminism

A lot of women wear the hijab by choice, I came across a woman the other day elsewhere on the internet who said she wore a burqa by choice for a couple of months but her husband made her stop wearing it because he was afraid she would be attacked for it (they lived in London). She wore it because she was devoutly religious, not because she was forced.

I also read an essay a while back written by an Iranian-American who decided to start wearing the hijab and her Iranian mother was horrified because she had came to America to get away from that. But her mother was forced to wear one in Iran and the daughter chose to wear one in America, there is a difference

 

Because it's a choice. In Iran they don't want to but people like me support a women who wishes to. That picture on the left has a flag on it for a reason. In America the protest done in Iran is not needed because it's up to the women what to wear among the religion. In other words feminism which allows the choice.

You seem to pro and anti-Islam at the same time depending on how you think it affects a political advisory. As I have said before you represent the right's inteligence (or lack of) well. It's like Fox news has a keyboard.

 

You must have missed my earlier post, where I explained this at length. The Scandanavian model is a mixed economy, combining private ownership of the means of production with extensive government regulation, a welfare state, and radical redistributive policies equalizing income--a very far cry from your libertarian utopia. Yet it seems to work, and to be compatible with freedom and democracy. If an American politician tried to introduce such a system here, he'd be called a Socialist. Obamacare and any move toward national health care which the Scandanavians enjoy is called "Socialized medicine'. And yet technically, narrowly defined, socialism involves govenment ownership of the means of production--something I don't hear even Bernie talking about. I view that kind of system as undesirable, because it is economically inefficient.

No, they did stupid things, just as the conservative Republicans here in Oklahoma did stupid things, i.e., tax cuts, because like Chavez they were ideologically driven, albeit by a different ideology. Chavez was an asshole, that we can agree on. But I think I already said that.

Before Chavez, Venezuela may have been a huge player in the oil market, but the poor got little benefit from it. Like the libertarian ideology you advocate, the system pursued efficiency at the expense of equity. You have not shown that falling into poverty was the result of socialism any more than Oklahoma's fall into poverty was a result of capitalism. In both cases, it was a result of a drastic drop in world oil prices, and previous policies failing to prepare for that.
Oil Prices didn't destroy Venezuela, socialism did. Socialism always promises heaven, and delivers hell - Mises.org Venezuela's Default Disaster
Quoting the Mises organization cuts no ice with me. They're misguided right wing ideologues like yourself. They and you simply assert rather than demonstrate that the economic problems in Venezuela are a result of socialism rather than the decline in world oil prices. But as I said, socialism in the sense of government ownership of the means of production is an economically nefficient system.

Your link explains that the police union boss doesn't think the segregated concerts were necessary and appropriate, and the report says "Experts note that migrants in general aren’t more likely to commit crimes than German citizens, but the proportion of crimes they commit may increase as they start to make up a larger share of the population." So possibly the concerts are an over-reaction. Germany, like other western European countries, has a labor shortage resulting from a declining birth rate, and has opened its doors to droves of migrant laborers, mostly from Muslim countries. That strikes me as risky, because of the clash in cultures. The differences in sexual mores between the cultures may easily be misunderstood by Muslim men, and the fear of Muslims engendered by political opportunists may inflate the perception of danger in the minds of women. Much of the fear seems to be based on false reports. Where Does Fear of Refugees Come From?

 

I'd be disappointed in my daughter too.

Perhaps you and Unfocused seem to be missing the point.

Let me clarify; I'm not bitching about the fact that some women choose to wear one while living in a land that won't incarcerate them for not wearing one.
My problem is that many on your side are embracing the headscarf as a symbol of solidarity, female empowerment, and liberation. Don't believe me? Take a look at the music video below:



"So Liberating" my ass. Are these women in the following articles liberated?

Aqsa Parvez's father, brother get life sentences
https://www.indiatimes.com/news/ind...r-her-dupatta-slips-from-her-head-245860.html
Swedish Women Urged to Wear Headscarf - Or Be Raped

 

Considering that in the US, we have so many women claiming to be sexually harassed, assaulted, and objectified by men in authoritative positions where they work, etc. ...maybe we've (American, non-Muslim women) just been under an illusion of freedom? I have Muslim friends who don't feel oppressed by following Islam, in fact, they feel quite ''free.'' In my opinion, it is a sign of a dictatorial government regime that oppresses women in some parts of the middle east for example, not Islam.

 

I see what you're saying now.
Mixed economies like the USA's and Scandinavia's have socialistic traits here and there, but I'm glad you see that Scandinavia isn't the best example of a pure socialism like many around the world seem to think. Venezuela is a much better example.

TBH I don't know enough about Oklahoma's oil problems to challenge you very far on this. But based on what little I've read, it seems that many people didn't anticipate that oil prices would be high forever, and just rode the gravy train. But I think your home state's poverty level pales in comparison to that suffered by Venezuela. You still have full grocery stores, a functional power grid, hospitals have the supplies they need, and you're not hunting pigeons as a source of food. These are the results of government controlling too much as a result of socialism. Which seems to me like you also believe is "economically inefficient."

Compare that to Poland, a country that isn't taking in any islamic refugees despite pressure from the EU. Poland, unlike Germany, Sweden and UK didn't use militarized police to protect its festival goers from peaceful trucks and Taharush.[/QUOTE]

 

Ah yes, Poland. Right-wing authoritarian paradise, where lslamophobia is used to generate the fear needed to cement control by demagogues.
.Poland's Right-Wing Government Scares Europe by Going After the Media | VICE News
Lurching Right: The Escalating Fight for Poland's Future - SPIEGEL ONLINE - International
Rule No. 1 for Poland’s new right-wing government: Ignore the critics
In Poland, a right-wing, populist, anti-immigrant government sees an ally in Trump
The assault on democracy in Poland is dangerous for the Poles and all Europe | Neal Ascherson

 

Yeah I'm well aware that lefty journalists published articles took to twitter to express their frustrations at Poland preserving their cultural heritage by calling them Nazis with their normalized fascism.

Poland nationalist rally with neo-Nazi slogans, calls for 'Islamic holocaust' draws biggest crowd ever

Which is freaking hilarious considering Poland was the first country to be creamed by Hitler's army. Golly it makes you wonder why nobody takes baseless accusations of racism and neo-nazism from WaPo, Newsweek, TYT, NYT, WSJ, and that ilk very seriously anymore. Per logic, a Polish Nazi should not exist.

Poland, like Czech Republic, Hungary, and the other Eastern EU countries know what its like to be occupied by a foreign force and have their culture taken away. They were heavily oppressed by the Communists much harder than Western Europe can even begin to understand. I've lived in Eastern Europe for many months and the attitude toward cultural preservation is quite a commonly held view.

It makes you wonder why these same virtue signalling journalists aren't expressing that same frustration at Saudi Arabia for not taking in any refugees and helping out their fellow muslim.

Western Hypocrites: How Dare You Criticise Poland? – Right Side News – Medium

 

You may think it's "freakin' hilarious." Rational people would think it's "freakin' insane" that the Poles who, as you say, were victims of Hitler would fall for such tribalistic garbola, and that Americans like you would admire it. Per logic, a Polish Nazi shoudn't even exist, but it obviously does, despite the slash marks in the symbols the dumbass tribalist dupes are carrying. Like their Alt right counterparts over here, they're Putin's stooges, manipulated by FSB goons. Fascists in denial. I think the "lefty" journalists are expressing plenty of disdain for the Saudis. It's the righty Tumpies who are sucking Saudi dicks. Their mentality isn't far removed from that of the glinty eyed ideologues who tossed similar slogans around in the Bavarian beer halls in the 1920s. If this sick tribal nationalism takes hold, we can kiss civilization goodbye. All so that a few Russian and American oligarchs can get richer and more despotic. I think you may be overgeneralzing that "nobody takes baseless accusations of racism and neo-nazism from WaPo, Newsweek, TYT, NYT, WSJ" seriously. Trump, the Alt Right and his mentally challenged redneck voting base are still a minority of the American electorate.. Despite the Trumpie/Alt Right campaign to brand professional journalism "fake news" and substitute your alternative dystopian reality as the true one, intelligent folks aren't fooled. You've offered up rags like Breitbart, InfoWars, Russia Today and now Right Side News as as reliable sources, and touted a misfit demagogue freak, Milo Yianopolous, as your hero, so why would anybody take you seriously. You're obviously just a mouthpiece for the radical right. The Mercers have already thrown Milo under the bus, and after the Roy Moore fiasco, Bannon's days are numbered. The Mercers Wash Their Hands of Milo Time for the rats to jump ship!

 

Seeing that it was a 11/11 Poland Independence day celebration that the media is losing their mind over. With that logic, should every 4/7 celebration in America be interpreted as a jingoist neo-nazi uprising?

The media has it's way of finding the right people they want to interview and give a platform to, and insinuate that a few disgusting people represent the majority. Taking a look at your sources, it seems they found the people they were looking for.

I suppose they overlooked the fact that one of the speakers at the event was a Jewish Holocaust survivor.

Poland is smart enough to learn from the errors of western europe. They've had their country taken over twice, and were occupied by a totalitarian regime for more than half a century. They don't feel like being occupied a third time by Islamists and EU elites.

Poland has figured out you can be humanitarian and help refugees without opening your borders wide open to young single men who aren't fully literate in their native language.
Aleppo Bishop thanks Poles for support


Even the EU has made it clear that mass immigration isn't a humanitarian issue, but a focus to destroy homogeneity and the native culture. In other words: there's too many Europeans in Europe.

EU states 'must be multicultural'

This mindset would assume that the Dalai Lama is a neo-nazi of some kind.

The Dalai Lama says ‘too many’ refugees are going to Germany
Dalai Lama says Europe has accepted ‘too many’ refugees

The alternative to globalism is not white supremacy or Jingoism. As much as they try to push that idea on all of us. I promise . There is a reasonable middle ground.

 

The Law and Justice Party is far from just a group of patriotic Poles celebrating their independence day. It has an authoritarian agenda of right-wing nationalism that's dangerous to Poland and to Europe. Xenophobic, authoritarian – and generous on welfare: how Poland’s right rules | Remi Adekoya Why Poland’s Authoritarian Drift Puts the EU Between a Rock and a Hard Place If there is a reasonable middle ground, why do you constantly push the extreme right. I happen to agree that sovereign nations have a right and obligation to use immigration policy selectively so as not to let their borders be overrun with culturally different minorities who a difficult to assimilate.

 

6

Not really back yet so haven’t got much time – but as you haven’t given me much this will not take long.

oh look at Venezuela oh that’s what happens when lefties are in control – you know that’s as stupid as saying ALL right wing governments will inevitably turn into Nazi Germany.

Oh I really wish you would read the posts and think about what they mean - too often you just react to post to ‘score’ a point to as you put it get a ‘win’ – but in doing so you seem to miss the meaning of many things posted.

I didn’t think it needed explaining but will try and put it as simply as I can so you can understand – right wingers that claim all leftie ideas end with Stalinism or some such are just as silly as left wingers who claim all rightie ideas end up as fascist.

Can you understand that?

It’s about the stupid name calling – the way people just throw out dumb (and often inappropriate) terms without giving them much though because they want to demean an opponent to score a point over them.

Do you get that?

 

6

As to the economics of Nazi Germany there is a book I’ve suggested before to others on this forum that I liked -

The Wages of Destruction: the making and breaking of the Nazi economy by Adam Tooze

If you want to get into a discussion on German history I’m happy to do so, I’m no expert but have read a number of books on the subject – what books have you read on German history so I can see if we have read any of the same? If you haven’t I can suggest some, if you wish?

The relationship between capitalism and the Nazis is a complex one, basically Hitler wanted control and capitalist forces eventually sided with him because they feared the communists more. Other capitalist like Henry Ford liked his ideas and many American banks invested in Nazis Germany, it is said that by 1941, American investment in the German economy totalled nearly 475 million dollars which some work out as 7.7 trillion dollars, adjusting for inflation.

The thing about many of the Nazis was that they had a belief in Social Darwinist ideas of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ genes that underpins a lot of right-wing socio-economic thinking even today.

I’ll post some musings I wrote here some 12 years ago on the parallels I saw (and still see) between the rise of fascism in 20’s 30’s Europe and some trends in US politics.

By the way does your reply indicate you haven’t yet started reading the books I suggested?

 

6

Here are some musings I wrote here 12 years ago in the thread ‘Why do the national libertarians keep reminding me of the Nazis?’

*

There are people that come to the forum that I have begun to think of as national libertarians. They mix a bastard libertarianism with the whiff of nationalism about it. It is a strange mix it seems to wish to protect Americans from the effects of free market capitalism while promoting free market economics.

Lets us look at a few of the trends I’ve noted.

They seem to talk of the US ‘regaining’ power from international organisations and being ‘free’ once again.

Can be isolationist

Can be against immigration and blame immigrants for talking away ‘American jobs’ lowing educational standards and increases in taxation.

Talk of ‘conspiracies’ undermining the ‘American’ way of life.

Much talk of ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom’ and how they will bring more (without explaining what they mean)

Claim that the present system is corrupt.

Claim to be neither of the right or left.

Talk of some past golden age.

In a lot of ways it reminds me of National Socialism the underlying ideological principle might be very different but many of the buttons that the Nazis used to attract people are being pushed by the national libertarians (the Nat-libs).

For one thing it is the scapegoating, how the two seem to blame the problems of their society on either external powers or internal ‘traitors’

How they appeal to the elite’s while simultaneously claiming to be looking after the interests of the common people against those of those same elite’s.

Nazis imagery was all about the past glory of the Teutonic races of the once proud power of the German volk that never really existed. The Nat-libs seem to talk a lot about the past of the founding fathers in almost reverential terms and associate it with a true ‘American’ way that never really existed since they seem to forget just what a compromise and a fudge the US constitution was.

*

What I’m getting at is not the ideology but the methods they seem to be using to attract people to the ‘movement’.

The National Socialist’s learnt not to dwell on their political policies they found they made a lot more headway if they appealed in other areas.

They could never really hid the policies they espoused but they could try and camouflage them behind concepts with greater appeal such as ‘liberation’ and ‘freedom’ slogans that often appeared on early Nazis posters.

The other thing they could do was try and misdirect people by scapegoating others. Blaming all problems on a shadowy conspiracy of Jewish bankers, claiming that political opponents even the whole system was corrupted or controlled by the conspiracy, and accused the media of the day of lying to the people.

These things seem to me to be very similar to what some so-called libertarians are doing on these very forums.

Here are a selecting of captions that appeared on early Nazis posters.

[Hitler] - “is ruthless in uncovering the rulers of the German economy, the international bank Jews and their lackeys, the Democrats, Marxists, Jesuits, and Free Masons!”

"Citizens! Do not believe that the Germany of misfortune and misery, the nation of corruption and usury, the land of Jewish corruption, can be saved by parties that claim to stand on a foundation of facts. Never!"

“Freedom and food for every decent working German! The gallows for profiteers, black marketeers and exploiters, regardless of religious faith or race!”

"Germany's Liberation."

"Freedom and Bread."

“The big-wigs are living high on the hog, the people are wretched."

*

In the early part of the 20th century socialist ideas were popular in Europe amongst those who were disillusioned with the mainstream political parties and even the system of governments of the time, which they saw as corrupt and upholding the power of vested interests. But while there were many legitimate socialist organisations there were others who were just using the guise of socialism to attract the disaffected for their own purposes.

National Socialists may have used some of the words and ideas of regular socialism but to me Hitler’s goals had more to do with seizing power than socialist reform.

*

In the US of the 21st century libertarianism seems to me to be attractive to many Americans who are disillusioned with the mainstream political parties and even the system of government, which they see as corrupt and upholding the power of vested interests.

So while there may be legitimate libertarians I feel that there are those that might just be using the guise of libertarianism to attract the disaffected for their own purposes.

Now this is just an impression, an opinion or a theory, and I’m not accusing all libertarians (although it is a philosophy I personally dislike) of only faking their beliefs, most are genuine (if misguided in my view). But sometimes talking to others I get the impression that just like many of the Nazis they are less interested in genuine political thought and debate and more interested in trying to misdirect and scapegoating others.