[Buzz62]

Oh I understood it alright. I'm just not a big fan of these philosophical knots some people like to tie up, in order to try and complicate human nature. Humans aren't that complicated. We have instincts, and learned social behaviors. We are the single most destructive beings on Earth. So much so, that we are actually self-destructive.
But go ahead and tie your philosophical knots.

[foxdemon]

@Buzz62 given you understand that 'Moloch' is not an entity but the results of the system, then you would be able to explain how Noam is mistaken in his claims that the 'rich countries' are to blame for the European immigrant crisis.

[Buzz62]

@Buzz62 given you understand that 'Moloch' is not an entity but the results of the system, then you would be able to explain how Noam is mistaken in his claims that the 'rich countries' are to blame for the European immigrant crisis.

Actually, Moloch was a gawd who demanded extreme sacrifice. Usually children tossed into a sort of caldron full of fire. Over the ages the deity had several variations of the name, but was always associated with burning of kids (*sick*).
However I still contend that Moloch is simply a term to represent the tools of, and the chaotic results of, excessive greed. Something that there is more than enough of, in the west and in the ME and Africa.

There always remains the 1 final question, with respect to this issue though. Do we (the west) allow our guilt complex over what has happened in the ME and Africa, to force us to sacrifice our own children's lives and lands?

Understanding that BOTH parties had active, greedy little hands in the "caldron" that created this "fire", my position is that of a father. Thus I will choose to ignore the actions that have lead us to this point, in order to cleanse Europe...for all of the European kids, who need that land, and deal with any lingering guilt afterwards.

[Buzz62]

errr...

[Pants-of-dog]

There always remains the 1 final question, with respect to this issue though. Do we (the west) allow our guilt complex over what has happened in the ME and Africa, to force us to sacrifice our own children's lives and lands?

This is not the question. It is stupid.

First of all, this has nothing to do with guilt. No one cares about your feelings.

Secondly, no one's kids are going to be sacrificed just because there is pressure to migrate from the global south. That is a term for the developing countries, by the way.

Thirdly, white people are not going to lose their land in the foreseeable future.

Thus, this question has no basis in reality.

Understanding that BOTH parties had active, greedy little hands in the "caldron" that created this "fire", my position is that of a father. Thus I will choose to ignore the actions that have lead us to this point, in order to cleanse Europe...for all of the European kids, who need that land, and deal with any lingering guilt afterwards.

I have. I have no idea who BOTH parties are here, but you are talking about ethnically cleansing Europe of non-whites.

This is racist.

[Buzz62]

This is not the question. It is stupid.

First of all, this has nothing to do with guilt. No one cares about your feelings.

Secondly, no one's kids are going to be sacrificed just because there is pressure to migrate from the global south. That is a term for the developing countries, by the way.

Thirdly, white people are not going to lose their land in the foreseeable future.

Thus, this question has no basis in reality.

Tell that to the Europeans POD. I think they'd disagree with you.
But hey. When has that ever stopped you from making shit up?
Your disdain for "the evil white guy" is well known.

I have. I have no idea who BOTH parties are here, but you are talking about ethnically cleansing Europe of non-whites.

This is racist.

Perhaps. Its also necessary if Europe is gonna remain Europe.

[Sivad]

given you understand that 'Moloch' is not an entity but the results of the system, then you would be able to explain how Noam is mistaken in his claims that the 'rich countries' are to blame for the European immigrant crisis.

It's not like any of those colonial powers did it solely out of necessity with great reluctance and deep regret, they were all about it. It was done for greed, profit, and power, and it was done with savage brutality. Even if it was absolutely necessary to access those lands and resources it could have been done humanely and respectfully through honest trade. The raping and pillaging, the mutilating and slaving, those were all gratuitous. And this isn't like ancient history, Africa was only officially de-conolonized in the 1960s but the abuse never really ended, it just mutated into neoliberal "trade" and continues to this day.

[Pants-of-dog]

Tell that to the Europeans POD. I think they'd disagree with you.
But hey. When has that ever stopped you from making shit up?
Your disdain for "the evil white guy" is well known.

I am sure that many think the same stupid things that you do. But something is not true just because a lot of people believe it. Something like 40% of people in the USA believe in Creationism. Does this make it true?

If you think I am making stuff up, what exactly am I making up?

Also, accusing me of racism is just a way of trying to shame me and silence debate.

Perhaps. Its also necessary if Europe is gonna remain Europe.

Please explain why ethnically cleansing Europe is necessary "if Europe is gonna remain Europe".

[Buzz62]

I am sure that many think the same stupid things that you do. But something is not true just because a lot of people believe it. Something like 40% of people in the USA believe in Creationism. Does this make it true?

If you think I am making stuff up, what exactly am I making up?

Also, accusing me of racism is just a way of trying to shame me and silence debate.



Please explain why ethnically cleansing Europe is necessary "if Europe is gonna remain Europe".

Look, in this case, I am not going to go 'round and 'round with you.
The very seat of the Caucasian race is at stake, and you think its OK.
You like to howl about "cultural genocide". Well we're watching it happen POD.
I will NOT advocate for the Islamification of Europe. I have family there, and I know what they and their friends think. You wouldn't like it, but that's us "evil white guys" for ya.
You are either willfully blind, or have an intense hate-on for white people.
Either way...it doesn't matter. What you are saying is asinine.

[Pants-of-dog]

Look, in this case, I am not going to go 'round and 'round with you.
The very seat of the Caucasian race is at stake, and you think its OK.
You like to howl about "cultural genocide". Well we're watching it happen POD.
I will NOT advocate for the Islamification of Europe. I have family there, and I know what they and their friends think. You wouldn't like it, but that's us "evil white guys" for ya.
You are either willfully blind, or have an intense hate-on for white people.
Either way...it doesn't matter. What you are saying is asinine.

There are many mistakes here. Let us look at them one by one.

First of all, Europe is not at stake. There is no existential threat to Europe from migration. If there is, please present evidence that this threat exists, as well as describing exactly what this threat is.

Secondly, I do not think it is okay that Europe is about to be destroyed. I think you are wrong when you claim that Europe is going to be destroyed by immigration. Do you see the difference between me disagreeing with you, and me agreeing with you and not caring? I am doing the former and you incorrectly think I am doing the latter.

Cultural genocide, as I use it, is a specific term. I use the definition used in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstituti ... _web_o.pdf

Physical genocide is the mass killing of the members of a targeted group, and biological genocide is the destruction of the group’s reproductive capacity. Cultural genocide is the destruction of those structures and practices that allow the group to continue as a group. States that engage in cultural genocide set out to destroy the political and social institutions of the targeted group. Land is seized, and populations are forcibly transferred and their movement is restricted. Languages are banned. Spiritual leaders are persecuted, spiritual practices are forbidden, and objects of spiritual value are confiscated and destroyed. And, most significantly to the issue at hand, families are disrupted to prevent the transmission of cultural values and identity from one generation to the next.

Now, since Muslims in Europe are not doing any of the things described above, it is incorrect to claim that I am condemning it on one hand and ignoring it on the other.

I do not care about the opinion of your family. I keep pointing out that opinions and feelings are irrelevant for political debate. You seem to ignore that and continue to introduce irrelevancies. The only interesting thing is your apparent inability to learn from this mistake.

Accusing me of hating white people is also not an argument, nor is it correct nor relevant.

Edited for typos

[Buzz62]

[foxdemon]

It's not like any of those colonial powers did it solely out of necessity with great reluctance and deep regret, they were all about it. It was done for greed, profit, and power, and it was done with savage brutality. Even if it was absolutely necessary to access those lands and resources it could have been done humanely and respectfully through honest trade. The raping and pillaging, the mutilating and slaving, those were all gratuitous. And this isn't like ancient history, Africa was only officially de-conolonized in the 1960s but the abuse never really ended, it just mutated into neoliberal "trade" and continues to this day.

Actually, it was out of necessity. Once one did, they all had to. Otherwise the one that did would get more wealth and thus power to dominate their rivals. None of the things you mention were gratuitous. They didn't do it simply for the sake of being nasty. There is two opposite views on European exceptionalism: Europeans are superior and that Europeans are intrinsically nastier than anyone else. Both are false.


Today we are seeing a shift in the global balance of power from the west to the east. For the last 70 or so years, US naval supremacy has maintained the global capitalist system. The rise of Asian sea power, built on a relative increase in Asian wealth, is ending US control of the oceans. This greatly increases their ability to act unilaterally. Another consequence is that Asian values will rival or displace Western values as the power shifts. Bye bye Western moralism. What were universal rules now aren't: system change = = values can't be enforced = one defaults = all default.

Asian nations and companies are moving to secure resources, most importantly water resources. Not one of these competing Asian nations can afford to sit back while the others secure more resources or they will lose relative power to their rivals. They don't have the choice to be nice if they want to remain competitive. The eviction of the Rohingya being a case in point. India and China must support the Burmese government in order to prevent the other from getting more influence.

And so lots of displaced people are coming to Europe. The European response has been uncoordinated. Again it is a case of lack of cooperation leading to the need to default. So that will be the outcome of the system as it stands.

We can talk all we like about what people should do and what they shouldn't but in practice people will do what they must. That's where your moral stand and Noam's moral stand are flawed.

[Sivad]

Actually, it was out of necessity. Once one did, they all had to. Otherwise the one that did would get more wealth and thus power to dominate their rivals.

Say that's true, say it was necessary, that's still not why they did it. They did it because they were greedy and because they could. They would have done it whether it was necessary or not.

None of the things you mention were gratuitous. They didn't do it simply for the sake of being nasty.

There were definitely more civilized, enlightened ways of going about it, they did it dirty because they were rapacious psychos.

There is two opposite views on European exceptionalism: Europeans are superior and that Europeans are intrinsically nastier than anyone else. Both are false.

I agree, they're not doing anything anyone else wouldn't do given the opportunity. I don't see how that would absolve them of all responsibility though?

We can talk all we like about what people should do and what they shouldn't but in practice people will do what they must.

State power does whatever it can get away with doing, it doesn't stop at necessary.

That's where your moral stand and Noam's moral stand are flawed.

Well at least you try to work out some kind of rationalization for it, a lot of people don't bother to even do that. So maybe there's hope for you. Most people just don't give a shit and are fine with it so long as they're pitching rather than catching.

[Hindsite]

Most people just don't give a shit and are fine with it so long as they're pitching rather than catching.

I think most people don't give a shit about what "Noam Chomsky has to say. HalleluYah.

[Pants-of-dog]

I think most people don't give a shit about what "Noam Chomsky has to say.

Well, you obviously care enough to post in this thread.

[Hindsite]

Well, you obviously care enough to post in this thread.

Don't you have something else to do?

[Pants-of-dog]

Someone's getting emotional.

[Buzz62]

ya you do tend to drag out "the best" in people, POD...

[Pants-of-dog]

ya you do tend to drag out "the best" in people, POD...

Why are you blaming me for your lack of emotional control?

[Buzz62]

Why are you blaming me for your lack of emotional control?

Duhhh...I don't know Boss.
Maybe it has something to do with the continued existence of Europe?