erm, what? europe shares race rights across the board. we have the eu bill of human rights. "homozygous" (lol?) european states? you do realise every single european country - including the insular scandinavian states - have quite large migrant populations? what are you talking about, homogeneous? germany is full of turks; the netherlands is full of hardcore islamics; france is full of maghrebians; spain and italy are full of northern africans and arabs; the uk is full of, well, everyone. i don't think you know much about the cultural make up of "multicultural" europe at all. and it didn't take us until the 50's and 60's to give our immigrant populations basic human rights. so i do think that europe can criticize america on the race and gender card - very easily. the only country in europe that is a little thorny on race equality is france with its burqa ban... but this is politically reasoned on a sound liberal-republican basis (france is all about a forced inclusion and a cohesive sense of national identity; see the debates about the formal national language for more on this ideological point). and is also a massive red sartorial herring.Macbeth wrote:
America is way ahead Europe in terms of race rights. The U.K. is the only country that has any room to criticize us. Otherwise little homozygous continental countries shouldn't even try to lecture us on race rights.
Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-09-19 08:55:04)
Yeah coz europe did such a great job making sure everyone in their colonies got along right? you know not splitting people into "elite" racial groups, not paving way for genocides in Africa and Asia. Good job Europe.Kampframmer wrote:
Are two American really criticizing Europe's tolerance?
First of all, they make the huge mistake of bunching up every European country into one collective term and second, they're dead wrong.
Shouldn't you be sticking your finger in a dike somewhere?Kampframmer wrote:
Are two American really criticizing Europe's tolerance?
First of all, they make the huge mistake of bunching up every European country into one collective term and second, they're dead wrong.
You have no idea what you're talking about.aynrandroolz wrote:
erm, what? europe shares race rights across the board. we have the eu bill of human rights. "homozygous" (lol?) european states? you do realise every single european country - including the insular scandinavian states - have quite large migrant populations? what are you talking about, homogeneous? germany is full of turks; the netherlands is full of hardcore islamics; france is full of maghrebians; spain and italy are full of northern africans and arabs; the uk is full of, well, everyone. i don't think you know much about the cultural make up of "multicultural" europe at all. and it didn't take us until the 50's and 60's to give our immigrant populations basic human rights. so i do think that europe can criticize america on the race and gender card - very easily. the only country in europe that is a little thorny on race equality is france with its burqa ban... but this is politically reasoned on a sound liberal-republican basis (france is all about a forced inclusion and a cohesive sense of national identity; see the debates about the formal national language for more on this ideological point). and is also a massive red sartorial herring.Macbeth wrote:
America is way ahead Europe in terms of race rights. The U.K. is the only country that has any room to criticize us. Otherwise little homozygous continental countries shouldn't even try to lecture us on race rights.
gay marriage is legal in the UK galt. what are you talking about? same-sex couples have been able to enter a civil partnership and enjoy all of the rights and financial/legal benefits that an ordinary married couple can, for quite some time. hereditary 'rule'? oh, you mean the royal family sitcom we keep around? hardly a measure of everyday cultural and social life in the UK, is it? we keep them as as tourist attraction. they wield no political or cultural power; 'rule' is a bit of a misnomer. ditto for mostly every single european state: they're a part of tradition, a tourism sideshow, gossip magazine fare. both the us and the uk has a system of primogeniture when it comes to basic property inheritance - this is a precept of capitalism, more than a cultural condition.
i would say that europe is far more progressive and far more tolerant than america. we are far more permissive and 'liberal' in the sense of morals and values. far more tolerant and relativist. we are far more secular, and thus in the post-enlightenment tradition far more 'advanced'. america was the big new democratic experiment, the city on the hill, but your (mainstream) politics is full of religious nutjobs, and your voting majority possess social attitudes and values that are more 18th century than 21st. only on the 'enlightened' and educated north-east coast and west liberal coast is your society anywhere near as permissive as europe: the majority of middle-america (esp. the bible belt and southern states) are stuck in some cultural backwater. remember, wasn't kerry smeared during bush's campaign as being "too french", hence too progressive and tolerant? and didn't the majority of americans rally behind bush for that election? lol.
The last instance of a large-scale race-related conflict we had was Indonesia in 1946. If were talking the current state of tolerance, America is still behind on the Netherlands and many other European countriesCybargs wrote:
Yeah coz europe did such a great job making sure everyone in their colonies got along right? you know not splitting people into "elite" racial groups, not paving way for genocides in Africa and Asia. Good job Europe.Kampframmer wrote:
Are two American really criticizing Europe's tolerance?
First of all, they make the huge mistake of bunching up every European country into one collective term and second, they're dead wrong.
I was thinking more along the lines of Rwanda and Burma.Kampframmer wrote:
The last instance of a large-scale race-related conflict we had was Indonesia in 1946. If were talking the current state of tolerance, America is still behind on the Netherlands and many other European countriesCybargs wrote:
Yeah coz europe did such a great job making sure everyone in their colonies got along right? you know not splitting people into "elite" racial groups, not paving way for genocides in Africa and Asia. Good job Europe.Kampframmer wrote:
Are two American really criticizing Europe's tolerance?
First of all, they make the huge mistake of bunching up every European country into one collective term and second, they're dead wrong.
There are more people in my state than there are in your country, and immigrants from every country on the planet. We get along just fine.Kampframmer wrote:
The last instance of a large-scale race-related conflict we had was Indonesia in 1946. If were talking the current state of tolerance, America is still behind on the Netherlands and many other European countriesCybargs wrote:
Yeah coz europe did such a great job making sure everyone in their colonies got along right? you know not splitting people into "elite" racial groups, not paving way for genocides in Africa and Asia. Good job Europe.Kampframmer wrote:
Are two American really criticizing Europe's tolerance?
First of all, they make the huge mistake of bunching up every European country into one collective term and second, they're dead wrong.
Last edited by Jay (2012-09-19 09:32:08)
Cybargs wrote:
Britain was so enlightened that it pretty much set up the genocide in Burma.
Last edited by Shocking (2012-09-19 09:44:00)
Netherlands is 80% Dutch. The U.S. is 65% non Hispanic white. The U.S. gives anyone born in the U.S. citizenship regardless of the citizenship status of their parents. An illegal immigrant can spend 5 minutes in the U.S. before they have a child and the child will be a full U.S. citizen. We have the world's most liberal immigrantion policy and allows hundreds of thousands of people in every year. Our federal government requires federal and state institutions as well as businesses that take federal money to put in place policies that increases the amount of minorities employed. We have national candidates bend over backward to get minority votes. The GOP and DNC both have Spanish language commercials and speakers at their conventions. We don't have nationalist political parties. And on and onKampframmer wrote:
The last instance of a large-scale race-related conflict we had was Indonesia in 1946. If were talking the current state of tolerance, America is still behind on the Netherlands and many other European countriesCybargs wrote:
Yeah coz europe did such a great job making sure everyone in their colonies got along right? you know not splitting people into "elite" racial groups, not paving way for genocides in Africa and Asia. Good job Europe.Kampframmer wrote:
Are two American really criticizing Europe's tolerance?
First of all, they make the huge mistake of bunching up every European country into one collective term and second, they're dead wrong.
could say the same for any european country re: immigration laws, citizenship laws, ethnic-specific political parties and candidates.Macbeth wrote:
Netherlands is 80% Dutch. The U.S. is 65% non Hispanic white. The U.S. gives anyone born in the U.S. citizenship regardless of the citizenship status of their parents. An illegal immigrant can spend 5 minutes in the U.S. before they have a child and the child will be a full U.S. citizen. We have the world's most liberal immigrantion policy and allows hundreds of thousands of people in every year. Our federal government requires federal and state institutions as well as businesses that take federal money to put in place policies that increases the amount of minorities employed. We have national candidates bend over backward to get minority votes. The GOP and DNC both have Spanish language commercials and speakers at their conventions. We don't have nationalist political parties. And on and onKampframmer wrote:
The last instance of a large-scale race-related conflict we had was Indonesia in 1946. If were talking the current state of tolerance, America is still behind on the Netherlands and many other European countriesCybargs wrote:
Yeah coz europe did such a great job making sure everyone in their colonies got along right? you know not splitting people into "elite" racial groups, not paving way for genocides in Africa and Asia. Good job Europe.
So what does the Netherlands get right about race relations that the U.S. doesn't?
well macbeth, in defending NYC and america's race-relations against europe ("we are far ahead of europe on race relations"). a few days ago to galt:NYC is also the certifiable most diverse place on Earth.
yummy, "diversity". are you just being a pointless contrarian? or do you love contradicting yourself? or are you trying to say the eu is worse than the above? if so i can tell you have never ever ever visited europe.It is because black people are still getting the shit end of the stick in the 21st century as a direct result of the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Every racial group has it better than the blacks. If you are black you are more likely to go to prison than college. If you are black you are more likely to die in poverty than make it into the middle class. A white convicted felon has a better chance of getting a job than a black person. The average black woman have less than 5% of the wealth of the average white woman. It was only 50 years ago that the government had laws that made blacks socially and economically inferior.
Even us Hispanics have better employment rates and lower incarceration rates than blacks. I can think of plenty of times I have heard people say nice things about Hispanics and then turn around and say something nasty about black people.
I'm not black so you can't accuse me of playing the victim card. My views on U.S. race relations made GS accuse me of "wishing I was white" so you can't accuse me of hating white people or something. This is just objective facts and realities that you have to accept regarding the state of African Americans.
Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-09-19 10:30:24)
I'm hurt for sure. Oh please don't call me a redneck! It just RUIIINS my day.1 day, 17 hours ago aynrandroolz (30) DAST Chat e you sound like a dumb redneck, wind your neck in.
Don't forget Africa, but what do Americans know about it?Cybargs wrote:
Britain was so enlightened that it pretty much set up the genocide in Burma.
ya well i'd say dubai is a clear anomaly that you can knock off that chart. it's a construction bubble. but toronto, hong kong, and many many other cities have valid immigrant populations and newcomers (i.e. foreign culture and languages being introduced). the only way new york comes top in any 'diversity' chart is if you count all of the black african-americans and somehow construe them as representing a 'diversity', as if they are culturally non-american or non-integrated already. that's bogus. ethnic and racial diversity means many alien cultures living together, side-by-side. black americans are hardly an exotic race.Cybargs wrote:
lol dubai immigration. more like 21st century slavery
Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-09-19 10:45:00)
Again, you don't know what you're talking about.aynrandroolz wrote:
ya well i'd say dubai is a clear anomaly that you can knock off that chart. it's a construction bubble. but toronto, hong kong, and many many other cities have valid immigrant populations and newcomers (i.e. foreign culture and languages being introduced). the only way new york comes top in any 'diversity' chart is if you count all of the black african-americans and somehow construe them as representing a 'diversity', as if they are culturally non-american or non-integrated already. that's bogus. ethnic and racial diversity means many alien cultures living together, side-by-side. black americans are hardly an exotic race.Cybargs wrote:
lol dubai immigration. more like 21st century slavery
also this whole "lol africa europe" thing relies on the way we treated europe about 200 years ago. americans that think we were still running imperial cruelty on africa in the mid/late 20th century (i.e. after europe was done blowing itself up) need to read a history book. the slow decolonising process mostly saw european powers take a paternalistic, managerial role over these countries. we weren't still exploiting them, far from "slavery". it was a long slow handover process, training a new elite (admittedly neocolonial in ideology and outlook; looking after our own business interests, etc.) but it was FAR from abusive. opportunist in a capitalist marketeering sense, sure. 'empire' after the two world wars mostly involved bourgeoisie management. it's a pointless trade to try and talk about which was worse: the slave-trade or empire. both were there to make the white rulers rich. both had the majority of their atrocities and killings in centuries long before the current era, in which we are comparing. both are completely irrelevant when we talk about the social values and moral progressivism of a country. empire, if anything, has led europe to be much more inclusive and much more multicultural and tolerant, post-wind-rush, post-dismantling. the slave trade, if anything, hasn't led america down that same path. the southern states are still insular, religious, and racist as shit. black populations in northern areas (e.g. nyc, chicago, detroit) are still completely in poverty, locked out of opportunity and mobility.
Last edited by Jay (2012-09-19 11:00:42)
That is not unique nor special.Jay wrote:
[I can walk down the main street in my own town and eat Italian, Mexican, Irish, Korean, Thai, French, Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, and Greek, and those are only the restaurants I can think of off the top of my head.