The patriot spring continues: Anti-Muslim immigration party wins Slovenian election

I once tried to write a counterfactual where Alaska isn't sold in 1867 due to the earlier discovery of the Bering Gold Sands. As a butterfly Russia becomes much more prosperous and the communists/anarchists are largely co-opted into a Gold Rush. Instead of Aleksandr being executed the Ulyanovs go into business running an engineering company in Alaska. They are successful and become the main impetus behind a bridge being built over the Bering Strait. Aleksandr is the main protagonist of that novel against a cadre of British spies led by one Winston Churchill.

Hey, you asked

 

Somewhere Adolph Hitler is smiling.

 

Again, I certainly hope you are right, your analysis appears good but I'm still not that sure that a bad economy is necessary for a dictatorship to emerge.

All of the nations of the Western Hemisphere have similar histories in that they have a large population made up mainly of immigrants. The nations of Central and South America have long been plagued by the phenomena of Caudillismo, the emergence of Caudillos, literally the "man on horseback" a series of dictators who take the country over one after another, keeping the beleaguered nations in a more or less constant state of civil war which has made these nations the very essence of the third world. The nations of the USA and Canada alone have had much different and much more prosperous, pleasant and successful development despite very similar early histories and particularly nearly identical overall patterns of settlement. Donald Trump appears to be VERY much in the pattern of these dictators and I am one of those who fears he may be the first of a long line of baleful tyrants the type of which have only recently stopped injuring those nations south of our border.

 

Slovakia fought on Germany's side in WW II. Eastern Europe has a long dreary history of persecution of minorities.

 

lol...I love it!
I wrote a counter-factual once where William Jennings Bryan becomes president when Woodrow Wilson and his VP are killed by an anarchist's bomb. Bryan, a pacifist, keeps the US out of World War One which results in a battlefield draw on the Western Front but German victory on the Eastern Front. Resulting in no Hitler, no Stalin and no World War Two...well a guy can dream, can't he?

 

Wonderful news, just fantastic. The march towards a complete ban on islam and mass deportation of muslims gets closer every day...

 

Amazing, I feel like I was back in the thirties.

 

Bryan might have made a very good President IMO.

 

You must be confused since the european jews in the 1930s weren't running people over with trucks like in Nice, or shooting up hundreds in night clubs like the bataclan, or running them over with passenger cards like in London, or shooting up grocery stores like in paris, or mass murdering entire groups of cartoonists like charlie hebdo, or conducting stabbing attacks, or blowing up underground trains, or blowing up concerts like ariane grande's, or creating no-go zones where non-co-religionists aren't welcome....

But we do see lots of muslims doing such things.

 

I would need to check but I think one of these countries were setting up Roma camps some years ago and I think that may have been Hungary.

 

That is because you agree with what he is doing. It would also be stupid to just think it was Trump. You should also look at the people who are with him. The American Christian Right a solid core who want World Christian Totalitarianism and lets not forget he is also supported by the alt right. While there may have been people who supported him for other reasons, I would expect their support now to be diminishing unless they are being drawn into the way of thinking which Trump supports and which is recognised in Hungary as fascism.

Whether the US survives as a democracy is for the future to tell. Arguably like most of the West it has already moved out of that for some time and become a plutocracy. The Question is where it moves now and the regime now in power in the US most certainly shows signs, unlike Obama, that that may be fascism. That that is supported by almost all the 100 million US Christian Right is not a good sign. Their first priority is not democracy.

The midterm elections will be interesting. One article I saw suggested that the putting of young children in cages separated from their parents and hence obviously severely traumatised was none other than a ploy for the mid term elections.

It’s all about the Midterms: Trump took those Children Hostage to Stoke his Base

Fascism has always been put in by the vote - that and the support of the financial elite.

Democracy is the most stable and humane way of running a country there is and is most certainly not a regime. Democracy and capitalism however are vulnerable together. It is the responsibility of Governments to keep checks and balances on Capitalism to ensure it does not itself destroy democracy. Neo Liberalism eroded those checks and balances.

 

Fascism with elections, interesting concept.

That's the case of almost all democracies.

No, Franco, Pinochet weren't put in by the vote. And if we look at the dictatorial communist countries, none were put in by the vote.

Please, it's only two/three centuries that democracy exist. Roman republic which wasn't a democracy, and Athenian democracy didn't last that much. A few centuries, nothing compared to some artistocratic system who lasted for more than a millenium. So yes, Democracy is unstable. There is very few democracies who are more than one century old.

For the northern western democracies yes, I'm not sure that failed democracy are any "humane".

Regime is just a term for speaking of a particular political system, it's a political system.

Democracy is vulnerable because of the human nature, which is imperfect by it's nature.

Any excess can destroy democracy, too much omnipresent state ? The state start to get in debt, be the slave of banks. Furthermore, the more a country assume things, the more likely he is too fail in his core missions : security and law. That's what is happening in France, the state tried to assume so much missions that he is failing to assume it's core missions.
Economical anarchy ? People can become socialist or stop trust the state.

 

Fascism has always been brought in by democratic election. The only two recognised fascist regimes were in Italy and Germany and they were both brought in by democracy.

Although people loosely call Franco's Spain fascism it is not accepted as that by experts on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Franco#Spain_under_Franco

Pinochet was a military dictatorship, not fascism.

Emmm communism is communism not fascism whether they had a vote or not. You are making the mistake of believing all authoritarian regimes are fascist. Fascism has certain characteristics.

Here is quite a good article on the components of fascism.

http://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/for-your-next-political-argument-what-fascism-really-is

Democracy is the most stable system because if changes Government without war. That is democracy on it's most basic level. Now Democracy of some sort is most certainly necessary if you do not want to have a totalitarian/authoritarian Government. Your ancestors like everyone else likely fought for that. We were having videos of what the British Suffragettes did to ensure they got the vote for women. Of course I would not expect you to want that. Democracy is the most stable system on which government is based because it has as its base that all people are equal. Not the same but that they all have one vote, they all have the right to the same rights and so on. Only a person who wishes to change that - to remove some peoples rights or in some other way to remove people's freedom would want the end of democracy and we can see that within the definition of fascism I have given above.

We have different beliefs on what stability is. You believe that a system of slaves is stable. It may be but that does not make it something to work towards. Are you intending on fighting to make yourself a surf again.

Length of time in existence and stability are not the same thing. Democracy is the most stable form of Government because it does not require civil war due to having the possibility to change the rule every 3 or 4 years. However Democracy is a lot more than just a vote every three or four years and can easily be usurped. The major flaw in democracy is Capitalism. That is what gave rise to WW2 and we are in a similar situation again today. Capitalism is not democratic and that is why it is always a danger to democracy and must be held in check by Government. This was being done astutely after WW2 and in my early life. As I said earlier neo liberalism removed these checks and balances. Hence instead of our Governments serving us they are now serving the Global elite. That is a flaw in Capitalism not democracy and Political Theorists for some years have believed we have become Plutocracies, some suggest Despotic Regimes but in them you need a strong MC and certainly in the US they are claiming the MC is not strong any more. That leaves the door open to worse ideas. Fascism of course being one and unfortunately it seems a major one. Fascism uses people's emotions to get their vote, not the intellect and we again find ourselves in a world where some people are trying to deny there even are facts and have no problem in saying things which obviously are not true. Fascism instead of noticing that there are global problems which need to be addressed, get people to turn their attention towards 'the other' who they must gang up against.

Authoritarian Regimes allow for a few in society to have a good time but massive repression. They are in no way stable due to their inherent violence...but stability is a silly thing to be focusing on. They are the return of barbarism. That would appear to be what you are supporting.

 

You're considering fascism in a strict sense so.

They're accepted as fascism in the large definition.

Thanks, quite interesintg.

I'm from a region known for its royalist uprising, so maybe they fought for the King. I don't know.

Stop projecting your fantasies on me, that's good that women can vote.

Equality, excepted equality on law, is a total lie.

Not the same but that they all have one vote, they all have the right to the same rights and so on. Only a person who wishes to change that - to remove some peoples rights or in some other way to remove people's freedom would want the end of democracy and we can see that within the definition of fascism I have given above.

Slavery was much less developped during the time of monarchies than during roman republic or athenian democracy. At the end of the middle age, slavery disappeared from western europe. It appeared back during the renaissance and took a particular form.

Length of time matters. Mankind is thousand of generations who succeeded each other. We're just one of them. One or two centuries are on this point short amount of time. Democracy is just two century old. Nobodoy know the end of the story, maybe a lot of western centuries will collapse in 20 years, maybe it will last for thousand of years. If it collapse however, how many people would die in that ?

The major flaw of mankind is its own imperfection. Communism and fascism both hated capitalism, they both created something worst. Every human work can only be imperfect, and so there can not be anything made of human beings which isn't imperfect.

You really think that the government is benevolent ? You really think that any government will really care of you ? The nature of politician is to be manipulative, narcissic, seductive self centered people. Politician are like prisons or excrements, not pleasant, but necessary.
It's like a woman who want to leave an abusive husband (the corporations) to go live in the house of another abusive lover (the government).

Glad to see you talk like a true far right activist.

Not only plutocracies, oligarchy. Representants, senators, are an oligarchy too. The only relative solution is direct democracy. Anyway, there isn't any easy path, only roads made of hardship. Thinking there is a magical external solution is the way to a nightmare.

Every politician use emotions to get their vote.

No, I support "no civil war" and the right for the european culture to still exist. Even if it's already half dead, burried in rock, hip hop music and modern art.

Furthermore, I don't pretend to know better than any people what their country need, the wish to impose democracy in Lybia and Iraq provoked thousand of death. Maybe they will do have better without democracy imported with bombs and just stablity.

About barbarism, it's always here, in the corner of the human mind. The western countries like France and UK produced a lot of barbarians, like ISIS fighters, in great numbers, so I doubt that the big democracies have any lessons of civilization to give to anybody.

 

Good point.
So what steps can Muslims take to change the worst parts of the Islamic texts to help assure that this doesn't happen?

 

It is not the content of the Koran that is a problem. Apart from the fact that many allegedly bad passages have various translations, or the Islamists use wrong translations on purpose ... the bible is not a bit better. The Christians always say that their Gkaube is so peaceful and refer to the New Testament ... however, the Old Testament is just as much a part of the faith (even if that is disputed, but that's BS chattering) and how everyone knows how full it is with violence!

What Islam needs is what we got thanks to Luther and other reformers and what was already present in important ways: Secularization - so separate religion and state!
This has never happened in Islam until today, and here in the West we unfortunately have to blame ourselves, because it is we who, for geostrategic and other reasons, support the forces in the Islamic countries that prevent this secularization and modernization. just because that endangers their power. Make a strict secularization and demand the same fundamental democratic rights as in Saudi Arabia or in Iran ... and in both countries the regimes are quickly eliminated!
For the Iran, the Americans are calling for this very quickly for the well-known reasons ... but also for Saudi Arabia, which is no better than Iran in all these matters as well? Not really ... and there you have the basic problem!

And despite all the contemplation is also a lot of hypocrisy ... because in the US as well as in many other countries of the "West" is clear separation of state and religion, as well as freedom of religion given ... only how likely is it that a US President will not be a Christian, but belongs to any other religion officially and confessing, or even avowed atheist?

 

Yes you are right, the Qur'an AND Bible are BOTH horrific, while Modern Secular Humanism is much much better for the world.

Yes, obviously the OT is a part of the faith, or they'd remove it....of course. But if a Bible was, say, accidentally printed w/out the OT, they'd demand that the publisher put the OT back in the Bible before they'd pay for it! Also, Mt 5:17 clearly says that the OT is part of the belief system. Of course they believe in the OT or they'd say which parts of the OT are dead wrong, and/or immoral, etc. They lack the moral courage to do that, so they are clearly less ethical than Modern Secular Humanists are. They have very low standards, unfortunately.

 

I think we can agree that Q4:34, Q2:282, Q5:33, Q9:5, and Q9:29 are not just "allegedly" bad, but are CERTAINLY bad, no, Mandelus!!!?? To a Modern Secular Humanist the barabarity of those passages is crystal clear - there is no "middle ground". Savagery is savagery. Just like God/Jesus was a savage, clearly.

 

The Q4: 34 is about the man's superiority over the woman ... "The men stand above the women (ar-riǧālu qauwāmūn 'alā n-nisā') because God has inherently distinguished them from them and because of the expenses, who made her of her fortune as a dowry for the women
And the Bible? Ephesians 5:22 - The wives are subject to their husbands as the LORD. For the man is the head of the woman, just as Christ is the head of the church, and he is his body's Savior.
Sure, thanks to secularization, for us it is mostly irrelevant what in the Bible is written about, for Muslims and their lack of secularization, with few exceptions, it is not.

What your problem is with Q2:282 I do not understand ... Because this is about money transactions, etc. ... and we all know what Christ did at the temple.

Q5 :33 - The reward of those who wage war against Allah and His messengers and seek to provoke destruction in the land is that they should be killed or crucified, or that their hands and feet should be cut off alternately, or that they should be expelled from the land. It will be disgraceful for them in this world, and they will be punished severely in the hereafter.
Sounds evil, but first of all, the underlined part is also part of it too, but liked to be ignored. Anyway ... And in the Bible we only have to look at the books of Moses and have enough counterparts!

Q9:5 - It is considered part of the Koran, with which the fight in the name of Islan can be justified against everything and everybody. Apart from the fact that there are numerous counterparts in the Bible, it is clear that Jews and Christians are not idolaters who are concerned with violence. Why? Because even the Islamists do not deny that Allah and Jehovah are one and the same, Christ is also considered a prophet in Islam! But let's take a look at a verse Q5:6 - "And if someone from the idolaters asks you for protection, then give him protection until he hears the word of Allah. Then let him reach the place where he is safe. This is because they are people who do not know." ...

And now?

 

The part where you're only capable of conceiving of non-theocracy along ethno-nationalist lines.

 

Change the words of prophet Muhammad?

 

Is Shariah ever non-theocratic?

 

arabs all love to do shariah i guess, just like all catholics personally molest altar boys and all buddhists love to torture rohingya

 

Your confusing orthodoxy with deviancy or fringe (and Arab for Muslim, for that matter).

Child molestation is not orthodox catholic doctrine, its deviancy (though apparently tolerated to an unacceptible extent...)(and ftr, im no fan of The Pope- a child molesting, satan worshipping collectivist imo, and I know many Catholics are none-to happy with him either. He's largely considered an usurper. Catholicism definitely has some shiz to work out...)

I dont know much about Buddhism, but I suspect 'torturing rohingya' is similarly fringe or deviant within their beleif system.

Shariah is Islamic Orthodoxy. There are many Muslims that disagree with Shariah, and I will call them friend on an individual, case-by-case basis. But these are exceptions to the rule until Islam has a reformation away from violence and oppression as its orthodoxy.

 

Yes - we can't take the words of a pedophile TOO seriously.