The concept of "rights" has become ever more disassociated from any legal, philosophical or rational justification. People don't have a right to a better life (whatever that means) paid for by someone else. Similarly, the concept of "asylum" has also become meaningless.
It’s an enormous grift. Not only does the org get free money but they pay no taxes on that cash. They can stock the org with executive positions paying enormous salaries to friends and um, wannabe friends. The ones who donate are no getting nothing for all that lovely money. They can shape governments with it, rewards their friends and punish their enemies. The ones in the cushy jobs also have lavish expense paid travel on the org’s dime. All this and they need not make or sell a product. But they do offer one: the ability to shape culture. To get everyone to believe a man literally becomes a woman when he says so. In addition to no cost of goods, they need pay nothing to the government for the privilege.
You are spot on, and the worst part- the government also funds these "NGO's" with taxpayer money. This way they can create another patronage network, with a government cutout that is supposedly private.
The government and corporations both fund these things because they have mandates to establish they are 'good citizens' so their PR departments can issue press releases about what a forward thinking progressive company they are. It used to be difficult to find orgs to give money to, but you had to find them because you had to disburse your budgeted donations.
The modern conception of rights is based on nothing deeper than the parent/child relationship, with modern Westerners being reduced to the level of children (most willingly) and the State being the Mommy and Daddy who tends to us from cradle to crypt.
No one talks more about "rights" than petulant children, whatever their age: I have a right! You have no right! Everyone should have the right to free everything at any moment they want it for any reason! And every poor child on the planet has the right to move into our house and never leave and do what they want—it's their right!
The concept of Rights now exists entirely to expand the power of the State and to infantilize the populace, who all believe they have the right to feel only pleasure and never pain or distress. Westerners have reached their Last Man phase, where they're happy to cede all autonomy in exchange for being well-fed and well-tended, with guts full of food and hearts full of righteousness. Just don't ask them if any rights come conjoined w responsibilities!
NOT THIS WESTERNER! I was forced to retire in 2021 for non-CONvid compliance…after working straight for 40 years!
I see the difference in the youth today, and it’s frightening. And I’m not an “old lady”! I’m nearly 61, and I run circles around kids today. They don’t exercise, with their cell phones attached to their faces!
every idea promulgated is there to increase the power of the state, to grow the bureaucracy, to increase dependency. It's a self-reinforcing pyramid scheme as well - academics, social workers, NGO's, the military-industrial complex...
i would disagree, as dogs have little control of their masters while children often control their parents.
our state/client-parent/child dynamic is symbiotic and reciprocal, and even the cutest dog doesnt emotionally dominate their owner as much as a whiny child who has mastered the guilt trip.
the modern state is God but also mama and papa. that's way so many babies are always crying for their attention!
One of the issues has been the scope creep around rights.
It used to be that rights were mostly about what the state couldn't do to you -- detain you without trial, subject you to an unfair trial, arrest you for your political views... Notice how these fundamental rights have been eroded, as the state carves out ever more exceptions.
At the same time, laws and frameworks have been rewritten in terms of positive rather than negative rights. Now it's not about what the state can't do to you, but about what you're entitled to. Things the state must provide or protect you from.
And this is a slippery, collectivist slope. Suddenly, if everyone is entitled to be protected from a respiratory virus, then everyone must be incarcerated at home.
You can see how this works. Everyone has a right to clean air, therefore no one will be able to drive ICE cars anymore or take more than two flights a year.
Soon it will be that everyone has a right to a basic income and the foundation of true totalitarianism will have been laid.
"Human rights" is nothing more than a veneer for tyrannical policies.
Great points - but please consider the aspiration of the person willing to get into Europe illegally. Some try to chase a dream, others end up in criminally driven debt traps, and some realise the 'grass is always greener on the other side of the fence'.
There is no illegality associated with arriving in Europe or the USA anymore. The aspirations you note more closely reflect the native populations who are being systematically pushed out of and shut down from economic success by their own leaders.
Well, as a status that maybe true. However, its not right. Why should I pay to import people illegally, fund them in the host nation and be open to attack since some of them hate us? I can't do that to their home nation. Why should I agree to allowing this in my home nation?
What an odd point. I don't do libtard bleeding heart stuff. Somebody wants to come to a country and earn a living - go ahead. Arrive and expect money for nothing? I do not think so.....
Entitlement is a better term. You have a right to free speech, and an entitlement to healthcare, as an example. Unfortunately people are too illiterate for this, and the MSM plays word games.
Where is it prescribed in the immutable laws of nature that anyone has an entitlement to healthcare? Civil society has deemed it appropriate, but for those that spit upon that society...there IS NO ENTITLEMENT!
Asylum used to be reserved for those fleeing political and religious persecution, not for those seeking to improve their economic outlook, exploit a nation’s largesse, and sow violence and discord, as in the present case.
agreed, asylum only has meaning in context of fleeing war, persecution. Otherwise it's economic migration and should be dealt with using the normal limited channels
“Positive rights” in general are horseshit, as they require someone else to perform a service or refrain from exercising their own rights. If you are living on a desert island, you still have the rights enumerated in the US constitution (freedom to speak, if only to a volleyball you name Wilson; freedom to bear arms, even if the arms consist of sticks and coconuts, etc.). But where is your “right to healthcare”, your “right to housing”, your “right to be prosperous”? Even if you are not living on a desert island, if you say people have a “right to health care”, what you are really saying is that medical providers must be forced to provide health services whether they want to or not — or how else can this “right” be guaranteed? Basically, advocates of positive rights are saying that people should be forced to provide their labor to others whether they want to or not. I’m pretty sure we fought a big war in the U.S. over that some time back.
In 2000 I founded a small women's vocational and literacy center, to serve the most desperately poor, in the hometown of the now-unhusband. I had by that time worked for almost 13 years as the support staff in a NYC grantmaking foundation, so I'd had a lot of exposure to the nice educated noble sorts who want money for all their brave projects, and plenty of experience of the grantmaking type too.
But that wasn't nearly as useful as actually dealing with the people you are hoping to help. I learned extremely quickly that nobody much values anything they get for free. And even people who don't need your help will try to con every minute of the day, and the wealthy privileged will gleefully make hay with any of the resources you have managed to acquire.
There were plenty of poor women, though, who were not grifters and not stupid, and who actually did value the chance to better themselves and help their families, but it required rigorous screening to ensure that they were the ones admitted to the program.
And I learned, too, that in those neighborhoods, many men who did want their little girls educated still kept them out of educational programs because if you have no status, you can't protect your women no matter how much your culture declares that rape and murder are capital offenses.
It's not true that the endless hordes of Muslim migrants in Europe only see European women as prey. They see all women as prey but you pick off the easy ones when you can. Back home or even in migrant stronghold's a girl's brothers might kill you, but European guys...
These dear little kind generous helping types in countries with liberalized laws never seem to wonder why the laws in all of the Muslim world are so brutal. And even there nobody can prevent to much of a degree the most appalling crimes against women and girls. You can only hope to pick off perpetrators as they perpetrate and then only if they don't have powerful families protecting them.
I never would’ve guessed your background given I agree with so much of what you have to say. But then again, I always thought of myself as a liberal just turns out today my opinions allegedly make me far right.
I'm just an average Noo Yawkuh with the usual illegal immigrant grandparents and a great-great uncle and his family murdered by Nazis--the actual ones--in Uman and I got to see the world a little when that was possible with almost no money, and it always surprises me I ain't been dead for years already, considering.
I still have letters from some of the students and the teachers (who were poor women themselves; we'd hired one middle-class woman who tried to establish a little cult-of-self and we fired her forthwith) and you know the saying--if you save one life etc. etc.
By the time we had to shut down because the local Taliban-adjacent guys were threatening to, you know, kill people, we'd enabled more than 200 women and girls to gain skills to be able to earn money at home or contribute in other ways to the household budget. It doesn't take very much money at all to make a difference in the lives of very poor people.
It takes brains though and they are always in short supply. Zombie plagues, etc.
Muslims aren't coming for a better life unless it involves Sharia law, and anybody that's paying attention knows what that entails. They are an invading force that will require extreme prejudice to overcome once they get close to a majority. The world needs to open their eyes to this death cult.
once any given muslim population reaches 15%, demographically the area, state, city, nation will become majority muslim. This is the muslim plan of conquest.
There is a pattern. Any territory within sight of a minaret is deemed islamic property. The muslims drive people from the surrounding estates through escalating harassment until they sell their homes cheaply and flee. Local councils are stocked with muslims installed by fraud and intimidation. These practices continue until you have a 'community policed,' sharia, no-go area.
Quoth Gotthold Streitberger: "They have a right to a better life..."
This is where his mistake lies: They have a right to SEEK a better life, but not a right to a better life itself. I have the right to seek a nourishing meal or to seek a Ferrari, but I have neither a right to a nourishing meal nor a right to a Ferrari. The latter construction implies that somebody else is obligated to provide me with these things. Nuh-uh, nope, no way José. If somebody else has provide it, it's not a right.
“The culture of Europe” is exactly what ((they)) want destroyed! The Kalergi Plan is NOT a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theory is another word for TRUTH.
European culture and morality is very atypical (and distinctly superior) compared to other cultures around the globe. See: The Weirdest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous, by Joseph Henrich,
Do I understand this correctly: Tunisians are almost never given asylum, but the center in Regensburg accepts them anyway, knowing that all of them are almost certain to be rejected? Why would anyone do this even if the people didn't tend to commit crimes?
I find the ones who think its a great idea to open the doors are all nimbys when it comes to having these problems in THEIR neighbourhood where THEY have to see and deal with it. The first time they run into a problem they change their minds. they are like children frankly with their enthusiasms and good will and inability to deal with the harsh reality of physical adversity.
I fear that there is no coming back from this kind of pathological self-righteousness, no dissuading the ageing Streitbergers of the Federal Republic from their moral posturing. They’ll go to their graves convinced of their piety, for their folly won’t bear its most terrible fruit until long after they’re dead.
That is why I despise boomers like they despise their parents‘ generation. Fat and decadent they lived off what their parents built and now what their children must produce. This is the generation of outsourcing and green scams, looking down upon their fellow German who suffers because he never studied asshole sciences at FU Berlin and must compete with the Orcs, they so admire and cuck before, getting high on moralin each time another thousand is invited to the Fatherland, for which they expect their next man to pay while using every dirty trick possible to save on taxes
I am a baby boomer, and, though I don't fit into your rationale for hating boomers, I cannot deny it is a fair assessment of how my generational compatriots have made such a mess in our society.
The baby boomers were the first generation of Americans to experience wealth without the corresponding hardship. (I'm speaking of them as a group; I have no doubt that you may have walked four miles to school, barefoot and uphill in both directions.)
I've read an interesting argument that the sixties (which was really the American wave of the French Revolution) could have taken place in the Roaring Twenties, had the stock market not crashed; the wealth was certainly there for it. But with the Great Depression, Americans kept on their knees and stayed there during the war, pleading for the safe return of their loved ones. Even as the middle class here ballooned during the American heyday after the war, those old enough to remember the depression and the war kept their sanity. It's a shame that GI Joe and Rosie the Riveter didn't make the same effort in raising their children that they did to win the war.
very true indeed. This is intentionally so. Not that I do not know this, but still I feel resentment towards that generation. Technology-Centricity, the complete absence of spirituality and crass individualism have made generational experience no longer relatable, between generations. This is a development that is not by accident, fostered by the powers that be. Nonetheless, a large part of today's problems are rooted in the unquestioning worship of the guilt cult, decadence and self-righteous praise of 60's liberation by the boomer generation.
These old fools will hold on to their ludicrous beliefs to the bitter end. I don't understand it. They've seen their extraordinary affluence and privilege wither, contaminated by vulgarity, promiscuity and mass immigration of foreigners but they simply can't admit they were wrong about it all.
Money and security are great and important human needs, but just as important is the feeling of holiness, of being spiritually advanced and elect, of having a pure soul worthy of merging w the godhead.
Social Justice is a secular Christian heresy and it allows its believers to feel more righteous and holy than their neighbors and allows them to believe that they are morally superior to the rest of us dirty apes—this is a feeling that will keep you warm on your deathbed, regardless of how delusional.
Just think of migrants as the modern crucifix, you display and project your love for them to let others know you are on the side of the angels, a Good Person.
Humans have worshipped everything from rocks to cows to trees, so it's no odder for people to worship an Algerian.
Those "they just want a better life" types are beyond obnoxious. You know who else wants a better life? I do. I always want to ask these people, if they have a nicer house in a nicer neighborhood than I do, does that mean I can just move into their house? My life would just be so much better if I could swim in their pool, use their hot tub, watch what I want on their home entertainment systems, and just stretch my legs a bit in one of their nice big rooms. And I wouldn't be a total leech about it. After some years, I might even help out with some of the utility bills or something, maybe (no promises). Think they'd agree to have me?
Streitberger (literally translated means a man from the town of Argument) is correct that the vast majority of Tunisiens in Regensberg are not offenders. In fact, the article reveals that 141 of the 250 Tunisians there are not offenders. That's about 60%. Now imagine living on a road with 10 other families and knowing that 6 will leave you alone and 4 will rob or rape you. 2 of those live next door and one across the street. 60% may be a statistical vast majority but it's not enough. We need to understand that 99.5% of the people in a society need to behave themselves 99.5% of the time to have a peaceful, fruitful life.
yes, exactly. Statistically, most people don't murder and rob. And even those that do, still spend most of their time NOT robbing and killing, and even if you're murdered, you are only killed once, on one day, and most of your days, you were not murdered, so on balance...so why have laws at all? lol
Although I consider Gad Saad a spy, a hypocrite and a major grifter, stealing other people's ideas so he can get paid, thank you Crumpet for bringing up the term Pathological Altruism and MR for “Suicidal Empathy.”
On my side of the river we have been discussing pathological altruism and its consequences for many years.
DerWaldgang, I am forever indebted to you for solving the mystery.
Not pathological "altruism" by the terminal do-gooders, no; it is pathological SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS that afflicts us. This is why the do-gooders and best intentions crowd cannot see the second- and third- order consequences of their devoted actions.
Conservative or liberal, neither dare own up to the fact that their idea was given a fair trial and didn't work out as they'd thought it would. It must be someone else's fault, because they only wanted to make people better!
The concept of "rights" has become ever more disassociated from any legal, philosophical or rational justification. People don't have a right to a better life (whatever that means) paid for by someone else. Similarly, the concept of "asylum" has also become meaningless.
We should close all of those NGOs whose whole purpose is to take tax payer money and destroy our country.
NGO means GO. Nonprofit means for profit.
Indeed, most NGOs have huge expenses which are usually opaque.
They are always some rich folks kids who couldn't find a REAL job
yes, everything means the opposite now
Oh, nice one!
The N is silent, as I like to say.
It’s an enormous grift. Not only does the org get free money but they pay no taxes on that cash. They can stock the org with executive positions paying enormous salaries to friends and um, wannabe friends. The ones who donate are no getting nothing for all that lovely money. They can shape governments with it, rewards their friends and punish their enemies. The ones in the cushy jobs also have lavish expense paid travel on the org’s dime. All this and they need not make or sell a product. But they do offer one: the ability to shape culture. To get everyone to believe a man literally becomes a woman when he says so. In addition to no cost of goods, they need pay nothing to the government for the privilege.
You are spot on, and the worst part- the government also funds these "NGO's" with taxpayer money. This way they can create another patronage network, with a government cutout that is supposedly private.
The government and corporations both fund these things because they have mandates to establish they are 'good citizens' so their PR departments can issue press releases about what a forward thinking progressive company they are. It used to be difficult to find orgs to give money to, but you had to find them because you had to disburse your budgeted donations.
The modern conception of rights is based on nothing deeper than the parent/child relationship, with modern Westerners being reduced to the level of children (most willingly) and the State being the Mommy and Daddy who tends to us from cradle to crypt.
No one talks more about "rights" than petulant children, whatever their age: I have a right! You have no right! Everyone should have the right to free everything at any moment they want it for any reason! And every poor child on the planet has the right to move into our house and never leave and do what they want—it's their right!
The concept of Rights now exists entirely to expand the power of the State and to infantilize the populace, who all believe they have the right to feel only pleasure and never pain or distress. Westerners have reached their Last Man phase, where they're happy to cede all autonomy in exchange for being well-fed and well-tended, with guts full of food and hearts full of righteousness. Just don't ask them if any rights come conjoined w responsibilities!
NOT THIS WESTERNER! I was forced to retire in 2021 for non-CONvid compliance…after working straight for 40 years!
I see the difference in the youth today, and it’s frightening. And I’m not an “old lady”! I’m nearly 61, and I run circles around kids today. They don’t exercise, with their cell phones attached to their faces!
There are still plenty of good ones still around - they're just not anywhere near as obvious as their teletubby trained contemporaries.
Oh I know that! 😉
My father always said, “Question authority Renee!”
And it’s funny, because I think that’s actually a Leftist term. I may be mistaken.
I hear you!
every idea promulgated is there to increase the power of the state, to grow the bureaucracy, to increase dependency. It's a self-reinforcing pyramid scheme as well - academics, social workers, NGO's, the military-industrial complex...
Not parent/child.
Master/dog.
i would disagree, as dogs have little control of their masters while children often control their parents.
our state/client-parent/child dynamic is symbiotic and reciprocal, and even the cutest dog doesnt emotionally dominate their owner as much as a whiny child who has mastered the guilt trip.
the modern state is God but also mama and papa. that's way so many babies are always crying for their attention!
Maybe closer to cat/human cat-servant?
Very well stated.
thanks!
One of the issues has been the scope creep around rights.
It used to be that rights were mostly about what the state couldn't do to you -- detain you without trial, subject you to an unfair trial, arrest you for your political views... Notice how these fundamental rights have been eroded, as the state carves out ever more exceptions.
At the same time, laws and frameworks have been rewritten in terms of positive rather than negative rights. Now it's not about what the state can't do to you, but about what you're entitled to. Things the state must provide or protect you from.
And this is a slippery, collectivist slope. Suddenly, if everyone is entitled to be protected from a respiratory virus, then everyone must be incarcerated at home.
You can see how this works. Everyone has a right to clean air, therefore no one will be able to drive ICE cars anymore or take more than two flights a year.
Soon it will be that everyone has a right to a basic income and the foundation of true totalitarianism will have been laid.
"Human rights" is nothing more than a veneer for tyrannical policies.
exactly right.
Sad but oh so true
Great points - but please consider the aspiration of the person willing to get into Europe illegally. Some try to chase a dream, others end up in criminally driven debt traps, and some realise the 'grass is always greener on the other side of the fence'.
Doesn’t give them a pass to be violent.
I'd go further. No visitor should be able to abuse the host nation in anyway without appropriate sanction.
still doesn't get them anywhere close to a "right". rights are bestowed by citizens who form a govt to regulate and operate their societies.
citizens have much more "right" to expelling or not inviting anyone they choose than any sort of migrant has a "right" to live in some other country.
There is no illegality associated with arriving in Europe or the USA anymore. The aspirations you note more closely reflect the native populations who are being systematically pushed out of and shut down from economic success by their own leaders.
Well, as a status that maybe true. However, its not right. Why should I pay to import people illegally, fund them in the host nation and be open to attack since some of them hate us? I can't do that to their home nation. Why should I agree to allowing this in my home nation?
You shouldn't.
Yeah..we managed to work that out years ago..so what? Will you offer up your home for some of them..thought not..goodbye
What an odd point. I don't do libtard bleeding heart stuff. Somebody wants to come to a country and earn a living - go ahead. Arrive and expect money for nothing? I do not think so.....
Entitlement is a better term. You have a right to free speech, and an entitlement to healthcare, as an example. Unfortunately people are too illiterate for this, and the MSM plays word games.
Where is it prescribed in the immutable laws of nature that anyone has an entitlement to healthcare? Civil society has deemed it appropriate, but for those that spit upon that society...there IS NO ENTITLEMENT!
Sigh.
I feel you, man. There's always at least one who doesn't seem to understand that they're actually arguing the same point you were.
My brothers called me BroomHilda
If our government were run like a private business they could pay for all that with far better service/quality, and we'd get a refund from the IRS.
Asylum used to be reserved for those fleeing political and religious persecution, not for those seeking to improve their economic outlook, exploit a nation’s largesse, and sow violence and discord, as in the present case.
agreed, asylum only has meaning in context of fleeing war, persecution. Otherwise it's economic migration and should be dealt with using the normal limited channels
Or as in some cases
FOR THE CRIMINALLY INSANE
let's not bring our "leaders" into this
🤣
“Positive rights” in general are horseshit, as they require someone else to perform a service or refrain from exercising their own rights. If you are living on a desert island, you still have the rights enumerated in the US constitution (freedom to speak, if only to a volleyball you name Wilson; freedom to bear arms, even if the arms consist of sticks and coconuts, etc.). But where is your “right to healthcare”, your “right to housing”, your “right to be prosperous”? Even if you are not living on a desert island, if you say people have a “right to health care”, what you are really saying is that medical providers must be forced to provide health services whether they want to or not — or how else can this “right” be guaranteed? Basically, advocates of positive rights are saying that people should be forced to provide their labor to others whether they want to or not. I’m pretty sure we fought a big war in the U.S. over that some time back.
Exactly. The edge case of positive rights tends toward slavery of those charged with fulfilling those rights.
There is nothing like real life to school you.
In 2000 I founded a small women's vocational and literacy center, to serve the most desperately poor, in the hometown of the now-unhusband. I had by that time worked for almost 13 years as the support staff in a NYC grantmaking foundation, so I'd had a lot of exposure to the nice educated noble sorts who want money for all their brave projects, and plenty of experience of the grantmaking type too.
But that wasn't nearly as useful as actually dealing with the people you are hoping to help. I learned extremely quickly that nobody much values anything they get for free. And even people who don't need your help will try to con every minute of the day, and the wealthy privileged will gleefully make hay with any of the resources you have managed to acquire.
There were plenty of poor women, though, who were not grifters and not stupid, and who actually did value the chance to better themselves and help their families, but it required rigorous screening to ensure that they were the ones admitted to the program.
And I learned, too, that in those neighborhoods, many men who did want their little girls educated still kept them out of educational programs because if you have no status, you can't protect your women no matter how much your culture declares that rape and murder are capital offenses.
It's not true that the endless hordes of Muslim migrants in Europe only see European women as prey. They see all women as prey but you pick off the easy ones when you can. Back home or even in migrant stronghold's a girl's brothers might kill you, but European guys...
These dear little kind generous helping types in countries with liberalized laws never seem to wonder why the laws in all of the Muslim world are so brutal. And even there nobody can prevent to much of a degree the most appalling crimes against women and girls. You can only hope to pick off perpetrators as they perpetrate and then only if they don't have powerful families protecting them.
I never would’ve guessed your background given I agree with so much of what you have to say. But then again, I always thought of myself as a liberal just turns out today my opinions allegedly make me far right.
I'm just an average Noo Yawkuh with the usual illegal immigrant grandparents and a great-great uncle and his family murdered by Nazis--the actual ones--in Uman and I got to see the world a little when that was possible with almost no money, and it always surprises me I ain't been dead for years already, considering.
Bless you for trying. Your acquired knowledge should be valued by the politicians and sought.
I still have letters from some of the students and the teachers (who were poor women themselves; we'd hired one middle-class woman who tried to establish a little cult-of-self and we fired her forthwith) and you know the saying--if you save one life etc. etc.
By the time we had to shut down because the local Taliban-adjacent guys were threatening to, you know, kill people, we'd enabled more than 200 women and girls to gain skills to be able to earn money at home or contribute in other ways to the household budget. It doesn't take very much money at all to make a difference in the lives of very poor people.
It takes brains though and they are always in short supply. Zombie plagues, etc.
Muslims aren't coming for a better life unless it involves Sharia law, and anybody that's paying attention knows what that entails. They are an invading force that will require extreme prejudice to overcome once they get close to a majority. The world needs to open their eyes to this death cult.
once any given muslim population reaches 15%, demographically the area, state, city, nation will become majority muslim. This is the muslim plan of conquest.
As soon as you allow mosques to be built Muslims think that you have ceded your country. It is theirs.
There is a pattern. Any territory within sight of a minaret is deemed islamic property. The muslims drive people from the surrounding estates through escalating harassment until they sell their homes cheaply and flee. Local councils are stocked with muslims installed by fraud and intimidation. These practices continue until you have a 'community policed,' sharia, no-go area.
slowly slowly
...and then, all of a sudden!
?????
war? if there is still the strength to fight back.
It is very difficult to go back to what was, each country and it's own culture.
Now, you travel to Switzerland or Holland (hoo boy) France (haha hoo boy)
and there will not be much culture or story to tell. It has either been erased or forbidden to discuss.
?????
Quoth Gotthold Streitberger: "They have a right to a better life..."
This is where his mistake lies: They have a right to SEEK a better life, but not a right to a better life itself. I have the right to seek a nourishing meal or to seek a Ferrari, but I have neither a right to a nourishing meal nor a right to a Ferrari. The latter construction implies that somebody else is obligated to provide me with these things. Nuh-uh, nope, no way José. If somebody else has provide it, it's not a right.
yes, and who is to say that the "better" life is German?
The less rapey way of life is better, so…
There are many states in the uSA, where one of these rapists would have a run in with Mr. Glock.
well, for us, anyway, lol.
What a nightmare these globalists have created-opening the gates of hell.
We would be better off spending our money "nation building"
That sounds old and dumb, but people should be discouraged to migrate to countries that are not their culture. What should they expect?
Yes, they have been uprooted, but then they uproot our countries. guaranteed losing situation on both sides
The culture of Europe is rare. It exists only in Europe and North America. Most are not suited to it.
Then they shouldn’t move into it
“The culture of Europe” is exactly what ((they)) want destroyed! The Kalergi Plan is NOT a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theory is another word for TRUTH.
what do you mean "rare" ?
European culture and morality is very atypical (and distinctly superior) compared to other cultures around the globe. See: The Weirdest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous, by Joseph Henrich,
okay, yes, I understand.
Not common.
Yes. Our good Lord promised us a Church upon which the gates of hell would not prevail. He never said it wouldn't be a close call.
CERN
Is the doorway. It should have been destroyed already.
"CERN"?
100%.
Do I understand this correctly: Tunisians are almost never given asylum, but the center in Regensburg accepts them anyway, knowing that all of them are almost certain to be rejected? Why would anyone do this even if the people didn't tend to commit crimes?
Same as in the USA , the powers elites deny there is even an issue much less a problem. Swift incarceration and deportation would work well.
Shut Down the Border! We have a massively funded DOD that seems to only to engaged in defending European borders...for the free-loading EU and NATO!
NATO only exists because it moments WAR.
Foments
I find the ones who think its a great idea to open the doors are all nimbys when it comes to having these problems in THEIR neighbourhood where THEY have to see and deal with it. The first time they run into a problem they change their minds. they are like children frankly with their enthusiasms and good will and inability to deal with the harsh reality of physical adversity.
I fear that there is no coming back from this kind of pathological self-righteousness, no dissuading the ageing Streitbergers of the Federal Republic from their moral posturing. They’ll go to their graves convinced of their piety, for their folly won’t bear its most terrible fruit until long after they’re dead.
That is why I despise boomers like they despise their parents‘ generation. Fat and decadent they lived off what their parents built and now what their children must produce. This is the generation of outsourcing and green scams, looking down upon their fellow German who suffers because he never studied asshole sciences at FU Berlin and must compete with the Orcs, they so admire and cuck before, getting high on moralin each time another thousand is invited to the Fatherland, for which they expect their next man to pay while using every dirty trick possible to save on taxes
I am a baby boomer, and, though I don't fit into your rationale for hating boomers, I cannot deny it is a fair assessment of how my generational compatriots have made such a mess in our society.
The baby boomers were the first generation of Americans to experience wealth without the corresponding hardship. (I'm speaking of them as a group; I have no doubt that you may have walked four miles to school, barefoot and uphill in both directions.)
I've read an interesting argument that the sixties (which was really the American wave of the French Revolution) could have taken place in the Roaring Twenties, had the stock market not crashed; the wealth was certainly there for it. But with the Great Depression, Americans kept on their knees and stayed there during the war, pleading for the safe return of their loved ones. Even as the middle class here ballooned during the American heyday after the war, those old enough to remember the depression and the war kept their sanity. It's a shame that GI Joe and Rosie the Riveter didn't make the same effort in raising their children that they did to win the war.
Great points.
I'm married to a boomer. It was one of my biggest errors in judgment.
Now I feel compelled to stay as I know he won't be getting better.
Dementia runs on his mother's side
intergenerational warfare is yet another way to break up a nation.
very true indeed. This is intentionally so. Not that I do not know this, but still I feel resentment towards that generation. Technology-Centricity, the complete absence of spirituality and crass individualism have made generational experience no longer relatable, between generations. This is a development that is not by accident, fostered by the powers that be. Nonetheless, a large part of today's problems are rooted in the unquestioning worship of the guilt cult, decadence and self-righteous praise of 60's liberation by the boomer generation.
I'm old
I'm from the silent generation. Born in the middle of WW2. GUESS my end might be in the midst of WW3?
"Fat and decadent they lived off what their parents built and now what their children must produce."
Absolutely correct.
These old fools will hold on to their ludicrous beliefs to the bitter end. I don't understand it. They've seen their extraordinary affluence and privilege wither, contaminated by vulgarity, promiscuity and mass immigration of foreigners but they simply can't admit they were wrong about it all.
Money and security are great and important human needs, but just as important is the feeling of holiness, of being spiritually advanced and elect, of having a pure soul worthy of merging w the godhead.
Social Justice is a secular Christian heresy and it allows its believers to feel more righteous and holy than their neighbors and allows them to believe that they are morally superior to the rest of us dirty apes—this is a feeling that will keep you warm on your deathbed, regardless of how delusional.
Just think of migrants as the modern crucifix, you display and project your love for them to let others know you are on the side of the angels, a Good Person.
Humans have worshipped everything from rocks to cows to trees, so it's no odder for people to worship an Algerian.
Those "they just want a better life" types are beyond obnoxious. You know who else wants a better life? I do. I always want to ask these people, if they have a nicer house in a nicer neighborhood than I do, does that mean I can just move into their house? My life would just be so much better if I could swim in their pool, use their hot tub, watch what I want on their home entertainment systems, and just stretch my legs a bit in one of their nice big rooms. And I wouldn't be a total leech about it. After some years, I might even help out with some of the utility bills or something, maybe (no promises). Think they'd agree to have me?
Great comment.
Also left unsaid is that if these people want a better life, they need to work hard at making their native countries better places to live in!
Streitberger (literally translated means a man from the town of Argument) is correct that the vast majority of Tunisiens in Regensberg are not offenders. In fact, the article reveals that 141 of the 250 Tunisians there are not offenders. That's about 60%. Now imagine living on a road with 10 other families and knowing that 6 will leave you alone and 4 will rob or rape you. 2 of those live next door and one across the street. 60% may be a statistical vast majority but it's not enough. We need to understand that 99.5% of the people in a society need to behave themselves 99.5% of the time to have a peaceful, fruitful life.
yes, exactly. Statistically, most people don't murder and rob. And even those that do, still spend most of their time NOT robbing and killing, and even if you're murdered, you are only killed once, on one day, and most of your days, you were not murdered, so on balance...so why have laws at all? lol
I recently discovered the term Pathological Altruism and the theory people can become addicted to self-righteousness.
Gad Saad is coming out with a book called “Suicidal Empathy.” Save concept, I think.
*same
W-T-F???? Insane!
Two books to purchase
Although I consider Gad Saad a spy, a hypocrite and a major grifter, stealing other people's ideas so he can get paid, thank you Crumpet for bringing up the term Pathological Altruism and MR for “Suicidal Empathy.”
On my side of the river we have been discussing pathological altruism and its consequences for many years.
DerWaldgang, I am forever indebted to you for solving the mystery.
Not pathological "altruism" by the terminal do-gooders, no; it is pathological SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS that afflicts us. This is why the do-gooders and best intentions crowd cannot see the second- and third- order consequences of their devoted actions.
Conservative or liberal, neither dare own up to the fact that their idea was given a fair trial and didn't work out as they'd thought it would. It must be someone else's fault, because they only wanted to make people better!
To their own demise!