1. PF has switched to Xenforo. Please see this post for more details. Search and other functions are still being worked on.
    Dismiss Notice

Immigration being used to pave the way for one-world government

Discussion in 'Global Issues' started by Anders Hoveland, Apr 23, 2012.

  1. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In the world at this period of time, there are unprecedented levels of immigration, and most of this immigration is into the economically and militarily influential Western countries: the USA, Canada, Australia, and Western Europe.

    Nationalism is one of the strongest hindrances to one-world government. It led to the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires, and was one of the main reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    Destroying the concept of national identity cannot be done within a single lifetime. But the socialist/communist idealists envission a future beyond their lifetimes. This was clear under the Soviet Union, where communism was in some ways like a religion. The actions of the individual in support of the state were to achieve a paradise- not for the individual himself, but for future generations in the world.

    If the national identities of the influential Western nations are destroyed, these nations can fall under a single government, and the rest of the world will fall under its influence also. The great irony is that the Russian Federation, formerly the center of the Soviet Union, now stands in opposition to this unification. This is likely one of the reasons that the Russian government is the target of so much criticism from the Western media. Russia is only a shadow of its former power and world dominance, but it is the only nation left of any significant influence capable of standing in opposition. We have seen how much effort the USA has made to form allies with the other former Soviet Republics surrounding Russia. Special trade privilleges are granted, and unusual efforts are made to more closely integrate their economies with that of the USA. Human rights and democracy are apparently only secondary considerations. Most of these former Soviet Republics have much more repressive governments than Russia, yet the Russian Federation itself is the main target of Western criticism. The West aims to weaken the economic influence of Russia, by building oil and natural gas pipelines to bring gas out of the former central asian republics, bypassing the pipelines already in place that go through Russia. The importance of natural gas will soon increase to great importance, much like that of oil today. Already, many vehicles are beginning to run on natural gas. Russia has vast stores of natural gas laying under its Siberian tundra, more than any other nation.

     
  2. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    20-minute documentary: http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/pcorigins.htm

    In 1923, the Frankfurt School in Germany contemplated strategies to help communism spread beyond just Russia.

    This is what they recommended:
    1. the creation of racism offences
    2. continual change to create confusion
    3 .the teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
    4. the undermining of schools and teachers' authority
    5. huge immigration to destroy national identity
    6. the promotion of excessive drinking
    7. emptying the churches
    8. an unreliable legal system with bias against the victim of crime
    9. dependency on the state or state benefits
    10. control and dumbing down of media
    11. encouraging the breakdown of the family
     
  3. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female

    Link- atlas Shrugs :yawn: I did watch some of it. It is simply a propaganda film trying to present a conspiracy theory for 'Political Correctness'. The thinkers in the Frankfurt school thought independently. Hence it is possible to criticise some a lot and agree with others a lot. Eric Fromm never developed a political theory but you would think from your link that was his interest. Instead he was one of the 20th C's best psychoanalysts.

    In addition the creation of the link between psychoanalysis and political philosophy which developed in the Frankfurt School was a desire to develop an understanding of how the situation which arose in Nazi Germany could ever have been psychologically possible and to develop ways to stop such a thing happening again.
     
  4. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Nazis were not really that bad. Sure there were a few horrible attrocities, but it was not on the large scale that many would have us believe. Millions of people died of starvation, both Jews and free civilians in Germany and Britain. France, Britain, Russia, Norway, and even the United States* committed their own attrocities which are not often talked about. The Nazis — and actually the whole german people — were initially villified after the start of the war, for war time propaganda purposes. Then the leftists and progressives continued this villification in later years for political and ideological purposes. Casting the Nazis as "pure evil" was convenient to advance their social objectives— particularly racial equality.

    Attacking the Nazis was also an indirect way to attack patriotism and nationalism. The leftists have never liked Nationalists, even from the very beginning. There was a great civil war in China between the Nationalists and the Communists, for example. The very word "racism" was originally invented by a Marxist to slander Slavic Nationalists:
    It is clear from the rest of Trotsky's work that he was no better than the Nazis, perhaps worse:
    *The attrocities of the United States against the German people were not on any lesser scale than the Nazi's mistreatment of the Jews:
    http://www.politicalforum.com/history-past-politicians/242037-other-holocaust.html
    But students in the Western countries are only taught about the Jews that died, nothing is ever mentioned about the Germans.
     
  5. raymondo

    raymondo Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,296
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    0

    At least people can now see you in your true light -- assuming they had not picked up on it already .
    You effectively qualify as a Holocaust Denier -- an offence punishable by prison here .
    I would like to believe that you were banned Sine Die and the appropriate authorities informed , if possible .
    But that is a personal opinion which I suspect all right and decent minded people would approve of .But naturally I can only speak for myself .


    "The Nazis were not really that bad. Sure there were a few horrible attrocities, but it was not on the large scale that many would have us believe."---- I never thought I would see that in print publicly . Amazing and horrific .
     
  6. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Marx had hoped that the “workers of the world” would unite. When the First World War broke out the workers of the world did not unite, instead they united with their respective countries and fought eachother. The Marxists had an enormous disillusionment when the French, German, and British soldiers all fought for their respective nations. Workers were more loyal to their respective countries, churches, and cultural values than they were to their counterparts in other countries. One Marxist, Antonia Gramsci wrote that they first had to change the culture of society, change the way people thought, and that the workers of the world would unite only “after the long march is over”. The sense of nation and ones own country was stumbling block. Nationalism and religion was too resistant to Marxism, so first had to be destroyed. This would be accomplished through educational institutions and newspapers.



    The Jews should not be granted any special monopoly on the word "Holocaust". If I thought the mistreatment by the germans was actually even half as bad as it is frequently described in western school books and depicted in popular films, I would not be making these types of statements. The main form of oppression during that time was economic. By "mistreatment", I generally mean they were inadequately fed— not unlike the masses of all the other people during that time. Why do the school textbooks say so little about the millions that died of starvation in Britain, the USA, and Russia? 7.5 million people died in the Chinese civil war between the Nationalists and the Communists.

    7.5 million people died in the Chinese civil war between the Nationalists and the Communists.

    What exactly is a "Holocaust denier"? Do I deny certain representations of history taught in many schools? Yes. Do I deny that depictions of the Holocaust shown in many films are completely biased against the nazis and misleading? Yes. Do I deny many Jews died from mistreatment while being held in internment camps? No. Labour is just trying to legislate away opinions they do not agree with. What better way than to enforce by law your own version of history, than use that view of history for your own political advantage, again and again! "Should we be concerned about all the migration affecting the political balance of power and changing the ethnic composition of Britain? No! That would be racist and evil — just like the Nazis!" :razz:
     
  7. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    Ha ha, well I should have left in the part where I said no doubt you will believe it was a holohoax. It is interesting that WN'S or Nat socialist are becoming confident enough to come on mainstream forums to present their views.

    There was a deliberate policy in Germany of inhumanity to minorities, that is homosexuals, Roma, Poles, Jews, Jehovah Witnesses, mental problems and opposing political views. In Germany murder was the response to difference!!!!!!!!!!

    I agree which is why a psychology of everything was needed. However there is no doubt in my mind that the Germans deliberately and systematically murdered minorities on a massive scale. I am aware of revisionism. Nonetheless the reality is that those who were different were systematically rounded up and died. You may protest about PC but if you had been around in this time and your view had not been the state view, you likely would have died.


    Yes and no. It was entering places like Bergen Belsen which got people going. Rommel for instance was greatly respected as being an honourable person on the warfield but what people found when they arrived at the camps was what did it.

    I agree with you that the whole German people were vilified after the war.


    I was born just after the war. Being told what the Nazi's did in their extermination camps is one of my first memories. Although it is true that terms such as the holocaust came later and I would agree that Israel uses the situation increasingly for propaganda but make no doubt about it, the disgust came from entering Germany camps after WW2.

    attacking the Nazi's was attacking the worst consequences of believing in eugenics. It showed the worst psychosis concerning Nationalism - disposing of those who different.

    quit this over generalisation. It means nothing. Their are no 'the leftist'. The SNP is a social democratic party which wants independence for Scotland. It however is an inclusive party. Nationalism itself however tends to believe it is superior to others. Hence straight away creating an us and them situation for conflict and/or barbarity. The very point that traditional Nationlism is based on the Superiority theme allows it to harm the other. It is a psychologically unsound premise, hence not superior.
    so?
    yes, people can have debates about that. It does not change the reality that the reason the Frankfurt school introduced a psychological dimension was that they wanted to find how Germany under the Nazi's could have acted in the way it did and to find means to stop anyone, including people today from doing the same again to any people...something which anti-islam extremists who go by this propaganda like Pamela Geller your original link, might also pay head to. At this point there is on the propaganda level a convergence of Nat Socialist and anti-islamists so thank you for bringing to the forfront the lies and propaganda which are being presented called 'cultural marxism', not just by WN's like yourself but also by the new far right populist groups. .
     
    toddwv and (deleted member) like this.
  8. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They Allies did not need any concentration camps to justify the Dresden fire-bombings, which targeted innocent german civilians towards the end of the war, when it was already obvious that the germans would lose. These bombings had no military target.

    Not only after the war. At the start of the war. But really the the anti-german sentiments had already started at the end of the first world war.
    By chance, I found an American book from that time in a library, about to be discarded. It discusses germans in a similar way to how the nazis talked about the jews. It is shocking that American society has changed so much since then. The new generations do not remember how things actually were during that time. That book did not go so far as to say the german race should be eleminated, but came very close. If not for all the Americans of german ancestry who had established themselves in the USA, I think a definitive genocide against germans would have been carried out, such was the state of public opinion.

    Many people try use the Nazis as an argument against eugenics. The simple fact is that genocide and Eugenics are two different things. Many of the Eugenics policies under Nazi germany were not so bad, and could well be of potential benefit to society. The USA was doing much of the same eugenic policies done by germany at the time. I think there is another thread somewhere on this forum where members debated eugenics.
     
  9. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I sympathise with Marxists on economic issues, but I am completely against the "social transformation" the mainstream Marxists are promoting, especially as it relates to immigration, and particularly race.

    By embracing "racial diversity" (racial-mixing targeted toward the european/white countries), the Marxists and progressives have completely alienated me, and made a new enemy.
     
  10. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    You are taking yourself very off topic.

    I agree the Dresden bombings were dreadful and the British public was furious when it found out about them. So much so that Churchill gave the impression he was not involved in them. All countries got involved in Total War.

    One person's opinion as expressed in one book does not create a real picture and I have read enough to seriously doubt that that was widespread opinion. It does though take time for people to get over war. I have also discovered things which are not in the history books and some things I have not yet found the answer to.

    I think there is a pretty large belief that the conditions put on Germany after WW1 laid the foundation for another war - but not for the mistreatment of minorities.


    I never said it was though it certainly holds within it the potential for such.


    I am at a bit of a loss as to what to say here. I do not believe in killing children or adults who are mentally or physically disabled or people who are not 'white' are gay, believe differently to me or whatever. That was it exploited and taken to it's worst in Germany till the end of WW2.



    The US was indeed much the same regarding Eugenics at the time and if I remember correctly some had suggested camps for Jews and others. We saw the consequence of this line of thinking in Germany. Also remember that the Western World at that time had 'human zoos' where they used to bring people from far away parts of the world and display them as human type animals in zoos. It was a poor time in the world's learning. Seeing the consequences of allowing such thinking free reign as happened in Germany in WW2 brought the world to it's senses.

    At the same time that a country such as Germany could act in this way was a shock to people who had considered Germany a Liberal civilised society.

    Among the work done to try to make sure this would never happen again the Frankfurt school also looked at the psychological perspective of what could drive people to this.

    Lest we forget our inhumanity and not learn from it and so repeat it.
     
  11. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This includes germany. That was the final reason they rounded up the jews and put them into camps. They were a potential security threat.
    http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/jdecwar.html

    I have actually met a Japanese woman that was held in an internment camp for several years of her life as a young child in the United States. Even when she was released, her family were not allowed to return to the West Coast. She did not seem to carry any bad feelings about the experience, and even expressed embarrassment when she went to cash her compensation check at the bank in later years. She felt a little guilty for accepting money from the government.
     
  12. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    I am aware of that. It does not however give reason for the round up of Jews into concentration camps. That is the same sort of argument that is behind people who believe radical Muslims gives us the right to harm or expel Muslims or put all Muslims in camps. Like I said it is a similar argument to today.

    .....and there never, ever was a reason for the mass systematic killing of civilians repeatedly, even worse when this includes children and babies.
     
  13. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are no "rights" in war, many bad things happen, and it is often a messy affair. During such an intense struggle, utility often takes precedence over ethical considerations.
     
  14. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    There was no war in 1933....and if you believe in the systematic killing of civilians because of their religion then there is little left to say. I have seen this story in more than one paper but I also know that most Jews did not want to go to Palestine in 1933, they wanted to go to Western Europe or even more the USA. It may be a fake...but even if true it is no excuse for genocide. None at all. At least now you have come out of your denial!
     
  15. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It had nothing to do with their religion.

    I am against genocide, but sometimes wars degrade to that level. At times, the only way to win a war is through genocidal tactics unfortunately. This can be seen in Africa time and time again.

    As a racial separatist, i am not entirely unsympathetic to forced relocations, although ideally such policies should be as fair as possible for all involved. If I had been Chancellor of germany, I would have tried to negotiate a deal with the Soviet Union to give the jews a nation where the Khazar kingdom formerly was, in addition to some land in Israel. Then deportations, with some compensation payments to help them out in their new lives.

    If ethnicity does not matter, why does Israel not just merge to become one government with Palestine, and let all the Palestinians in? Would that not end all the conflict? I think ethnic conflicts have an origin in human evolution.

    Rarely mentioned is the many ethnic conflicts and tension in several former Soviet states, due to the legacy of forced (and sometime voluntary) migrations of peoples of one ethnicity into another area with other ethnicities. I think ethnic tensions have an origin in human evolution.
     
  16. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    Yes, it was to do with their religion or because they were apparently genetically a Jew. You have just said it was because they were Jews and Jews outside Germany were stirring up anti German feeling and wanting a boycott of Germany. You excused these Jewish civilians being systematically killed because

    resulting from a Jewish led boycott of Germany to supposedly get Jews to leave and go to Palestine when they don't want to????????????

    There was no intense struggle from Jews in Germany. They from what I have read tended to like Germany very much and be very loyal to it. As I say this is like trying to justify vilifying all Muslims because of radical ones. It is an excuse to justify acting in an unjustifiable way.

    Can you not begin to get an idea on why the Frankfurt School believed an investigation into the psychology going on at the time was needed?


    I am thinking a bit about what one of the psychiatrists asked Breivik. He asked him if he thought it was 'manly' to kill helpless adolescents. You've lost it here. We are talking about Germany 70 years or so ago and helpless men, women and children.
     
  17. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So now you are trying to compare me to Brevik? Politically-motivated attacks on civilians come from both sides (Joe Stack for example).
    What about all that poverty that could potentially result in the future from bringing in so many migrants? Does not poverty kill people also?
    If Brevik was concerned his country's standard of living would head back towards historical levels because of the burden of all those migrants, it is not impossible to be at least partially sypathetic towards views. Because poverty is very bad, it can in some ways worse than death. Democracy does not guarantee that people will not starve to death; we can see this in India. No one ever seems to talk about it, but living conditions are absolutely HORRIBLE for 3 out of 4 of India's people. I think my country has a right to refuse migrants just to avoid ever becoming like India, if not for any other reason.
     
  18. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    Your attempt to try to justify the killing of helpless men women and children simply reminded me of the psychiatrist who asked Breivik, who believes himself to be very manly, if he thought the killing of defenceless adolescents was manly.

    From what I have read you have though given up your holocaust denial, moving instead into a holocaust justification.

    Justification not accepted, hence the need for the Frankfurt school to hire some psychologists to find out how people in general could come to think such a thing was OK.

    As you are now trying to deflect into waffle or some attempt to now justify Breivik, I think we have probably gone as far as we can.
     
  19. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The nations of India, Pakistan, and to some degree Mexico, have killed far many more people in the last several decades than the Nazis. But these extermination policies have generally not been recognised as such, as it is not obvious killing in the conventional sense of the word, but gradual indirect killing of a small segment of society. Through severe impoverishment. The poor are prevented from growing food or building shelter. Now of course, part of the reason for this phenomena is structural, some order has to be maintained. But it is the equivalent of mass-murder nonetheless. The disturbing thing is that these are all democracies, and this type of thing could potentially become a problem in the future for any of the other nations. What India, Pakistan, and Mexico have in common are overpopulation and ethnic diversity- two factors that can not be ignored, and are a big part of the reason for the poor conditions. So what is the United States, Australia, and Western Europe going to do to prevent this from happening?

    Embracing ethnic diversity, encouraging migration, and ignoring overpopulation all have the potential to result in horrible violence and death in the future. In some ways this may simply be inevitable. In other words, trying to suppress ethnic tensions now could lead to much greater problems in the future. We can see countless examples of ethnic diversity in other parts of the world that have only led to violence and genocide. It is naive to think this does not have to cause problems. There eventually will be problems, perhaps not soon, but eventually in the future.

    Is Brevik so competely different from the Norwegian Resistance movement during the second world war that killed 10 innocent Norwegians on Lake Tinnsjø, just to destroy some heavy water? The saboteurs planted a bomb to sink the steamship SF Hydro, knowing there would be civilian casualties. 8 german soldiers guarding the heavy water were also killed. Yet the saboteurs were not regarded as terrorists by the Norwegian people. Rather, it was almost as if they were reluctantly seen as heroes. It was only much later that it was realised that the barrels of heavy water were actually very dilute, so the ammount of heavy water onboard was not very significant, only about 5-10% of the quantity that would be needed for a nuclear reactor. The Norwegian Resistance was willing to kill innocent people to try to prevent massive death tolls in the future. The heavy water was only one small component of what would have been needed by the germans to help develop a nuclear bomb.

    I am not advocating killing innocent people, but the Norwegian people should have the right to live in their own nation without ethnic diversity. Perhaps the media should be focusing more on all the horrible murders, killings, and war happening in Africa.


    The Marxists of that time wanted to put in place their system, and for the most part were willing to do it by any means possible. This was clearly evident by the terrorism, and later the harsh tactics used in the Soviet Union and China that killed millions of citizens. I think the Labour Party is an offshoot of Marxism to an extent more so than many people realise.
     
  20. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not defending some of the mistreatment during the second world war, but things should be put in perspective.
    A one-sided view of history is being used for political purposes and social objectives. The real reason is not so much about preventing a Holocaust from happening again, but about setting the foundations for political change and a complete restructuring of the economic framework.

    Perhaps when progressives stop mentioning "the Holocaust" every time there is a debate on immigration (or whenever an issue that has racial implications comes up), I will stop arguing over what actually happened in the past. In the meantime, I want to prevent an "India" or "Mexico" from ever happening again! :razz:
     

Share This Page