jumpy64 wrote:I think multiculturalism is a key issue of our time and is central in media propaganda. But other than this I will not expound a thesis in this first post, as I did in the “Open Conspiracy” thread. I will leave the issue open, with (a lot of) questions that everybody here is invited to answer. Or anybody can ask other questions, of course, and make other examples.
Starting from the “media fakery” angle, which this forum specializes in, do media hoaxes like the Charleston Church shooting or the Utoya (fake) massacre (or others you can name) promote multiculturalism, directly or indirectly?
Is the Utoya (fake) incident, for example, in any way connected with the (future at the time) invasion of immigrants in Scandinavia?
And do media hoaxes like the ones I’ve just mentioned, or others, imply something negative about nationalistic movements or ideologies?
We know better than most other people how prevalent media fakery is. Does this mean that everything the media insistently promote is fake or wrong or negative?
For example, how do the media portray different ethnic groups?
Is how the media portray White people real or fake?
Is how the media portray Black or Colored people real or fake?
Is how the media portray White or "Colored" people biased in favor of one or the other?
Is how the media portray Muslims real or fake?
Are Whites as dumb as television portrays and other ethnicities as intelligent as the television portrays, especially in America?
And is how the media portray Jews real or fake?
Talking about Jews, Barbara Spectre - the Jewish activist and academic who founded and directs Paideia, the European Institute for Jewish Studies in Sweden - declared:I think there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the centre of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.
Do you agree with what she says about this "necessary" transformation of Europe?
Do you agree with her statement that Jews have a leading role in the multicultural transformation of Europe, as also the very influential "Kalergi Plan" seems to demonstrate?
And is it a legitimate thing for them to do? Or is it a blatant case of double standards on their part, since they advocate for DNA tests as a prerequisite for Israeli citizenship and refuse to take in Middle Eastern refugee in Israel but actively promote their (forced?) reception in Europe?
Back to multiculturalism, is how the media portray it real or fake?
Are multiculturalism and the idea of race as a "social construct" connected?
And if they are, do the media generally promote multiculturalism and this idea of race as a "social construct"?
And if they do, as it seems to me, why?
Can it be a good thing?
And if it is, can you make other examples of “good things” promoted by the mainstream media?
Do you think multiculturalism can facilitate respect for other cultures more than incite hate between different cultures forced through immigration to co-exist in the same places?
And in any case, why would the media promote it?
Do you think multicultural ideals are rigged against White European people or not?
Do they deprive White European people of their basic right of “freedom of association” by forcing them to coexist with other races?
Is this really inevitable, as people like the former French president Francois Sarkozy said?
Are these multicultural ideals fairly applied to all ethnic groups, or to the advantage of some groups and to the detriment of others?
Some see multiculturalism as an attempt at "White genocide". Do you agree with this perspective?
Do you perceive multiculturalism as more protective of certain races and more accusatory towards others?
Do you think it promotes the idea that all races should merge into one? And if so, do you agree with this idea?
Do you see any exception to this idea, any race that is portrayed by the media as worthy of a special protection?
A race whose extinction we should be worried about?
And are we allowed to worry about the possible extinction of other races too?
Can the creation of the “islamic terrorist” boogeyman be interpreted also as a warning against the dangers of nationalisms and religious beliefs?
Why is the media telling us to distrust such phenomena?
Are they saying this to their benefit or to ours, or both?
Are there cases in which what benefits the media controllers can also benefit us?
Is how the media portray White nationalism or other forms of nationalism real or fake?
Do they promote it or oppose it?
Do you see multiculturalism as something that has roots in the past, or arising only from the 20th century onward?
Can you name thinkers, philosophers or intellectuals who, before the 20th century, spoke in favor of multiculturalism?
And from the 20th century onward, did these promoters of multiculturalism belong equally to different ethnic groups or to one in particular?
Do you think multiculturalism could benefit a particular ethnic group?
Did it arise in concomitance with the rise to international power of any particular ethnic group?
And finally, do you think it's important to try and find answers to these questions, or at least some of them?
hoi.polloi wrote: I am not really worried about the "extinction" of any races but perhaps I am just too aloof for people concerned with such things.
Social capital is a form of economic and cultural capital in which social networks are central, transactions are marked by reciprocity, trust, and cooperation, and market agents produce goods and services not mainly for themselves, but for a common good.
The term generally refers to (a) resources, and the value of these resources, both tangible (public spaces, private property) and intangible ("actors", "human capital", people), (b) the relationships among these resources, and (c) the impact that these relationships have on the resources involved in each relationship, and on larger groups. It is generally seen as a form of capital that produces public goods for a common good.
fbenario wrote:The movement of the USA toward a more multicultural society provides one huge benefit to me at least - it makes many white folk very uncomfortable, and brings into question their assumed privilege as the 'best', most favored Americans.
For example, while I don't like or trust Obama, Democrats, or even the American political process, I was so happy when Obama was first elected because I knew it would expose the underlying racism, hatred, and intolerance many white folk still feel and believe in. As all of you know, I despise arrogance, feelings of superiority, bias, bigotry, and anything else that makes one person/group think he/they are inherently superior to anyone else. (I hope the political rise of Donald Trump constitutes the last gasp of elderly scared, angry, rural, uneducated whites. As they die off we should see less 'acceptable' public fear and hatred.)
hoi.polloi wrote:Hi jumpy64
hoi.polloi wrote:jumpy64 wrote:Are Whites as dumb as television portrays and other ethnicities as intelligent as the television portrays, especially in America?
This is a question that is loaded with a preconceived opinion that Whites are portrayed as dumb and ethnicities intelligent for some reason other than protection against racism.
hoi.polloi wrote:Arabian people lately have been portrayed as an expendable commodity that you get brownie points for destroying.
hoi.polloi wrote:jumpy64 wrote:Can the creation of the “islamic terrorist” boogeyman be interpreted also as a warning against the dangers of nationalisms and religious beliefs?
It is meant to be interpreted that way, absolutely. I don't necessarily agree that is the best interpretation of the "Islamic terrorist" fictions lately.jumpy64 wrote:Why is the media telling us to distrust such phenomena?
This question doesn't quite make sense to me, based on the site you are on. Are you asking why the media is telling us to distrust Arabs?
hoi.polloi wrote:jumpy64 wrote:Do you see multiculturalism as something that has roots in the past, or arising only from the 20th century onward?
It has deep roots in the past, but there are modern variations constantly being born, and new forms will be born tomorrow and so on. As long as there are different cultures trying to figure out how to coexist on our planet, multiculturalism will be a subject.
1. On the expansion of slavery, Lincoln said:
There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races ... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas ...
2. On shipping blacks back to Africa, Lincoln said:
In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, "It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and in their places be, pari passu [on an equal basis], filled up by free white laborers."
3. On outlawing slavery in the south (before the rebellion), Lincoln said:
I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
4. On equality, Lincoln said:
I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.
5. On inter-racial marriage, Lincoln said:
Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.
jumpy64 wrote:So who can I turn to at this point, I wonder?
jumpy64 wrote:Do you see multiculturalism as something that has roots in the past, or arising only from the 20th century onward?
Cyrus's conquests began a new era in the age of empire building, where a vast superstate, comprising many dozens of countries, races, religions, and languages, were ruled under a single administration headed by a central government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_the_Great#Politics_and_management
According to Professor Richard Nelson Frye, Cyrus – whose abilities as conqueror and administrator Frye says are attested by the longevity and vigor of the Achaemenid Empire – held an almost mythic role among the Persian people "similar to that of Romulus and Remus in Rome or Moses for the Israelites", with a story that "follows in many details the stories of hero and conquerors from elsewhere in the ancient world". Frye writes, "He became the epitome of the great qualities expected of a ruler in antiquity, and he assumed heroic features as a conqueror who was tolerant and magnanimous as well as brave and daring. His personality as seen by the Greeks influenced them and Alexander the Great, and, as the tradition was transmitted by the Romans, may be considered to influence our thinking even now."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_the_Great#Legacy
The sons of Adam are limbs of each other,
Having been created of one essence.
When the calamity of time affects one limb
The other limbs cannot remain at rest.
If you have no sympathy for the troubles of others,
You are unworthy to be called by the name of a Human.
-- Saadi Shirazi, Golestan (The Rose Garden)
Cyrus’ legacy as a humanitarian monarch continues to this day. Xenophon, a student of Socrates, wrote The Cyropaedia, a biography of Cyrus which extolled his virtues. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar carried copies with them. America was directly founded under the benevolent monarch model offered by Cyrus’ example. Thomas Jefferson read the Cyropaedia frequently.
Cyrus’ empire, which we now call the Middle East, was a far-reaching ménage of different cultures and faiths. The Cyrus Cylinder decreed a paradigm for coexistence — a blueprint which established an enlightened order.
In addition to the influence of the Cyropaedia on the US founding fathers, its core principles resonate with those of the United Nations. The high-minded concepts fathered by Cyrus in Persia thousands of years ago have found expression in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Brought to life by John Peters Humphrey and the UN Commission on Human Rights chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt, the Declaration was adopted by the United Nations on December 10, 1948.
https://perribirney.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/the-cyrus-cylinder-eleanor-roosevelt-the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/
ICfreely wrote:jumpy64 wrote:Do you see multiculturalism as something that has roots in the past, or arising only from the 20th century onward?
Multiculturalism, a direct consequence of imperialism, has been at play throughout recorded history. America, for all intents and purposes, is Iran v. 2.0.Cyrus's conquests began a new era in the age of empire building, where a vast superstate, comprising many dozens of countries, races, religions, and languages, were ruled under a single administration headed by a central government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_the_Great#Politics_and_management
Nobalai wrote:I sincerely apologize to all if I went on too long with my prose, and if I came off trying to dismantle all the work presented here. The latter was 100% not my prerogative.
As a neutral researcher I will do my best in contacting those who portray themselves as relatives of Sumaya and post my findings.
I hope it's understandable that I must take my own path in verifying the claim that no one died on 9/11, given that this forum has presented an outstanding case for it.
In the meantime, ive been posting in other places. 9/11 (although extremely fascinating) is definitely not my main interest. I hope to see more exposure and personally engage in discussion of nuclear and space/NASA hoaxes.
Users browsing this forum: patrix and 5 guests