I'm from Holla Forums (I'm American using a vpn)...

I'm from Holla Forums (I'm American using a vpn), I want to ask why we would let Muslims in our country rather than Europeans? Muslims are 1% of the population yet commit 6% of the terrorist attacks, and they are less compatible with our culture and system of government than Europeans. Why would we let Muslims into the country rather than Europeans?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.fo/r6VUE
lmgtfy.com/?q=saudi Arabia exporting Islam
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro-Islam
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Islam is a plague you shouldn't let it in just like Judaism.

Because diversity is strength, and we will never have true equality if everyone is the same race.

Silly fucking goy, it is not you who is letting the Saracens in. You have no power.

Nobody here is favouring muslims over european migrants if that's what you seriously believe

I would let in both mudslime and european.

I'd spend more money on helping them to speak english and learn how we do things

nobody cares

Culture is dead, we only have consumer products. Our system of government is nothing but a facade for the tyranny of political economy. The modern right is an incoherent movement, based on an insincere commitment to preserving muh liberal values that never actually existed. Liberals and the Right represent two sides of the same coin, two paradoxical attempts at 'saving' enlightenment liberalism that end up destroying liberalism.

1st. USA is a cultureless country. Stop saying we europeans woudl fit in, because…no. What is american culture? coca-cola and mcdonald's? fucking Beyonce?
Americans are just all equally retarded, regardless of gender or color of the skin.

2nd. It should be you dumb turds receiving the muslims, because it was you dumb turds that didn't cared when your corrupt government were giving money, weapons and military training to ISIS.

Ever been struck by lightning OP? It's more likely than a terrorist attack.

All religion is poison.

You're misinformed. Also what embodies american values and culture? Would this poem represent them at all?

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Or maybe we could MAGA by tearing the statue of liberty down.

...

That's not how it works, you fat retard.

...

American culture is Norman Rockwell nostalgia to a time of expansion and genuine economic growth where for almost two hundred years life just kept getting better for everyone and the power of the country kept growing until the bubble burst in the 70's and life stagnated while the world moved on alienating the middle and lower classes to the point where the entire population is fixated on returning to some idealized whitewashed version of the past that never existed. The trump lovers on the right and the Hamilton lovers on the left. That is American culture.

Oh and just take the educated and skilled Muslims and Europeans and its all good. I don't care a out Somali immigrants if they are all doctors and lawyers.

Why would you do this? You are wasting money on nothing, if you import the right people, then you won't have to spend any money.

The unfortunate thing is that America had lively, vibrant regional cultures that evolved out of the interactions of the immigrant populations prior to about WWII and somewhat after. The cultural upheaval wrought by the mid to late 20th century though was absolutely devastating for this.

Which is a facet of what makes Holla Forums's obsession with 'white culture' so frustrating. They lay claim to legacies that they have nothing to do with while being almost totally ignorant of what they've actually lost and why.

both Liberals and Trumpniks claim to represent True American Values (TM), when in reality, the American Dream has always been a mere marketing conceit. The idea of America as 'diverse' meritocracy is an ideological product of the liberal managerial class, an excuse for 'woke' nationalism and a 'progressive' War Machine. It's as mendacious as Reaganite Exceptionalism or Holla Forums's ethnonationalist fantasies.

...

American culture is democracy, freedom (and of speech), individual rights and muh guns. Europeans are more receptive to concepts like this, and they speak the language.


Yes yes, it's all well and good to post poetry, but what are the advantages of letting Muslims in, when there are plenty of Europeans who want to come here.

Nah dude we've got to piss off white people.

...

Which is why you aren't even allowed to walk around with a knife in great Britain right?

I don't support adding more Muslim immigrants though. Western countries have a massive labor oversupply and high rates of unemployment and precarious employment especially in lower-skill sectors. Unemployed people are dependent on State programs (which can be cut at any time by a conservative government) and without them are locked out of the means to provide for themselves. Left immigration policy should focus on expanding employment, not expanding the reserve army of labor with third-worlders because we feel bad for them or due to guilt over imperialism.

I object to the claim that American culture is only Norman Rockwell-esque nostalgia, or at least that that is all that there ever was. That's all that remains because regional cultures were considered 'low' or common by the bourgeoisie, if they even knew about them at all. American cultures were almost completely obliterated by bourgeois 'pop' culture, like paving over a field of wildflowers.

I agree. Was just trying to point out the hypocrisy of appealing to 'american values' to betray the actual bourgeois enlightenment republican values of internationalism propagated in classical U.S. founding ideology.

Forget everything you're hearing here about anti-immigrant talk, it's just reinforcing your beliefs and clearly you wanted them to be challenged by someone who thinks immigration isn't a problem. Or at least, not blown to the proportion it is.

The reality of this situation is morally grey.

It's because if we want to live our lifestyle we do in Capitalism, we do so on a mound of bodies of the past, the present, and the future. The military industrial complex makes up an enormous amount of our economy and our state interests, our deep state interests, and our international interests. The West as a bloc, as a group of states, is finnancially weaponized.

Because war is profitable.

What you see in the Middle East was nothing purposefully orchestrated by strategic geniuses, they're just doing asymmetric warfare for their own reactionary benefit,with similar beliefs to many modern, what I like to call "election reactionaries" or "election nationalists"; views taken to the extreme. It isn't an accident either however. It is very purposeful.

American defensive strategy from a point is make as little sense as possible. Why you might ask, is that the case? It's because it's chaotic and bound to shake up states and governments with covert action first and military intervention later. It started with Reagan, and funnily enough he indirectly caused 9/11.

We also fund Saudi Arabia quite a lot. And they in turn, fund ISIS.

The problem here is, you have innocent people caught in the cross fire of the American economy, which, if the military industrial complex were to be removed from it, would instantly die.

I am more likely to sympathize with victims of economic Imperialism than I am someone living in a state benefiting from the gains of war for profit.

If these people, furious at the West for what they've done to their homes indirectly and directly, cause acts of violence, I mean if we're in a liberal solution, you simply equip the police to handle these situations better. Not what I would do, but clearly there is ineptitude to the situation by local and state authorities.

There's also the problem anti-immigrant rhetoric is not new, and suspiciously enough it comes and goes in news cycles, when convenient, right before another plan of action in the Middle East is devised.

In the grand scheme of things you're being conned by people pretending to be isolationists to go to war.

We can still walk around with knives and guns, retard.

archive.fo/r6VUE

See, this is what I'm talking about.

America was never a democracy, throughout american history, 'freedom' and 'individual rights' have been for the most part limited to the property owning elite. If you really cared about freedom and individual rights you would realise capitalism is a much more of a threat than muh terrorests, which were actually funded by the US and its allies from the very begining

I wish you would spend more time making posts like this instead of worthless shitposts.

America is all about freedom of speech. Just ask anyone in the 20th century. Or the 19th century. Or the 18th century.

There was so much freedom people were ejaculating red and white and blue. In fact, it was so free, nobody was robbing trains on a mass level, and people didn't coin the term wage slavery. Japan was allowed to criticize post World War II American military occupation, as was Korea, or Vietnam, literally no restrictions on speech.

...

Isn't this a worthless shitpost

Yes, of course war is profitable. So is child porn, and murder porn. Everything is profitable in a certain situation.

Capitalism as a system doesn't support war, it supports profit (of course). The people who support war are the corrupt ruling class (the type of people drumming up hate against russia right now for "hacking"), the reason they're in power is because of an uneducated populace. The problem here is with big government, and the military industrial complex (as you mentioned).

"The problem here is, you have innocent people caught in the cross fire of the American economy, which, if the military industrial complex were to be removed from it, would instantly die. "

I don't buy that, at all.

Please point out how Trump is not an isolationist, since that's who you're referring to.


So your reason is "i sympathise with them". I want you to tell the advantages that America would get from not banning all Muslim immigration.

So what? Americans still had the "freedumbs muhfugga" attitude and believed they had freedom of speech, it's definitely part of American cultture.

If you invite Muslims in, you can get their oil cheaper. This ain't no fucking charity, son. It's not because of white or imperialist guilt, but because that's how business transactions work.

I'm surprised to be the first one to say it.

How does more Muslim immigrants cause Middle Eastern monarchies like Saudi Arabia to lower their oil prices?

There's a difference between letting in important Saudi businessman, and importing hundreds of thousands of people from Pakistan with no skills, isn't there?

...

Tbh, if anybody has a right to be angry it's the lower-class workers who are out of the job like that guy. The reason he killed a member of the labour party is quite simply because he blames them for his situation, and that isn't an entirely unfounded position because it's at least partially their fault that the overpopulation issue rendered him unemployed.

Unemployed and over 50, your life is just short of being over, so why wouldn't BTFO a career politician who in his eyes culminates all societal ills that exacerbated his economic situation?

If you really want to understand American culture you have to closely study the American civil war and the country we became after it ended. We started the war as basically a massive coalition of independent states but then after the war we became a federated power where the central government became the defector power above the states. It also settled the question of weather the united states would be a primarily agricultural slave run society or a industrial """"""""free"""""""" society. This set the stage for us to become the economic power house that could act decisively over seas and essentially run the world economy because of our size industrial potential and isolation.

Death to traitors, freedom for Britain.

...

Yes; the latter can be used as cheap manual labor in the long run to support a load against Made in China, which is the only reason Made in Germany is still so relevently a thing.

I wish I was kidding.

The difference is trillions of dollars and the economy not collapsing.


Capitalism can support anything it wants. Currently, the market is baking on Defense to the point a single fighter jet in development has cost over 30 trillion US dollars.

If Defense spending injected into the market, contracts for your Northropp Grumann and so on, if that were to cease, the economy would crumble immediately.


Because you've been brainwashed by US politicking and think tanking.


He's president of the United States in a time of unprecedented connection of income, market, everything is connected with the internet. He is clearly looking after economic interests. He plain as day said, we should kill the families of terrorists. Does he mean on American Sovereign Soil? Obviously not.

Trump is as isolationist as Hillary Clinton.

They don't have a say in the matter and it is part of their job to extend chaos in the Middle East in order to sustain the defense market we generated, NATO generated, during the Cold War.

There is simply no way to get around it, and it is impossible to try without economic crash. It will not happen, there will not be a sudden power vacuum in the Middle East.

In 2008 when Obama took office you heard people like McCain saying that we'll be in this region as a military upwards of 2070.

You didn't hear that much of it afterwards, for a number of reasons.


Yes, I sympathize with people who are victims of a war zone.

What is your argument? You're incapable of empathy? You're not willing to call on your police to do a better job about this?

Or most of all, you're not willing to even acknowledge this is happening geopolitically?


I don't want to give America any advantages whatsoever.

In fact I would rather like it if the state was destroyed and the actual people took control of their own destiny in emancipation from Capital. You're asking the wrong person.

I don't really know what Labor's platform is, but I assume it involves more immigrants, higher taxes, and fewer jobs. How is the left going to gain any power promising more third world immigrants, more taxes, and fewer jobs when most workers appear to want fewer immigrants, lower taxes (on themselves), and more jobs? There can be no electoral success with this sort of platform.

Are you arguing Americans are easily manipulated by lies? Because then we're on the same page.

Wrong, Jeremy Corbyn doesn't need money. He just said so.

I don't know what this image is attempting to convey.

Well more immigrants and fewer jobs are one and the same thing, which seems to be an idea that people here fail to get.

That's why you find most of the lefties are actually upper-class to upper-middle-class muh privileged valley kids. And yes, that includes the minorities practically swimming in scrooge mcduck pools of money too. "My life is better than that of 99% of the people on the planet, but you've got white muh privilege so shut your mouth!"

Uh, do you think there is a class or region of people *NOT* easily manipulated by lies? Because then you are most definitely not on the same page as reality.

This isn't completely accurate. Low-skilled immigrants from third world countries still work the jobs, they just earn less money. It would be most accurate to say that third-world immigration promotes inequality.

Do you know what a scolarship is, how many people who were poor worked their ass off to get to a place to escape it to get to upper education in the first place? And why should we disregard completely academic study, because increase in income bracket from education alone, likely wasted on enormous debt?

Also what makes this position suddenly speak of Marxists outside of the West?

How does this make the people you're speaking of more or less politically apt?

And furthermore, what makes immigrants into the United States less politically apt? And not more? Or less?

You're working off an enormous amount of assumptions about the population of the board, and the fact labor has existed in a worse scale, they just happen to have another skin tone to your own.

They're used by proxy for election cycles but the problem will never be solved because its useful to agriculture to have them, furthermore, they are more working class than the people you're describing.

Have a problem with these situation? Don't blame the people incapable of action on it, blame the state and the economy for lying to you every election cycle.

I think you failed to see my point. For the people who were originally there, those worked jobs by third world immigrants just *poof*d into thin air, and what's worse the people who get the jobs don't appear to give half a shit about their cultural values.

Of course they would be fucking pissed that more immigrants are coming. And yes, it does promote income inequality because capitalism works on a system of demand. The more workers there are, the less demand for workers there is, the less they get paid. ECONOMICS

ECONOMICS

Hispanic immigrants have been a media talking point for decades. And every election cycle it's the same shit. You're buy into an enormous amount of American political bullcrap.

I don't give a shit about whether or not the people coming into the country are politically apt, or even whether or not they are good people. The fact of the situation is that their arrival lowers the quality of life for the people already present, and gives opportunities to large-scale employers to fuck up the lower class for their own benefit.

That's why every news and media outlet that isn't a ridiculous right wing propoganda machine(In other words, is instead a ridiculous left wing propoganda machine) constantly pushes pro-immigration propoganda, and only allows opposing speakers on in numbers less than the establishment position of MORE MIGRANTS PLS THINK OF THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN

Americans are particularly susceptible to it. Think tanks exist for a reason. Not to say Europe is free from blame. You're right, you know you're being lied to. You just can't tell the forest from the trees in terms of exactly the specifics of what shit you're being sold.

If Defense spending injected into the market, contracts for your Northropp Grumann and so on, if that were to cease, the economy would crumble immediately.

And? This means nothing, of course an economy relies on certain things, it's due to the style of economy, the economy could literally depend upon anything else.

Because you've been brainwashed by US politicking and think tanking.


Then explain how the economy would collapse without the military industrial complex? You still haven't done so, at all.

Trump is as isolationist as Hillary Clinton.

So you're not basing this upon anything he said, other than "we should kill the families of terrorists", you're basing it upon "he has to go war because all the other career neoliberal globalist politicians went to war". It sounds like you've got a lot of assumptions.

What is your argument? You're incapable of empathy? You're not willing to call on your police to do a better job about this?
Or most of all, you're not willing to even acknowledge this is happening geopolitically?

I don't base immigration policy upon empathy.

I don't want to give America any advantages whatsoever.
In fact I would rather like it if the state was destroyed and the actual people took control of their own destiny in emancipation from Capital. You're asking the wrong person.

Ah of course, excellent. Why did I suspect otherwise.

Immigrants have been coming over for decades, and it hasn't done shit. The problem is that they're used as a scapegoat for legislation that otherwise fucks you over you're not paying attention to.

You trust politicians on their word the problem is immigration, and this is the first part of your political problem.

You blame the fact the working class exists, rather, than blaming the fact you are both being exploited. In similar, and different, ways.

Ever heard of a thing called "diplomacy"?

Saudi Arabia is an Islamic Theocratic Monarchy. Exporting Islam is obviously in their best interest, if not a top priority. It's not saying anything new, check it out:

lmgtfy.com/?q=saudi Arabia exporting Islam

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro-Islam

Firstly, I'm not American, and I'm highly critical of America in general. The only reason I'm against immigration is because I understand economics, and the entire world seems to be under the misguided position that closing your borders is somehow racist and not actually a survival tactic that has repeatedly been put to use for hundreds of thousands of years to not just prevent drug trafficking, illegal immigration, AND weapons trafficking, but to also ensure that covert enemies can't just literally walk into the country without some kind of justification.

Remember what I said earlier about mostly middle-upper-class to upper-class people complaining about the problem? Well here it is, obviously you haven't lived in a low income white neighborhood before, because that is where the problem is apparent. And of course, you can only really notice the problem if you've lived there for years, because the erosion of job availability and the inflation of the tax dollar is something that occurs over a large period of time.

That doesn't make it fuck people up their sensitive lower-income assholes any less, just at a gentler pace.

This is going over your head.

You're not seeing the problem.

As long as you have a military presence in the Middle East for profit, you will have refugees, you will have a talking point every election for the public to invest enough to get to the voting booth.

It has been this way for decades. The Middle East is our replacement threat to the Soviet Union and we've perfectly, and are contentiously doing so, working on making it more than a sheet of paper threat and a reality.

And those refugees will piss you off until you die because the United States is in no position to stop the fuel to their perverse puppet show of the Democratic process.


Precisely. He has no say in the matter, in fact he wants to go to war.

You have no idea what the deep state actually is. The magnitude of how defense impacts the global economy, and what America is willing to do to protect its economy.


You don't base it on actual fact and legislation either.


Working against what America currently is, is more loyal to the American people than what you're asking.

And that's for us to trust Congress.

It's also worth noting, that the people who have actually become victim of this are the kinds of people that people just don't even see when they walk by on the street. Homeless people. Why don't you check if there's been an increase in poverty and homeless people, and check that up against immigration statistics, I bet you'll be surprised :P

You're right, I came from a low income apartment complex in south east LA where I worked my ass off to get to the position I'm at. You're not in a position to talk about people's lives as a stay at home nationalist when as a matter of fact as well, I was around actual Vietnam nationalist family members.

I also went over the problems with this argument.

It ignores everything people have to go through to get to college from a number of income brackets.

When your argument is entirely, "You must be white and upper class" towards everyone who disagrees with you, then that's not an argument.

In fact, the people you are describing are liberals and we don't like them particularly either. We have a history of hating them for different reasons than you, however.

The solution is to blame individuals and not systemic problems in how our society organizes itself.

...

Most economists believe that global economy with freedom of movement leads to most efficient market.

...

"most efficient markets" = maximal profits for the bourgeoisie

The MIC is basically unlabeled welfare for the American economy. If all the assembly floors and factories suddenly closed the economies of many rural (and even done non-rural) would completely tank. The civilian side of assembling, distributing, and supplying all that equipment employs thousands of people, to say nothing of the effect military bases themselves have.

Take Fayetteville, NC for example. If fort Bragg were to close or even shrink, 'Fayettenam' would be a ghost town.

So are you suggesting that America restructure or it's economy, or be destroyed altogether?

It has been this way for decades. The Middle East is our replacement threat to the Soviet Union and we've perfectly, and are contentiously doing so, working on making it more than a sheet of paper threat and a reality.

I know this, that's why I voted Trump… I can't believe that he will go to war because "everyone else did", and I certainly don't believe that he's at interventionist as Hillary Clinton, what makes you think this?


Muslims are further disconnected from our culture. Muslims are 6x more likely to commit terrorist attacks. More cohesion equals a better, more unified society.

America has been in a near-constant state of war with someone or other for almost its entire existence.

Is he the one legend tells of??????

Both is the only solution to the economic inequality that will reach nightmarish levels by the time we are elderly. And for an enormous list of other reasons.


Because this is the way it works and nobody will change it, the only people who want the job description are people who love the way it works.

You can make a politician as Donald Trump as possible. The fact of the matter is he has no control over the military and further, that he is fine by that and will completely let it strategist on its own under the guise of his own orders.

You're too naive and idealistic about how Trump will do all these populist and collectivist things.

You have no reason to support politicians, only to criticize them for what they're doing. But that's become such a vague place, that itself has become marketing.


America doesn't have a culture.

Trump will go to war because the entire governmental and economic apparatus he now sits at the top of has been organised explicitly for that purpose. The US military is the big stick to enforce American economic dominance, and the only thing worse than going to war for the people that made it, is not going to war. All those trillions of dollars in weapons development have to be justified somehow or else all those sweet government contracts Lockheed Martin, Northrop, et AL, depend on will dry up. There are a lot of people that make a lot of money from that who would be very upset if that changed. So unless Trump has another half trillion dollar business lobby lined up to replace it, he's going to be dancing to their tune.

Why does this matter? If the economy improves, then people will get higher wages and higher income, but job creators will naturally get a higher cut of it, because they're the ones profiting much more.


You're sending mixed messages here. Does he want to go to war, or does he not have the power to prevent it? And again, what reasons do you have for believing he is as interventionist as HRC, you still haven't told me, "because everyone is" isn't an argument. Not even every politican is like this.


If a politician does something commendable, then I will sing their praises. Unfortunately they never have done anything particularly good so I haven't, but still. And again, Donald Trump isn't a politician, he's obviously unqualified but he's not a politician.


Then what is it called where every American shares the ideals of freedom, democracy, and the right to express yourself, and we all have done for generations now?

Inequality causes economic crisis. The super rich have vastly different savings rates compared to everyone else. This means that as inequality continues, there will be a surplus of loanable funds, and eventually cause a general situation of over-leveraging to the point of mass default and a debt crisis.

Well yes, that's the cycle of boom and bust, market crashes are inevitable in capitalism, even with sufficient government intervention, it's just finding a way to prolong the time before the crash. If it's not due to income inequality, the crash will be due to something else.

Regular boom and bust cycles aren't caused by debt crises. No, they are much rarer and take several decades to stew, and are much more destructive These are the great depression and the great recession.

You talk of government intervention, but thanks to the wonders of capital accumulation, the people who control our political economy are the capitalists who have no interest in stopping a cycle of debt which lines the pockets of banks and keeps the rest of the economy running in the short term by propping up aggregate demand. They won't allow the government to intervene in such a situation, only react to cover their asses when it blows up.

Great recessions are still inevitable, though, and there are few ways to prevent them.#


Yep.

Only inevitable if you don't question private property.

What do you mean?

Pure ideology.

Does it not become culture when those values have been shared by almost every American citizen for hundreds of years now?

I mean that if we change the legal structure of private property, we could decrease inequality, as well as put the banking sector under public control and/or take profit out of its MO.

Only to be discarded and bent in every which way in order to serve whatever convienient narrative conjured up by the state and the interests of the U.S economy. At this point, they are merely ideological tools of capitalists to create the semblance being the good guys of history.

We went from civil war to suddenly everyone's moving to the cities to ww1 to great depression to WW2 to FINALLY having some degree of stability. That's almost 100 years straight of social chaos.

...

oh yeah i didn't mean it STUCK. but for a decade there we had stability. Which is really why all the traditionalists want to return to the 50s.

People act like the late sixties and seventies were the best time ever.

It was worse than now.

The auto industry died, capitalist claws were finally relaxing and becoming unhinged, watergate ruined the reputation of the US government to their public, Vietnam backlash and veterans becoming homeless, extreme social angst

Your parents screaming you were satanic or communist

I mean it could always be worse. But that's not saying much.

…Yes, and? Culture is always manipulated by politicians to make people believe that they are ones upholding traditional X culture.

Either you've never been to America, or you've never left America.

It is a vague, moralistic abstraction that is nice and all, but in the end is taken advantage of for their benefit and is naive as hell. It's like pacifism.