This is the end result of a social experiment in Marxism, called Critical Race Theory.
CRT destroyed the notion that “justice is blind” and made the identity of the offender and the victim of paramount importance.
CRT holds that whites are always the oppressor and people of color are always victims. It creates a justice system that is as harsh on whites as it is lenient on people of color, who are deemed oppressed.
“Applied CRT" in policing is what killed Henry Nowak and it’s what signaled to the criminal class that if they occupy a protected class for religion or race they can quite literally get away with murder — because society has become too tepid and feckless in service to ideological experiments, to simply enforce the law, irrespective of the status of the offender or the victim.
Justice must be blind — and Marxism must be sent into the wood chipper of history — or societies will be pushed to the breaking point.
@Grumpy_is_GOD@RealAlexJones There is no good reason.
But in this day and age, one must note that this guy was minding his own business — not in the midst of raping this guy’s sister when he came along, pulled him off and began beheading him in a fit of rage.
It’s not “British culture”. It’s a reaction to stupidity on the part of European governments.
Suppose tens of thousands of settlers enter China and over the course of about 20 years raped 200,000 young Chinese women. The newcomers refuse to learn Chinese. They form gangs and stab and behead people walking down the street. They forbid the police from visiting their neighborhoods. They insist on creating their own laws. They convince the Chinese government to arrest anyone who tries to stop them on the basis that law enforcement is “racist”.
China would never put up with this madness. Nor would most non-Western countries. But West has decided to embrace unrealistic “open borders" immigration policies, and has set everyone up for failure as a result.
Much of this is motivated by the fact that governments are hungry for money. They do not wish to downsize as the population has fewer children. They need more people to pay taxes in order to continue to pay those debts. Many decided that the best way to solve the problem of citizens having too few children (future taxpayers) is to import people who are known to have larger families.
When governments create immigration policies, they have a choice: They can can make sure that the people they import are not criminals. They can determine if these individuals will learn the language or respect religious values, such as Christianity. The alternative is that government asks very few questions. They admit people who practice things like honor killings, forced conversion of infidels, rape of women and girls who do not wear a hijab and beheadings.
Governments must ask these essential questions, otherwise all they are responsible for is conflict.
Humans are not ingredients in a soup that can be thrown into the same pot with little care for whether the result is a soup anyone would want to eat.
This is not about racism. It is about realism.
I appreciate that this may sound harsh.
But no matter where in the world large shifts in population occurred, this has been the challenge faced by newcomers.
It is not about skin color or even religious differences. It happened between Irish, Italian, Polish, Germans and others setting in the U.S.
It has happened in parts of Africa where whites are a minority.
And it would surely happen if large numbers of Jews occupied Lebanon or large numbers of Americans attempted to settle in Syria or Iran.
Government’s job is to choose a reasonable pace of migration, to verify that those who are admitted are not violent and to ensure access to education.
When government fails to create realistic standards, than all that is left is the strength and commitment of the community — new and old — to deal with the results.
It would be a function of historical ignorance to say that mass migration can occur at scale without such conflicts, irrespective of the religious or racial identities involved. However, better policies on the part of government and more commitment among those who migrate to assimilate would allow for conflict to pass.
As long as one continues to exercise the “us vs. them” mindset or the “right vs. left”, there is only one guaranteed outcome: more conflict.
For what it’s worth, it’s not “you”.
Protestors are reacting to a government that has placed unrealistic demands on society.
If you don’t like what the “far right” is doing, help a first generation immigrant adapt to the ways of a West.
No white European can adequately achieve what you can in this regard.
In summary, there are only two options:
1) Migrant communities focus on helping members of the community assimilate for the mutual benefit of all;
2) Governments create conditions that favor conflict.
Were it not for the high debts, First Wold countries could sustain gradual population declines — and indeed it would help to meet climate targets if they did so.
However, growing the tax base is made that much more urgent by governments working to sustain their own spending and growth.
It’s the migration counterpart to a Ponzi scheme.
There are not significant outflows of migration from countries generally subject to a high standard of living. Therefore if the goal on the part of the First World is to offset aging demographics, by definition — not conspiracy — the bulk of that migration will come from parts of the world that are subject to poverty, corruption and refugee crisis (e.g. reasons people might be willing to leave and permanently resettle elsewhere).
We have already seen the consequences go sideways on Europe on a number of fronts.
It is not a conspiracy to observe that there is no way to replace aging demographics without a significant portion of that imported population originating in the so-called Third World.
Whether it’s government backed, UN backed or privately proposed is irrelevant for purposes of identifying downstream consequences for the host society in response to large and sustained migration shifts.
@KucingJava@citizens_sanity Those lame boomers who used to laugh at the most inappropriate things moved over for generation neurodivergent.
Apart from the use of AI, this plays like an old SNL skit. Back in the day comedy was funny because nobody was spared. Now everybody’s spared and nothing is funny.
@EvelynMaeWrites@citizens_sanity For a campaign, it’s a problem. But would Talarico take offense in another context? My guess is that he'd probably laugh it off in recognition that about 3/4 of it is inspired by his own take on the issues. It wouldn’t resonate as particularly offensive (or funny) otherwise.
@grahamformaine Considering that Virginia voters elected a top cop (DA) who fantasized about killing his opponents children, the bar wasn’t that high.
But congratulations are in order for not threatening to kill your opponents.
@ToddRegelski@CAgovernor Part of that fraud is watching tax revenues decline as businesses leave, the California budget deficit exceed $12B — yet there’s money for a government hiring spree to help cover up the employment crash?
Who is going to be hired in construction, maintenance, public works, food service or custodial?
The job market looks a lot different for people who were not born here vs. those who were.
It looks even more different for professionals vs. trades.
And more different still for people who are too white to hire…