petitesouris wrote:
I am trying not to write anything else in here on the inevitable collapse, yet I find your response to be insultingly cavalier, possibly because you have never lived in Europe and you seem to think that the economy runs itself without being influenced by people and their motivations.
You are wrong on both counts. I am British, and I was educated in Britain. I chose to avail myself of my Canadian citizenship in part because of antiquated European ideas that "Fortress Europe" could be sufficient answer to globalisation.
As for my view of the economy, I am well aware that it is influenced by people and their motivations. So much so that I--unlike you--consider both parties in a trading relationship. I doesn't matter how many goods and services Europe produces--if there is no one out there willing to buy them, then Europe has no export trade.
Quote:
As for "living in this world as it was", this response lacks nuance. Every civilization has adapted itself, yet this never amounted to the disappearance of morals and identity.
In short, one could be recreative to avoid clinging to backwardness, yet without freedom from impending sharia rule + urban anarchy, this will be impossible for the country my family resides in. Also, those who ironically cling to "change" even when certain negative changes are being rejected, are themselves maladapted. Also, please ask yourself, when you insist that all change is good, who decides what changes?
And again with the ridiculous
sharia alarm. What percentage of voters in your country are muslims? How many of these muslim voters are primarily motivated by the entrenchment of
sharia into public law? And who cares if two people choose to resolve a private dispute under whatever form of law they choose? We've certainly had civil courts give legal sanction to resolutions of disputes arbitrated by all manner of alternative forums, from secular family mediators to traditional Jewish Courts.
As for urban anarchy--Europeans were perfectly capable of creating all manner of urban anarchy long before ex-colonial immigrants started arriving. Terrorism in the 1970's didn't mean
al qaeda--it meant the the PLO, to be sure, but it also meant the IRA, the Red Brigage and the Red Army Fraktion.
As for who decides what changes, that is the easiest question of them all: the body politic. Political parties and Parliament will generally move fastest to respond to the body politic, but on the more difficult matters, they will punt decision making to the Courts.
So take a good, long look at the real demographics in your country. There is no country in Europe in which the domestic population is anywhere close to losing its vast majority. The only European languages under threat are those like Basque that are being squeezed out by linguistic hegemony from within--not without. You are like Chicken Little running around crying, "The Sky is Falling!!" when it is doing nothing of the sort.
_________________
--James
07 May 2012, 11:58 pm
