The rise of Extremism in Economically tough times

jamesmorgan

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Impossible to hold a sensible discussion with someone who has a totally incorrect and off-beam fixed notion based on obsessional political prejudice and who is impervious to all evidence and reason. Think what you want to think, I couldn't care less, life's too short.

Based on this response, I can only conclude that the answer to the question in the original post is unfortunately 'yes'. In economically tough times, it becomes every (wo)man for themselves. There is very little real compassion for people in 3rd world countries. If we let a few of their most highly qualified people into our country, then we can try to re-assure ourselves that as a country we are not institutionally racist.

antrobus

jamesmorgan wrote: »

....Socialism believes that everyone earns the same amount. ....

Technically speaking, 'socialism' doesn't believe anything, because it isn't a concious entity, but never mind that.:) Socialism is not about "everyone earning the same amount"; it's about nobody earning anything as such, because it's "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

jamesmorgan wrote: »

..
The scenario runs broadly as follows:....

So all this globalisation stuff that has been happening has just escaped your notice?:rotfl:

jamesmorgan

antrobus wrote: »

Technically speaking, 'socialism' doesn't believe anything, because it isn't a concious entity, but never mind that.:) Socialism is not about "everyone earning the same amount"; it's about nobody earning anything as such, because it's "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

It depends on whether you are talking about Marxism or modern day socialism

So all this globalisation stuff that has been happening has just escaped your notice?:rotfl:

I'm glad it's all sorted then - perhaps we should tell all these economic migrants to simply go home. The streets of London aren't paved in gold after all.

antrobus

jamesmorgan wrote: »

It depends on whether you are talking about Marxism or modern day socialism....

I don't think that your brand of airy-fairy egalitarianism qualifies as any kind of socialism.

jamesmorgan wrote: »

...
I'm glad it's all sorted then - perhaps we should tell all these economic migrants to simply go home. The streets of London aren't paved in gold after all.

It is. The Chinese have shown the way. Thirty years of Marxist-Leninism produced nothing more than millions of dead Chinese. Thirty years of Socialism with Chinese characteristics or, as it is more commonly known, capitalism, have dragged over 600 million people out of poverty, and set China on course to being World No1 economy.

It ain't flippin rocket science.

Gangaweed wrote: »

This is just not true. Most of Africa's problems for example are man made. With good governance, they would be easily wealthy.

Indeed. See the Sudan, the Congo, etc and so forth.

antrobus

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Impossible to hold a sensible discussion with someone who has a totally incorrect and off-beam fixed notion based on obsessional political prejudice and who is impervious to all evidence and reason. Think what you want to think, I couldn't care less, life's too short.

Yes, but this a thread about the "rise of Extremism in Economically tough times". So it's not surprising that one or two people will join in to promote their particular brand of extremism, in the hope (no doubt) that these economically tough times will indeed further their cause.

jamesmorgan

antrobus wrote: »

I don't think that your brand of airy-fairy egalitarianism qualifies as any kind of socialism.

You seem to be getting very confused. I am proposing that the only way to really reduce the number of economic migrants, is to fully embrace free trade and level the playing field. The EU's variant of socialism is one of the key obstacle to this. They complain that globalisation is bad as it causes small negative impacts on the standard of living in Europe, when in reality the type of globalisation we have today is only a small movement in the right direction.

I have no idea what you are standing for. Whether it is pro or anti-EU, whether it is pro or anti- economic migration. It seems you are happy to support anything unless it directly impacts on your standard of living. That position is understandable, and probably echoes the views of many within the EU, but it is not a catalyst for real beneficial change.

Thrugelmir

antrobus wrote: »

Thirty years of Socialism with Chinese characteristics or, as it is more commonly known, capitalism, have dragged over 600 million people out of poverty, and set China on course to being World No1 economy.

Many of those 600 million would beg to differ. Just like the West there's vast disparity.

Maybe the largest economy but has many flaws.

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

I agree with this but presumably if you hold racist views, e.g. not wanting to be around foreigners, then it's reasonable to be called a racist.

So it might therefore be reasonable to actually witness one of us stating this, before casting your extremely insulting assertions.

danothy

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So it might therefore be reasonable to actually witness one of us stating this, before casting your extremely insulting assertions.

Maybe the lack of parity expressed in the supposed motivations for objecting to immigration (e.g. not advocating expatriation on economic grounds but objecting to immigration) could be considered such a statement.

burnleymik

"rise of Extremism in Economically tough times" I think the rise in extremism is probably because we have so many means of communicating and spouting/imposing our views and opinions compared to years gone by and not really heavily linked to the tough economic climate we are currently experiencing.