[ExI] "polluting my home with unwanted people"

[painlord2k at libero.it]

Il 07/02/2009 11.07, Dagon Gmail ha scritto:
> This is significant example of stupidity in action. You pose a problem
> here that deceitfully suggests a clear and simple answer.
>
> There is immigration from poor countries. This causes significant stress
> to demographics and institutions in modern,
> civilized countries because the immigrants are poor, undereducated and
> from rather savage and backward places.
> Your complaint covers poor people who resent having their children be
> educated in schools that have deteriorated
> because of immigration. So my questions to you are:
>
> - is there any humane AND affordable way to stop immigration, including
> people smuggling or desperate rafting?

It is humane and affordable to not stop immigrations in these 
conditions? Including primarily the people smuggled (there is not 
"desperate rafting" in the Mediterranean).

> - can immigration of undesirable poor people be reversed, again -
> humanely and affordably?

Can we let undesirable people inside and will it be humane and 
affordable for the desirable people inside and outside?

> - can Italy do anything affordably and humanely to make sure emigrants
> do not have an incentive to come and bother

Is is humane and affordable for the immigrants enter and bother the 
local people?

> poor struggling Italians, or cause immigrants in Italy to return or go
> elsewhere?

Is it humane and affordable force native Italians and legal immigrants 
to be forced to move from where they live to other places because of the 
other illegal immigrants?

> - is there any affordable and humane tool politicians can use to make
> sure backward and savage immigrants
> integrate and become civilized faster, preferably somewhere later this year?

They are politicians, not Gods or wizards. At best they are Wizards of 
Oz, nothing more.
The best way to force people to integrate is to kick out the people that 
don't want integrate and is not able to integrate and the criminals 
(that usually are from both the two categories before).

> My accusation is there is no answer to any of these questions, except
> "stretching up what is regarded as humane
> and affordable".

When being "humane" lead to misery and extinction, maybe "humane" is not 
so humane. And it is not affordable to go in misery and be extinct.

> No politician is able to deliver on any promise of
> closed borders, not without ruining your economic
> infrastructure.

When did closed border become synonymous of no commerce with the 
outside? It is the flux of people that need to be controlled, not the 
flux of goods. Because people are not goods.

> No politician is able to deliver on a promise of sending
> back immigrants humanely and affordably.

I will (and many other will do the same, at the end) settle with the 
"inhumane", if any "humane" way is not discovered.
I prefer life to death, mainly my life to someone else death.
Are you, or other, different?

> Immigrants cannot be integrated in anything less than two, three
> generations.

This is a function of their ability and will to integrate and the 
willing of the original population to integrate them.
I will say that in Europe and America, the natives are willing to 
integrate the immigrants as the opposition is very little.
But many large groups of immigrants are not interested in integrating 
inside the native society. I never heard this complain about 
Philippines, for example. The complain are mainly about the M.E. people 
and Africans of Islamic faith.

They have low IQ, so they have problems finding successful jobs and 
integrating and their faith support a racist, illiberal and violent 
behaviour.

> Yes I am aware of these demographic disasters. We have problems with
> backward and savage maroccans here in
> the Netherlands, and many of them have gone retrograde in terms of
> assimilation and integration - and yes they
> behave precisely in a way as to be as contrary and unlikable as
> possible. The new proverb is no longer "as stubborn
> as a mule" but now has become "as stubborn as a maroccan".

What would you expect by a group of people that have a IQ 20 points 
lower than the natives and is indoctrinated with a nazi-like ideology?

> However the nightmare we are in is that we are not able to offer quick
> solutions. If you demand any, or claim there
> are, you are effectively lying, or trying to crowbar into place
> "sinister or intransparant solutions" using the savage
> immigrant issue as leverage. In the mid 20th century we could wait it
> out - one or two generations of assimilations
> weren't all that bad an expectation. But as even the NY times is
> starting to notice that sociological and technological
> trends are subject to a puzzling accelerating trend, we don't have that
> time anymore.

So, we are not able to wait and we have no time.
So, the "sinister and dark solutions" could find a way, whatever we like 
or not.
What is dangerous is that "one or two generations" are needed, but the 
present generation is taking a step backward and increasing in numbers.

So we are, now, nearer an armed confrontation than before.
I'm relatively sure that natives would, at the end, win the 
confrontations with the Muslims, but they and the others would pay a 
price much greater than any price we could pay now with any stark and 
strict policy.

> The onlyshort-ter, solution we have is a bit roundabout - it is removing
> the influence Islam has over this people.

This could be done, but the leftist need to understand this. Until they 
are friends of the "poor and oppressed muslims" they will contrast any 
actions like this.
Also, you could don't like it, but this can be done better and faster by 
the Christian churches (or Hindus or Buddhists) than by atheists and 
faithless people.

> Islam as a force in the world is currently kept on IV drip by Wahabi
> sociopaths in Saudi Arabia. That means - you and
> everyone else who use the damn oil, is keeping Islamic evangelism alive
> with a hefty subsidy via state sponsored mullahs
> over there.

I agree with this.
The current oil bust is doing / will so more damage to the Wahabi and 
the IRI (don't discount them) than anything other short than a outright 
invasion (Genghis Khan style).

> But I agree Islam is only a fraction of the problem - we
> need to make societies all over the world about twice
> as rich as they are now to start solving these problems.

Wealth help solve problems only if you have the intelligence and will to 
use it correctly. Otherwise it is an amplificator of bad choices.

> Right now by
> exporting whole plainloads of economic power
> abroad we are slowly strangling ourselves with our own hand. This needs
> to stop, but I am not entirely sure how we
> can do that. The current situation is imminently unstable.

The current situation is inherently directed to an armed confrontation.
The fronts are forming just now in Europe, if you look at the right 
hints you will note it. And surely many groups are planning ahead for this.

Mirco