Colonialism, Exploitation and Independence

[Zardnaar]

I had some trouble parsing that second sentence but anyway, I think she’s saying that it’s a bit rich for him to act like it’s so hard for him as a non-white non-male person in parliament when most people view him as a white man. But the controversy actually didn’t seem to have much if anything to do with race this time.

Im not that familiar with the incident.

Some Maori do pass as white. Sone Maoris and whites do have issues with it.

Basically they appear white but qualify for improved government or iwi services.

Some over do it if they discover Maori ancestry and connect with iwi irritating various people.

 

[choxorn]

I kinda figured you meant something like that. There's several things wrong with the framing, but even just sticking to basic facts, some quick searching gives me Portugal's foreign-born population as more like 15%, not 25%, with about a third of it from other European countries and another third from Brazil, and you have plenty of foreign-born people from Portugal's other former colonies who speak Portuguese and have Portuguese ancestry. And a population graphic from a few years ago on Wikipedia says you have plenty of immigrants from other demographics than 20-something men. So I'm not seeing how exactly immigrants to Portugal are an invading army of colonizers. What are they doing that's actually harming you?

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Praying it hits 2/3rds, outside of the hyperbole: lol, lmao even

It'd only be colonization if the immigrants totally supplanted the indigenous rule and started extracting resources like the Portuguese did up until the 70s, neither of which are actually happening.

Instead it's just immigration of people you don't like, so sad

 

[Cloud_Strife]

So I'm not seeing how exactly immigrants to Portugal are an invading army of colonizers. What are they doing that's actually harming you?

Existing, apparently

 

[W|M]

I get your confusion! I should be calling them invaders when talking about the massive influx of males in conscription age. But new colonizers still seems like an apt phrase as it gets the fact of native suffering.
And get this, my poor Portugal has almost 1/4 population comprised of migrants. Natives are dwindling, our left is euphoric and seething at the restoration of proper immigration laws by a center-right majority in parliament.
I find it interesting and damning that the Immigration laws being approved in Portugal are still way more lax than the laws from the countries these males are coming from.
Nothing to see here!

Portugal, a country so small that it wouldn't even be the biggest city in Brazil, announced in June that it would be deporting 34.000 people, including 5.000 Brazilians; Brazil deported 36 people in 2024

 

[Samson]

I find funny the snide remarks from folks pertaining or cheering for a tribe ever so loved by these invaders.
This week our parliament ruled in banning Burka like garments...can you guess who screeched agains this ruling and were doing contortionist acts saying this ruling was against women rights?
It's really fun to watch

I think, with the coming surveillance state and the power of gait analysis the Burka should come into fashion for everyone.

 

[choxorn]

It's violating women's rights to say they have to wear a burka and also violating their rights to say they're not allowed to wear one if they want to. It's their body and should be up to them what they want to cover it with. I don't get how that's contortionist or at all hard to understand.

Also, Muslims make up less than half a percent of Portugal's population, because again, immigrants to Portugal mostly come from other European countries, Brazil, or from another one of Portugal's ex-colonies that don't have very large Muslim populations. I once again don't understand how this constitutes an invasion, or how it's negatively affecting you in any way.

 

[r16]

the right of women to wear anything they want was a liberal narrative in my country as well . None of those people are reported these days protesting how prominent people who campaigned for the right to cover one's head are so not for the right to cover one's head not . Covered women are daily attacking scantily clad women if you believe the news , even if the news are centrally written and might not be the whole truth . Once you get the right for Islamic Dress , the alternatives become shunned over time . This is not a problem with Islam but Islamists . Like , the Caliph of Muslims , the Sultan of Ottomans , Abdülhamid the Second banned the likes of Burka as a security risk , as men with otherwise very prominent moustaches and beards were fomenting Revolution against his Goverment with the freedom of movement the dress type provided . Taliban like basically banned women in burkas from the streets or something anyhow . The liberal notions people espouse become poison for the rest of the world without the checks and balances stuff . Things based on centuries of experience and they no longer apply in the West , too , this way or that way .

 

[Ordnael]

I think, with the coming surveillance state and the power of gait analysis the Burka should come into fashion for everyone.

Interesting take. I would rather go full ninja though.

 

[Samson]

Interesting take. I would rather go full ninja though.

You need something loose fitting to obscure ones gait, a tight ninja suit will not help.

 

[choxorn]

Yeah, and I could point to heavily Christian countries that don't have the best record on LGBT rights either, and I know plenty of Western Christians on the right would love to become a Christian version of Iran or Saudi Arabia if they could, they talk about it all the damn time. We aren't defending the abuses of governments in Muslim countries, just saying that if you use those abuses to paint everyone with a skin tone a little too dark as a barbaric religious fanatic, you're maaaybe not being entirely fair and maybe overlooking the religious fanatics who look more like you. And maybe you're also not being supportive enough of LGBT rights in your own country for us to be convinced you actually care about them when you can't use them as a cudgel against some other group you don't like.

Also, like... plenty of the people I've met from Middle Eastern countries have more Western, liberal outlooks on these kinds of things and don't like what their governments are like in their country of origin. I don't know why you're assuming that most Muslim women in the West are even wearing burkas in the first place, or if they are, that there's necessarily someone forcing them to.

 

[Akka]

In this I believe I am consistent, very unlike some posters

They are very consistent, just duplicitous about it. You can easily notice that when it's about "colonizing powers", it's always exclusively about the western ones. No mention is ever made to ask for China, Mongolia, Turkey or Arabia to pay reparation or to take responsibilty for the vassalization of other countries.

Ironically (and surprisingly or unsurprisingly depending on how cynical one is about human psyche), the most strident anti-racists end up being the only ones actually pushing the "white savior" image (in a twisted way), only ever assigning responsibility and ability to act to white people, and casting everyone else as some sort of permanent hapless victims without their own agency.
And then making a bit show of constantly talking about racism. Projection maybe ?

 

[NovaKart]

You really want to compare EU laicism and embedded protection from religious fanatics enshrined in law (but very much in danger due to new colonizers) to countries whose policies and religion view LGBT as subhuman both before their god and their authorities!? Whose prosecution is not only a rightful jihad and a moral tenant imperative but also a lawful target for a purge directive!?
I can't go this silly...sorry

We can’t exactly get rid of our own homophobic populations in western countries but why would we want to exacerbate the situation by encouraging more mass migration from deeply conservative societies? Pointing out anti-gay conservatives in western countries doesn’t change that.

I’m not even against controlled and limited immigration from Muslim majority countries but people should consider the societal effects of large demographic changes. It’s naive to expect that the pro-Palestine crowd will always sit comfortably under the same tent with the 2SLGBTQIA+ folx as much as it is to expect the same from conservative Christians.

 

[choxorn]

people should consider the societal effects of large demographic changes

Please point me to the European country where conservative Muslim immigrants make up more than a few percent of the population, or where they're imposing their religious rules on society at large, or where they're doing anything remotely colonizer-y

Like, the constant thing I hear from the right about immigrants is how they're taking over the country or committing crimes or how if you let them in you won't have a country anymore, but where exactly are they causing large demographic changes, where are they systematically taking things from you or threatening your way of life?

All I ever see as a response to this question is just more thought-terminating cliches or stereotypes or highlights of whatever gangs of foreign criminals they can find, when the immigrants are usually committing crimes at a lower rate than the native population is

So like, I'm sure that there is some level of population shifting or migration where too much all at once really would cause problems, but is that actually happening in any Western country right now? Is there any significant danger of it happening?

Explain to me where this massive, overwhelming influx of migrants is actually happening, and prove to me that it's actually having the negative impacts you say it is

 

[r16]

No mention is ever made to ask for... Turkey ... to pay reparation or to take responsibilty for the vassalization of other countries.

not taking sides at all but your eyeballs will pop when you hear what they are plotting to demand . When there is no more reports of unreported Turkish things to punch their faces , them lawyers in the US with Armenian roots . One of those Kardashians married some guy who had heard about that and it was not just her body or something . Yes , a far more "reasonable" wikipedia page here .

Armenian genocide reparations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

edit: Foreign Ministry will have trouble with this post , so like ı do NOT recognize anything with it .

 

[Zardnaar]

Please point me to the European country where conservative Muslim immigrants make up more than a few percent of the population, or where they're imposing their religious rules on society at large, or where they're doing anything remotely colonizer-y

Like, the constant thing I hear from the right about immigrants is how they're taking over the country or committing crimes or how if you let them in you won't have a country anymore, but where exactly are they causing large demographic changes, where are they systematically taking things from you or threatening your way of life?

All I ever see as a response to this question is just more thought-terminating cliches or stereotypes or highlights of whatever gangs of foreign criminals they can find, when the immigrants are usually committing crimes at a lower rate than the native population is

So like, I'm sure that there is some level of population shifting or migration where too much all at once really would cause problems, but is that actually happening in any Western country right now? Is there any significant danger of it happening?

Explain to me where this massive, overwhelming influx of migrants is actually happening, and prove to me that it's actually having the negative impacts you say it is

Are the crimes stats the right using accurate?

Illegals aren't a problem here. Numbers of legal were relative to infrastructure/houses built.

Generally X broke left 20 years ago. 20 % of the population are immigrants. A lot come from low trust conservative societies. Some vote 75% for the right.

One city is 40% immigrants. In American terms last election the "red wave" happened in the equivalent of LA or NYC.

So there's a backlash from left and the right (different reasons). Its really only the far left progressive types and hard core free market types really in favor of high immigration.

Overseas its causing problems in Europe with tbe rise of the right.

Or places like Dearborn Michigan.

Theres issues around visa abuse, migrants exploitation, housing etc. Point any out you get called racist/facist or whatever.

Alot of it is backlash to Trump/ICE white refusing to deal with the negatives.

Busing them to NYC was kinda genius. Border states gave been dealing with them for decades.

No one wants to have that rational conversation about it though. Its to much of a hot button topic for the rights higher ups strategy and the progressive left are kinda clueless on it.

Some sort of reform is needed in multiple countries. What that reform ilooks like varies but cutting migrants in half or more short term and going after employers and visa overhaul are probably all required.

I would argue its sinking the lefts electoral chances. The rights pass poor governing is helping the left though.

A left wing nationalist movement or traditional conservative faction that was competent at running the country and flexible on other social issues could clean up.

 

[r16]

because nobody would care , this Nişanyan guy wrote one of the best Turkish dictionaries . Like but

Sevan Nişanyan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

so , let me explain the dynamics in this thing below

https://asbarez.com/ankara-conference-looks-beyond-genocide-debates-reparations/

the "Kurds" press for reperations because there will be millions of them to discover they were actually Armenians and had to change their identities to survive . Nişanyan is disgusted by it . He has the hotel business . Knows the Israelis boobed greatly when Germany was paying for the Holocaust with rather high numbers of people turning up alive when their names were on the lists of dead victims Bonn was paying for . He also dislikes the Kurds for killing , plunder of the columns to Syria and abduction of women and children and so on . Because everybody knows the Kurds will cite the Armenian thing and demand the same for their sufferings and those millions of Kurds who were actually Armenians will re-apply because they are unblemished and pure Kurds since Adam and Eve . The numbers are important . Armenians will be fighting Kurds for domination of Anatolia when every Turk who can fight has been killed , they need justification . Oh yeah , those million and a half of Armenians murdered ? See , how many hundreds of thousands must have survived for two enemies of the Turks to demand territory ...

 

[NovaKart]

Please point me to the European country where conservative Muslim immigrants make up more than a few percent of the population, or where they're imposing their religious rules on society at large, or where they're doing anything remotely colonizer-y

Like, the constant thing I hear from the right about immigrants is how they're taking over the country or committing crimes or how if you let them in you won't have a country anymore, but where exactly are they causing large demographic changes, where are they systematically taking things from you or threatening your way of life?

All I ever see as a response to this question is just more thought-terminating cliches or stereotypes or highlights of whatever gangs of foreign criminals they can find, when the immigrants are usually committing crimes at a lower rate than the native population is

So like, I'm sure that there is some level of population shifting or migration where too much all at once really would cause problems, but is that actually happening in any Western country right now? Is there any significant danger of it happening?

Explain to me where this massive, overwhelming influx of migrants is actually happening, and prove to me that it's actually having the negative impacts you say it is

I never said Muslim migrants or immigrants were colonizers. My post was about comparing conservative Christians with Muslims in an attempt to downplay anti-gay sentiment among Muslims. If your point is, homophobia exists among American/European Christians, why on earth would you want to add to that by bringing in another conservative demographic?

The percentage of Muslims overall in Western Europe is small but very concentrated in certain areas. In some cities in the UK the population is between 20% to 30%, with 40% of the population under 20 being Muslim in Birmingham (although some of this is probably university student population from outside).

In Amsterdam I saw a similar estimate for the youth population but couldn’t track down the source while in Vienna Muslims are 41% of the primary and secondary school population.

Muslim pupils now largest group in Vienna schools as city debates civic education

With a growing share of Muslim students, Vienna’s education leaders are pushing for a new subject on democracy and coexistence in Austrian schools.

www.thelocal.at

So while the Muslim population is overall small, parts of Europe look like they’re in for at least highly localized large demographic changes even without the current migrant crisis.

While I don’t believe a significant Muslim minority will seek to impose Islamic law or anything like that, this is absurd, I would not take a casual attitude to the idea of Muslim voters becoming a significant voting bloc comparable to conservative Christians.

For a clue, take a look at Dearborn in USA, which has a small Muslim majority and Hamtramck, which has an entirely Muslim city council. The Pride flag issue is of course small, but symbolic. Trump also got the majority of Muslim votes in Dearborn in 2024.

“Muslim residents packing city hall erupted in cheers after the council’s unanimous vote, and on Hamtramck’s social media pages, the taunting has been relentless: “Fagless City”, read one post, emphasized with emojis of a bicep flexing.

In a tense monologue before the vote, Councilmember Mohammed Hassan shouted his justification at LGBTQ+ supporters: “I’m working for the people, what the majority of the people like.”

While Hamtramck is still viewed as a bastion of multiculturalism, the difficulties of local governance and living among neighbors with different cultural values quickly set in following the 2015 election. Some leaders and residents are now bitter political enemies engaged in a series of often vicious battles over the city’s direction, and the Pride flag controversy represents a crescendo in tension.

“There’s a sense of betrayal,” said the former Hamtramck mayor Karen Majewski, who is Polish American. “We supported you when you were threatened, and now our rights are threatened, and you’re the one doing the threatening.””

‘A sense of betrayal’: liberal dismay as Muslim-led US city bans Pride flags

Many liberals celebrated when Hamtramck, Michigan, elected a Muslim-majority council in 2015 but a vote to exclude LGBTQ+ flags from city property has soured relations

www.theguardian.com

.

 

[Angst]

They are very consistent, just duplicitous about it. You can easily notice that when it's about "colonizing powers", it's always exclusively about the western ones. No mention is ever made to ask for China, Mongolia, Turkey or Arabia to pay reparation or to take responsibilty for the vassalization of other countries.

so just to chime in here, and not to ignore the rest of the post (white guilt exists, etc etc). it's a behavior that seems weird, but there are three practical reasons for this often overlooked.

first off, there's the question of impact and relative strength. mongolia, turkey, and (the region of) arabia simply doesn't have the material and political capital the west at large has. they're all dwarfed. china is the odd one out of course and has tremendous influence, but more on that below.
second, there's the question of what you can actually control. you have more influence towards those that are part of your sphere than those that aren't. i'm not a chinese citizen, i'm a citizen of a nato country, so while i have very meagre influence where i live, it'd be much more absurd for me to push for changes in china.
and lastly, the basic reason other spheres aren't often brought up is that it's not what we're talking about. often these discussions sprout out of domestic policy questions. when you talk america, the question of colonization is inevitably ingrained into the political environment of that nation, and you then look to the general behavior of us' colonizers when discussing this very behavior. we were discussing the english overlord behavior here at the onset of this thread. not chinese overlord.

basically, for the "duplicitous" leftie you're angy about, the question has to check three boxes; is the power relevant; is it within our sphere of action, often as in what we're actively doing already; and is it on topic. the reason the mongolian conquests aren't brought up is because they fail to check the three.

now, a longer tangent on this. is it abstractly useful to discuss colonization at large as it relates to eg britain, looking at chinese behaviors in africa today, arabian behaviors in the past (albeit that's kind of a different thing), the romans, etc? surely. that's why discussions on china are quite common internally among leftists. it's just often treated carefully when it comes to these things, because the vast majority of times non-western behavior is brought up, it's to soften western behavior. so lefties will not engage (or they will, to dismiss). eg discussing belgian colonization, some conservative shows up to yell what about china, they high five themselves and leaves. nothing is solved. and in spite of the name of this thread, the topic specifically had to do with a hiccup about the benevolence of british imperialism. so lefties will not naturally bring up china (why would they) and when china is brought up, every reading of the poster will basically make sure it gets a pass of being western whining and/or apologeia. because more often than not, it just is.

i have throngs of leftists i can criticize china with, but if i do it to make a whataboutism, they're right to clock me and laugh me out the door. that's a fair situation. bringing up china should be relevant for bringing up china, not to poison the discussion.

it's a very conservative worldview to be sad that you don't get to abuse minorities anymore, and lefties are very watchful on when china is brought up as abstractions on human behavior or apologeia to rein the colonies back in. it's always strange to see vaguely left-leaning people having lost the sauce here, and having fallen to these distractions, because while it's true that china did and does a lot of abuses, there's no reason to get baited by the rhetoric.

i have an acquaintance who is supposedly an artist. a quarter of their facebook feed were musings on artistry and philosophy (good musings, too). half of it was variations of WHY DOES THE LEFT NEVER BRING UP CHINA? the last quarter was stuff like heartfelt excitement over the novel notion of illiberal democracy. he really, really liked the latter, he really hated the left, and he was in the enviable position where you couldn't tell whether he was stupid af or i-can't-believe-it's-not-dogwhistling-all-over-the-place. all of his friends knew what he wanted to do politically, so there was no real use "discussing china" with him.

so it has to be colonization relevant to the discussion at hand; and from the tangent, it's also a space where you have to be really careful about what the purpose of the conversation is when discussing nonwestern countries. the duplicitousness is a complete nosequitor. considering the left manipulative is ridiculous. the stereotypical leftie is not one that does rhetorical tricks; it's one who's abrasive, can't pick a fight, can't shut up, and has no strategic filter as to the listener in question.

 

[r16]

when you look at a Muslim community abroad , you do not see foreign goverment interference . But it is there , eventually Gulf Arabs who have no problems with the undemocratic West . It will never be to the Left's benefit if it is a matter of life and death . With the current trends . You are angry with some meme in which Mamdani or whatever crashing a red painted plane with hammer and sickle into the Twin Towers ? However nice a person he might be , there will still be an agent provocateur to create some link that will be 100% correct to the MAGA crowd who do not really spend much effort to think about anything . "Whitewashing" stuff does nothing , the Right is re-conditioned everyday to distrust the Left ; and some German court case where some immigrant raped a German girl and walked out and some woman had racist online posts against him and was sent to jail seems perfect Rightwing conspiracies from the beginning to the end ... Can't remember that was the one where there were like 5 men and they beat up the victim and left her passed out on a cold night where she could have freezed to death . It is an immensely difficult task already , defending Democracy ; anyone talking against my view is a Nazi doesn't win anything for you , the Democracy and the World .