Who would Hitchens vote for?

[Quit smoking No.9130402]

Who do you guys think Hitchens would have voted for if he was still alive today?

He held a deep hatred for the Clintons but was highly suspicious of any "business tycoon" politician so maybe he would have refused to vote??
I get the feeling he would have voted Trump

p.s pls /pol/ warriors go away

[Anonymous No.9130427]

>>9130402
>I get the feeling he would have voted Trump

it's almost a shame that Hitchens became so popular. people only get to know his meme tier work (i.e. they hardly understand him at all,) then they say absolutely preposterous things like this.

[Anonymous No.9130434]

>>9130402
i dunno man, i really liked hitchens a lot. he was wrong about many things, but right about many things as well. he was the first person who helped me to realize that i shouldn't follow cult personalities blindly. it was a hard revelation but worth it. i don't know who he would have voted for, and possibly, i think he would have chosen neither. Perhaps he would have chosen Trump simply as a contrarian move, but who knows. the real reason is does it matter what he thought? does it really matter? who did you vote for?

[Anonymous No.9130441]

>mfw grew out of my edgy atheist phase and realized peter was the superior hitchens after all

[Anonymous No.9130455]

>>9130441
>dat berserk music
grade a shit right there. well, peter stayed away from all the sin, but he wasn't quite as brilliant. just different paths i'd think.

[Anonymous No.9130477]

>>9130455
>he wasn't quite as brilliant

maybe...for me the really obvious thing is that he lacks his brother's range. idk if I'm just ignorant, but I've never seen Peter talk or write about anything besides his conservative politics. you'd have a harder time finding a topic Christopher DIDN'T write about.

[Anonymous No.9130483]

>>9130427
why is voting trump over Hillary preposterous for hitchens?

[Anonymous No.9130487]

>>9130477
i do try to just take bits and pieces of what both of them say and decide for myself in the end. i'm so tired of people following others blindly and being devastated by some grand character they built up in their heads falling down and shitting on themselves. if i'm a human and i know i make mistakes, i know that other humans are just as prone to making mistakes themselves. i do still really like them both though. i used to listen to christ talk about stuff for hours and hours on end.

[Anonymous No.9130493]

I think he'd rather drink/smoke himself to death than support the Clintons in any way.

Luckily, he did.

[Anonymous No.9130501]

>>9130483
why is it unlikely that a left wing intellectual would've voted for a populist buffoon? does that question sound reasonable to you? the only interesting question is if he would've voted for Clinton or not, given his long standing opposition to her brand. I have no clue about that...he might've just not voted, but there's an absolute 0% chance he would've supported Trump.

[Anonymous No.9130505]

>>9130402
>guy who was in favor of nation building and invading arab states
>guy who is a militant atheist
>guy who is for welfare and social justice

Hillary campaigned like she was specifically asking for him to come back from the dead and vote. No, he wouldn't vote Trump.

[Quit smoking No.9130533]

>>9130427

Extra chromosome detected.

>>9130434
A valuable revelation comrade, some are never granted this. It doesn't matter really but i would be curious to see his take on the situation. I'm not from USA so i cannot vote.

>>9130434
>>9130441

BASED PETER.

>>9130493
Agreed

[Anonymous No.9130543]

>>9130533

How many books do you think he actually read?

Not many, I think.

Reminds me of stack threads on /lit/. Fuckin' pathetic.

[Anonymous No.9130554]

>>9130501
Zizek preferred Trump you fucking brainlet
Probably the biggest left intellectual

[Anonymous No.9130557]

>>9130543
With Hitchens I always got the impression of a man who was pretty smart but desperately wanted everyone to think he was even smarter. There was a certain resentment in him that manifested in a kind of sophistry.

[Anonymous No.9130562]

>>9130501
>>9130505

He started in the left and finally matured into a conservative.

Fingers crossed you guys can survive that journey too. xD

[Anonymous No.9130568]

>>9130554

Kek.

It's Chomsky by a mile, kid.

[Anonymous No.9130569]

>>9130562
I seriously hope this post is a bad attempt at mocking morons, and not an actual moron posting.

[Anonymous No.9130573]

>>9130568
Chomsky is an irrelevant dinosaur

[Anonymous No.9130578]

>>9130554
>>9130568
Actually its Cenk Uygur.

[Anonymous No.9130588]

>>9130477
Peter is more canny when it comes to politics and history than Christopher. Christopher is very book smart, but lacks the awareness of his brother.

[Anonymous No.9130599]

>>9130554
>taking anything Zizek says at face value

wew

[Anonymous No.9130600]

>>9130599
He literally said he preferred TRUMP

[Anonymous No.9130604]

>>9130599
"Don't look at what I do, listen to what I say"

t. Slavoy "Cocaine Nosejob" Zizekov

[Anonymous No.9130613]

>>9130569
SJW detected

Its fine, we all get it - Your going through your Liberal ""Phase""
Everyone has done it to some degree while they're young. When you get a bit older kid you'll understand the appeals of conservatism and finally see the downsides of the left.

[Anonymous No.9130626]

>>9130613
I am already old enough, and I don't plan on becoming more selfish as I age.

[Anonymous No.9130637]

>>9130626
You should try it. Start by realising that the cultures of Europe belongs to the natives of Europe.

[Anonymous No.9130646]

>>9130600
>>9130604
https://youtu.be/5a4aK2eAPqQ

yeah

[Anonymous No.9130649]

>>9130637
Holy shit you just put >>9130626 into the dumpster

[Anonymous No.9130658]

>>9130637
>>9130649
>"you are young and here is a strawman"
>LMAO REKT

In your own words, grow up.

[Anonymous No.9130660]

>>9130637

[Anonymous No.9130697]

>>9130626
I'm going to guess your between the ages of 16-25 this is the perfect time to explore the left and rebel against the patriarchy/education system or whatever you kids are doing these days.

Like i said, its a perfectly natural phase for someone working their way towards adulthood/maturity ( Don't worry, its a bumpy road but you're gonna make it! xD )
When i reflect on this time in my life it was probably the time when i had the most fun and learned the quickest.
Then you get responsibilities.

If you think being "conservative" is selfish..... all i ask you do is really think about it. I mean really fire those old neurons and consider what a "liberal" is asking for.

[Anonymous No.9130701]

>>9130697
I am 28 years old, am educated and settled, and went through my "we should be an authoritarian fascist empire :D" state when I was a teenager.
I grew out of it, hopefully you will as well. It is a bumpy road, but I am sure you will make it.

Until then, fire up those neurons, and make an argument when you attempt to argue.

[Anonymous No.9130702]

>>9130613
>>9130697
And the right dares to complain about the left being condescending when the "you'll be leftist when you're young and rightist when you're older" meme has been a claim they've made for more than a century now.

Hypocrites.

[Anonymous No.9130706]

>>9130702
Just shut up and grow out of liberty and social security. Go to church and sign up for the army, be a real man.

[Anonymous No.9130707]

>>9130626
>>9130701
>>9130702

[Anonymous No.9130714]

>>9130707
More strawman. More lack of argument.

[Anonymous No.9130716]

>>9130706
>just do the dumb shit I do already!

t. right winger

[Anonymous No.9130718]

>>9130706
Liberty only works when the people are capable of being left alone by the state and not be criminals.

Social security only works when it's used as a temporary safety net to catch those that fall until they can get back up.

For example, when you have "liberty" in Britain that means that Islamic sex trafficking gangs can target thousands of white girls for years with the protection of the state, but the father that attempts to save his daughter gets arrested (in one case the girl getting raped was arrested for being "disorderly"), is it any wonder that people will start turning against liberty?

[Anonymous No.9130723]

>>9130718
>being this paranoid and fucked

[Anonymous No.9130726]

>>9130718
>liberty means state funded rape
No, it doesn't.

>poor british children raped by somalis
In reality, 17 year old british slags getting drunk and having sex with pakistanis. OH NOES A PEDO ORGANIZATION OH MY GOD, when in reality it was a party house that teenage whores went to so they can drink and smoke weed.
I hate that this story went viral, and that people still insult the police for not arresting men whos only crime was giving alcohol to 17 year olds without their parent there.

[Anonymous No.9130727]

>>9130723

He's right you know.

Read up on Rotherham.

[Anonymous No.9130730]

>>9130726

>This much delusion

[Anonymous No.9130731]

I believe this thread started with hitchens. We all know what the guy thought of muslims and religion in general, but it definitely would be interesting to hear what he had to say on Trump. He may see him as a necessary evil, a method of resisting his hated enemies in the Clintons, or he may side with them, believing them genuinely capable of leading the country better than the opposition. Doubtlessly, he would be a strong advocate for hating both of them for various reasons, and I can't imagine he wouldn't be able to tie some historical political events with what we're experiencing today to help we hoi polloi understand a little better.

It's important to make up your own mind tho.

[Anonymous No.9130732]

>>9130727
You read up on Rotherham, imbecile.
1. The children were 17-21 year old women.
2. The rape was of the "i regretted it next week" variety.
3. The "rapists" were british citizens of foreign background, not illegals.

[Anonymous No.9130733]

>>9130723
>what is Rotherham, Bristol, Oxford, Rochdale, Telford, Aylesbury, etc.?

You do know that this exists, right?

[Anonymous No.9130736]

>>9130733
Yes, party houses where teenage sluts go to have sex and regret it later do exist.
Do you want the fuhrer to outlaw them?

[Anonymous No.9130737]

>>9130732

>british citizens of foreign background

What did he mean by this?

If you're not of Anglo-Saxon stock, you're not British.

[Anonymous No.9130739]

>>9130737
>conveniently avoids that he has to temporarily adopt the neo-feminist definition of rape to push his narrative

[Anonymous No.9130740]

>>9130726
>>liberty means state funded rape
>No, it doesn't.

Why not?

Also, funny how quickly the left will start victim blaming when the victims are white and the perpetrator was non-white. It is also funny how you make excuses to rationalise the horror of the event in order to avoid accepting the reality of it. Sticking your head in the sand wont make it go away, nor will protecting the rapists.

[Anonymous No.9130742]

>>9130739

>Claims that Rotherham/etc were just "party houses where teenage sluts go to have sex and regret it later"
>Implying this was the case

I didn't want to dignify it with a response, but if you insist.

[Anonymous No.9130743]

>>9130702

How do you know it's a meme? I can think of several former lefties who swung to the right as they aged. If anything the recent farce the left has made out of itself is just accelerating the process. Why would a young, white, man vote for the parties endorsed by the people who insulted him and questioned his very right to exist? Honestly if you read the kind of books this board likes you're probably a bit of a cultural conservative whether you know it or not.

[Anonymous No.9130745]

>>9130740
>why does liberty not mean state funded rape
Because definitions and history. Read a book.

>>9130742
This is indeed the case, you should investigate a bit. Yes, this would include reading things other than stormfront blogs.

[Anonymous No.9130749]

>>9130732
>1. The children were 17-21 year old women.
Actually aged between 13 and 17. Read he report.

>The rape was of the "i regretted it next week" variety.
No, it was the "held down and penetrated multiple times, forcibly injected with drugs, and trafficked to other cities" variety.

>british citizens of foreign background
Then they weren't British. They were the exact people I was talking about when I said some people don't deserve liberty.

[Anonymous No.9130751]

>>9130732

>british citizens of foreign background

The Normans?

[Anonymous No.9130758]

>>9130745
>Because definitions and history. Read a book.

Liberty is multiculturalism in the modern world. "You have the freedom to live your life according to your culture."

If that culture (and it does) says that raping the females of the other tribe is acceptable and commendable, who are you to say that's wrong? All cultures are equal, aren't they? We should all have the liberty to practice our own cultures, shouldn't we?

[Anonymous No.9130760]

>>9130701
Fantastic story written from the cellars of your mother's estate.

Being a conservative doesn't mean your 100% fascism and totalitarianism. This is the problem with the majority of liberals, everything has to be in black and white for their brains to cope.
You say that being a "conservative" is selfish? Waiting for you to explain this one.

::hint:: You cant.

[Anonymous No.9130765]

>>9130749
>Then they weren't British.
You mean, like the Queen, a British citizen of German descent?

[Anonymous No.9130767]

>>9130760
>everything has to be in black and white for liberals
>"lol eveyone on the left is an SJW white man-hating anti-free spech totalitarian communist! XDD"

this is your brain on the redpill. god I miss old-school conservatives...those guys were smart, at least.

[Anonymous No.9130769]

>>9130765

>Shifting the goalposts and changing the subject this hard when you get called out

Like pottery.

[Anonymous No.9130770]

>>9130760
>This is the problem with the majority of liberals, everything has to be in black and white for their brains to cope.

Yet if I don't hate blacks I must love cuckold porn and rent my wife to gangsters. You lack self awareness.

[Anonymous No.9130777]

>>9130770

>Yet if I don't hate blacks I must love cuckold porn and rent my wife to gangsters

Well, which is it?

[Anonymous No.9130779]

>>9130749
>"I was drawn into a world of fear, rape and horrific abuse. I lost my childhood at the hands of those men."
>"No one understood. No one wanted to understand. I felt lost, isolated, trapped, ashamed and completely worthless."
>"I was completely owned by these dirty old men who would do with me whatever then wanted, whenever they wanted."

t. girl who sold her pussy for alcohol over the course of months and when she got pregnant she cried rape

[Anonymous No.9130780]

>>9130767
Still awaiting that explanation of why conservatism is more selfish than liberalism.
::hint:: liberalism is extremely selfish

[Anonymous No.9130784]

>>9130767

What rock have you been living under? The mainstream left supports affirmative action, supports hate speech laws, supports feminism, supports mass immigration, supports multiculturalism, and is against personal freedom and self determination in general. And it's not some big conspiracy, they're quite open about it.

[Anonymous No.9130786]

>>9130769
>not adressing the point besides shouting "fallacy" and posting memes instead
It was an reductio ad absurdum, frogposter.

In any case, this is a stasis of definitions, and these are notoriously hard to resolve. Seeing as you didn't even comprehend that simple argument, I'd be wasting my time.

[Anonymous No.9130787]

>>9130780
Why is "we should help those less fortunate" less selfish than "those less fortunate can fuck off back to Iraq"?

[Anonymous No.9130790]

>>9130777
In the words of a horrific imbecile, not everything is black or white, your brain just makes it that way to cope with it.

[Anonymous No.9130791]

>>9130787

Why do we have a duty to help foreigners? Is helping foreigners worth it if it harms our own country?

[Anonymous No.9130794]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

[Anonymous No.9130804]

>>9130794

It makes my blood boil, absolutely appalling. And they say we're the privileged ones, when these "British" citizens had carte blanche, or should I say carte brun, to rape little girls.

[Anonymous No.9130806]

>>9130441
>The person dismissed as a ‘racist’ is not worthy of inclusion in the human family, and there is no need to debate with him. We can instead despise him. Thus, such people have no need to engage in a proper debate with their opponents. They subject them to what is in effect a citizen’s arrest on behalf of the Thought Police. The offender is carted off and never heard from again.
Really makes you think. The funny thing is this has been practised so heavily that a large group of people have started to identify with the racist label wrongfully assigned to them and by subversion make racism socially acceptable again.

[Anonymous No.9130807]

>>9130714
>>9130723
>>9130726
>>9130702
>>9130767
>>9130770

>Say everything has to be black and white, us + them for liberals
>Liberals proceed to formulate us vs them arguments

Never change.

>Reasonable people point out how much Europe is suffering from the mass refugee intake - Mass violent crime and sexual assaults aggressively down played by the media
>Liberals defend Mohammed's patriarchal, degenerate rape culture. Plethora of reasons why its the victim/western civilizations fault.
>Reasonable person presents statistics
>Liberal: " Your racist" " Go back to stormfront nazi"

The El classico

[Anonymous No.9130808]

>>9130806
>made racism socially acceptable again

ask Richard Spencer's face about that, cuck

[Anonymous No.9130810]

>>9130568
Chomsky has no meme power.

Zizzy oozes the stuff like a poison arrow frog.

[Anonymous No.9130812]

>>9130701

>and went through my "we should be an authoritarian fascist empire :D" state when I was a teenager.

No you didn't. You're lying right now. Admit it.

Why do you do this? Do you doubt your position and efficacy to defend it so much that you feel compelled to lie?

[Anonymous No.9130813]

>>9130810
https://youtu.be/VcHc54Z_b3w

verily

[Anonymous No.9130815]

>>9130806

>citizen’s arrest on behalf of the Thought Police

That's good, I'm stealing that one.

[Anonymous No.9130817]

>>9130812
>No you didn't

where'd you learn how to read minds?

[Anonymous No.9130820]

>>9130817

>being coy in response

I knew it. Why would you lie about such a basic thing? Do you not see how telling that is that you refuse to be honest at even the most basic of levels?

[Anonymous No.9130826]

>>9130807
>point out the hypocrisy of your posts
>"YOU SWEDE KEK LIBERAL SJW KEK PEDO"

The El classico.

[Anonymous No.9130827]

>>9130813

>stameena training device!

[Anonymous No.9130829]

Do you see it /lit/? Was Hitch a memelord?

[Anonymous No.9130831]

>>9130812
>>9130820
I absolutely did. Do you have an argument to present here, or are you willing to let neutral viewers assume you know more about my childhood than myself?

And how is this guy being "coy" for asking you the most obvious basic question, how the fuck can you know what I was like? You are so certain and convinced of it, because you are a self indoctrinated husk.

You will grow out of it. Its not even hard, all it takes is being happy. No joke, when the times get good for you personally, you will break out of this.

[Anonymous No.9130834]

>>9130787

>This is what modern liberals think conservatism vs liberalism boils down to.

conservatism: Hey guys we haven't managed to kill off the entire species yet and the majority of people have access to medicine/food/education!!

liberalism: We must change all of this.

[Anonymous No.9130836]

>>9130791
>is it worth it to help others

Yes, nigga, you are THAT selfish.

[Anonymous No.9130840]

>>9130836
>Ignoring the last half of anon's post.

[Anonymous No.9130842]

>>9130829

I always knew he was a pseud. This confirms it.

[Anonymous No.9130843]

>>9130834
>liberalism is the political doctrine demanding the removal of medicine, food and education from the equation, so we can kill the entire species

Citation Needed.

[Anonymous No.9130846]

>>9130829
breddy good taste

[Anonymous No.9130847]

>>9130840
>i don't want to pay 5% more tax to ensure you dont get beheaded for refusing the call for jihad

This is the definition of being selfish.

[Anonymous No.9130851]

>>9130831

You've actually gotten yourself so mad you had to recreate your childhood.

top kek

[Anonymous No.9130854]

>>9130836

I pay my taxes, I donate to charity, I hold the door open for people. What more is required?

[Anonymous No.9130858]

>>9130854
Not sending atheist families back to a jihad warzone, because thats where they were born, so I guess they should deal with it. And then crying when they get butchered, and using their corpses as statistics to not allow the next refugee in as well.

[Anonymous No.9130860]

>>9130843

Liberalism is a threat to the stability that conservatism created.

Liberalism = selfish because its willing to create turmoil/risk in order to impose its ideologies on an already well functioning society.

Easy enough to understand dindu??

[Anonymous No.9130864]

>>9130858
If you actually think the majority of refugees are atheist you're beyond help

[Anonymous No.9130865]

>>9130864
>your example doesn't apply to everyone everywhere

Okay. That was never the intention, and it doesn't make you smart to point it out.
Now how about those arguments?

[Anonymous No.9130868]

>>9130831

>I absolutely did.

I don't believe you.

You can keep affirming this and being passive aggressive about "unhappy husks" and all that, l but I simply don't believe you. I think you like to be passive aggressive and dishonest with people.

[Anonymous No.9130870]

>>9130860
>progress is bad, because we aren't currently dying, so why change?

Thank Zeus some half-ape a long time ago took upon himself to use the liberal principles and start cooking food rather than eating it raw. BUT UGG NUGG, WHAT IF THE FIRE POISONS IT? YOU DOOM US ALL!!!

[Anonymous No.9130872]

>>9130858

Look you retard, we can't even get priority status for Christians and Yazidis, not in Canada. We are importing the Jihadists, not atheists.

[Anonymous No.9130877]

>>9130851

>You've actually gotten yourself so mad you had to recreate your childhood.

l i b e r a l i s m

[Anonymous No.9130878]

>>9130868
>anything that conflicts with my dumb ideology and stereotypes is a lie

wow...

[Anonymous No.9130879]

>>9130851
>>9130877
>let me tell you how you felt

We are done here, you are obviously delusional and any neutral reader will see it.
Seek help;

[Anonymous No.9130888]

>>9130878

No. It's just that anon can intuit character in different ways when they talk to people. You can too. Especially if you've been here a while. This guy was lying about his childhood for convenience because he wanted a quick mimic repartee off the last poster and now feels compelled to maintain the lie.

>>9130879

You like to be passive aggressive and dishonest with people.

[Anonymous No.9130896]

>>9130787

What has Iraq ever done for the world?

[Anonymous No.9130905]

>>9130879

Let me put on my special glasses with "truth lens" installed!

>We are done here

You've challenged my world views and made me so mad to a level where i cannot stand it any longer.

>you are obviously delusional and any neutral reader will see it

I cannot provide a sufficient argument to challenge your own. Hopefully someone will agree with me.

>Seek help

Help me

[Anonymous No.9130928]

>>9130554
>believing an accelerationist

[Anonymous No.9131164]

>>9130834
>conservatism: Hey guys we haven't managed to kill off the entire species yet and the majority of people have access to medicine/food/education!!

>hate the EPA, hate any efforts to curb climate change, would sell their own mother to big oil/gas/coal, hate public education, hate public health care

all that stuff happened IN SPITE OF conservatism

[Anonymous No.9131214]

>>9130879
go back to twitter

[Anonymous No.9131221]

>>9130858
How do we establish which people are persecuted atheists (or Christians you disgusting person)? And what persecution are those people facing in Turkey, Hungary or any other nation they flee across?

[Anonymous No.9131228]

>>9131221
>calls others disgusting for religious discrimination
>himself discriminates by implying muslims can't be victims of the war in their area

They don't have to be christians, you disgusting person. Anyone who lives in a warzone, and doesn't want to live in a warzone, should be able to temporarily stay in a country that can afford him. Its international law.

[Anonymous No.9131329]

>>9131228
No. International law states that you must stay and seek refuge in the first safe country.

[Anonymous No.9131337]

>>9131329
Yes, and then the first safe country said it can't take no more, so the second safe country took over. And the same happened. Thus its called the "refugee crisis", because the refugees are so many that the nearby states can't take them. Thats why they aren't all in Turkey and Greece.

>b-b-but saudi arabia and israel
Are shit states, and should be judged harshly and diplomatically attacked for refusing to take people.
Them being shit doesn't make the law invalid. One person being a fag doesn't mean all should be.

[Anonymous No.9131351]

Not voting
or voting third party candidate
has identical consequences to
voting for the winner.

So unless you voted Hillary, your vote went to Trump.

[Anonymous No.9131356]

>>9131337
It's called the "refugee crises" to cover up for the fact that they're all economic migrants heading to welfare states.

Besides, Europe already can't cope with the people it has, what can they do for >1,500,000 more people? How can Britain, who can't even heal all its own sick take on hundreds of thousands of sick from another country? Same with France and jobs. And housing is an issue across the entire continent.

Should refugees get preference above the nationals, and if so, why should the nationals accept this?

[Anonymous No.9131360]

>>9131356
Refugees are living in shacks in concentration camps, this isn't related to the housing crisis whatsoever.
They don't compete for the same buildings.

[Anonymous No.9131369]

>>9131360
>concentration camps

Nice use of emotive language.

>his isn't related to the housing crisis whatsoever.

So should they stay in the "concentration camps" indefinitely? If so, what do you do when those camps fill up? Make more camps? Where?

>They don't compete for the same buildings.
Well, no, there's no "competition" at all. That's the point. Unless you think they should stay in "concentration camps" forever, the state will have to put them elsewhere, and where else if not houses?

[Anonymous No.9131371]

>>9131356
>How can Britain, who can't even heal all its own sick

>do everything you can to destroy the nhs
>bitch that nhs isn't working

d e v i l i s h

[Anonymous No.9131376]

>>9131369
They stay in the concentration camps (the camps, where refugees are concentrated in) until the war is over, then they can go home. They don't need to be given citizenship unless the state wants to.

If you can't support more, you move them along. The planet sure as fuck can support a couple of million homeless people.

[Anonymous No.9131393]

>>9131371
I'm sure the mass immigration over the last few decades and the baby boom from this has nothing to do with the struggle for beds and school places.

NHS has no troubles in places not targetted for mass immigration.

>>9131376
>They stay in the concentration camps (the camps, where refugees are concentrated in) until the war is over

Define "the war is over."

> then they can go home
And if the millions of young men don't want to go?

>They don't need to be given citizenship unless the state wants to.
They'll be given citizenship because there'll be no infrastructure to take them back. Those boats go one way, and you know it.

>If you can't support more, you move them along.
OK, where to after Britain and Sweden? Iceland?

>The planet sure as fuck can support a couple of million homeless people.
And here I was thinking you were being compassionate.

[Anonymous No.9131407]

>>9131393
>I'm sure the mass immigration over the last few decades and the baby boom from this has nothing to do with the struggle for beds and school places.
>NHS has no troubles in places not targetted for mass immigration.

wrong

[Anonymous No.9131415]

>>9130402
In his most political work, he makes it clear that he prefers democrats in poor districts that legitimately try to better their districts, and above all are competent in governing while not being self serving or giving ground to capitalists or racialists in a 60s-70s context, not a modern post-structural one.

[Anonymous No.9131421]

>>9131393
You make no arguments.

>Define "the war is over."
There are institutions to define when the conflict is over, and its not 4chan.
Not related to the issue of compassion anyways.

>And if the millions of young men don't want to go?
Those who have to go and don't want to go will be dealt with as all illegals are, according to law.
Not related to the issue of compassion anyways.

>They'll be given citizenship because there'll be no infrastructure to take them back. Those boats go one way, and you know it.
Implying implications with NO ARGUMENTS. Saying "you know i am right" doesn't make you right.
Even if you were (you aren't) the answer isn't related to the issue of compassion anyways.

>OK, where to after Britain and Sweden? Iceland?
>And here I was thinking you were being compassionate.
Not arguments whatsoever. Europe has a population of 800 millions, it can take a couple of million people in to live at bare minimum standard under surveillance. This is factual. There is wealth and infrastructure to do so.

[Anonymous No.9131462]

>>9130402
Hitchens would of held his nose and obviously went for Clinton since he was a neocon.

>>9131356
>It's called the "refugee crises" to cover up for the fact that they're all economic migrants heading to welfare states.
There is pretty obviously a lot of war going on, it isn't a simulation, you didn't see this amount of human migration 20 years ago.

>Besides, Europe already can't cope with the people it has, what can they do for >1,500,000 more people? How can Britain, who can't even heal all its own sick take on hundreds of thousands of sick from another country? Same with France and jobs. And housing is an issue across the entire continent.
Europe is the richest continent on the planet but they decided to elect in conservative governments that would guarantee lowering living standards for ideological reasons and you have housing issues because of NIMBYism and government regulations that prevent building affordable housing because of "muh skylines".

>Should refugees get preference above the nationals, and if so, why should the nationals accept this?
Nationals can vote to kick every foreigner out and be left with an ageing population and conservative governments that implement austerity programs.

Free movement will always mean people will go to where there are more opportunities, that's how markets work. Unless you heavily invest into developing the third world people are going to try to escape.

[Anonymous No.9131495]

>>9131337
>Yes, and then the first safe country said it can't take no more, so the second safe country took over. And the same happened
This is not what happened, where did you ever get this information? Are you American?

>>9131228
Big words considering you brought up religious persecution.

[Anonymous No.9131500]

>>9131495
Turkey has more refugees than all of the EU combined. This is exactly what happened.
Greece is overflowing too, and can't handle it economically, so they let them move on.

Do you get your news from /pol/?

[Anonymous No.9131551]

>>9131500
Tell me which are the countries closest to Turkey, Greece or Syria and do they include Germany or Sweden?

There are literally people coming directly to Germany from their homes in Syria or North Africa. They don't get passed along from overflowing refugee camp to refugee camp. They don't overflow from border to border, from country to country. If you illegally cross European borders and then go on a cross European journey to the most comfortable place you are not a refugee, you're a migrant.

[Anonymous No.9131560]

>>9131551
>balkans are full
>hungary and austria are full
>germany vocal about having capacity
>WHY ARE THEY GOING TO GERMANY ITS A VACATION THEY ARE TOURISTS NOT REFUGEES

Retard.

[Anonymous No.9131567]

>>9131551

yes you are a refugee you retard, because you're running away from wartorn 21st century dresden to a country that you view as a viable place to live

[Anonymous No.9131594]

>>9131567
> a viable place to live

So they're migrants.

>>9131560
Hungary just shut its boarder because it doesn't want hundreds of thousands of fighting-age males swarming the country.

>>9131500
Greece can't handle anything economically.

>>9131462
You're acting as if you know what you're talking about, but then you use the term "affordable housing". If you're a BTR-er then £500,000 is affordable.

And there's nothing wrong with an aging population when expansive growth is not over. Having a smaller population is the answer, not a larger one.

>Free movement will always mean people will go to where there are more opportunities
Hence why people are against free movement. Those "opportunities" don't spring out of the air, they are created by people, and those people expect the fruits to belong to their own children.

>>9131421
Forcibly removing people is a violation of their human rights, anon.

>Europe has a population of 800 millions, it can take a couple of million people in to live at bare minimum standard
if they lower the standards of living of the natives they could easily take in many 10s of millions more.

>There is wealth and infrastructure to do so
I thought we had monumental debt?

[Anonymous No.9131597]

>>9131594
>is not over
Meant to say "is now over."

[Anonymous No.9131616]

>>9131594
>So they're migrants.

brilliant, refugees actually don't exist because to become refugees they have to move from one place to another and that makes them migrants

[Anonymous No.9131626]

>>9131616
Seeking refuge makes you a refugee.

Seeking "a viable place to live" makes you a migrant.

[Anonymous No.9131635]

>>9131626
refuge = a viable place to live
because guess what, the country they're fleeing from has stopped being exactly that - livable

[Anonymous No.9131662]

>>9131635
"Liveable" or "viable"?

[Anonymous No.9131669]

>>9131635

Then why move all the way through Europe to reach one specific place that fits very specific demands? Isn't a place of refuge already enough?

[Anonymous No.9131703]

>>9131462

>The Titanic has a huge hole in its hull! It's sinking!
>Well m8, you might as well punch a few holes in that hull :^)

[Anonymous No.9131708]

>>9131662
both, who gives a fuck

>>9131669
what you're trying to say is that a refugee isn't a person who flees their country because of a threat to their life but a person who flees their country because of a threat to their life AND flees to the closest non-threatening country AND will return to his country of origin as soon as the conditions that caused his flight cease (AKA he must live in a tent and must not get a job for the duration of his stay in the host country)
which is not the definition of a refugee

[Anonymous No.9131723]

>>9131708
>AND flees to the closest non-threatening country
Which is neither Germany, Britain, nor Sweden.

>will return to his country of origin

You actually think they'll go back, don't you? You've already admitted that Europe is richer and better than their home country, so why would they leave, war or no war?

> he must live in a tent
Shouldn't they have something something more solid if they're going to be there until there's no war in the Middle East?

[Anonymous No.9131725]

>>9131708

>a person who flees their country because of a threat to their life AND flees to the closest non-threatening country AND will return to his country of origin as soon as the conditions that caused his flight cease (AKA he must live in a tent and must not get a job for the duration of his stay in the host country)

Not who you're responding to, but that was LITERALLY the definition of 'refugee' until very recently, before people lost their fucking minds in 2015/16.

[Anonymous No.9131743]

>>9131723
1. I'm not the guy you were arguing with earlier.
2. Your points are premised on both of us agreeing that your definition of a refugee is true, which we don't.

>>9131725
>Not who you're responding to, but that was LITERALLY the definition of 'refugee' until very recently, before people lost their fucking minds in 2015/16.
I'm gonna need a citation or something.

[Anonymous No.9131757]

>>9131594
>You're acting as if you know what you're talking about, but then you use the term "affordable housing". If you're a BTR-er then £500,000 is affordable.
I'm not European but you mentioned housing issues, I meant most of your issues come from having so many heavy regulations around housing. Housing shouldn't be that expensive unless you want to discourage people from started families.

>And there's nothing wrong with an aging population when expansive growth is not over. Having a smaller population is the answer, not a larger one.
When more and more of your population can't work and have to live off those that are young enough this will start to become more of a problem.

>Hence why people are against free movement. Those "opportunities" don't spring out of the air, they are created by people, and those people expect the fruits to belong to their own children.
Free movement today is the only answer; no one else is offering an alternative. Protectionism will just aggravate every issue that already exists. Unless you impose stricter and stricter controls those opportunities will move as you shrink and become more irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.9131767]

>>9131757

>Protectionism will just aggravate every issue that already exists.

People keep saying this, but it has a great track record.

Globalists are just buttblasted that their Star Trek-esque 'one world/govt/etc' utopia is loosing its appeal in the face of reality.

[Anonymous No.9131809]

>>9131743

>I'm gonna need a citation or something.

You need to set aside your insistence upon legalese and realize that pre-2015/16, a refugee was generally understood in most Western nations (and perhaps the world) to be:

>a person who flees their country because of a threat to their life AND flees to the closest non-threatening country AND will return to his country of origin as soon as the conditions that caused his flight cease

Needless to say the EU/UNCHR/etc have politically charged and intentionally rather limited definitions, rarely going beyond "someone who flees terror/etc" - but that's de jure. I'm talking de facto.

[Anonymous No.9131842]

good thread everyone

[Anonymous No.9131868]

>>9131809

You make a claim, I ask for some kind of proof and then you accuse me of "insisting on legalese" and say that the "general opinion" was this or that and I'm supposed to trust your word for it. Besides, even if you're right it doesn't have anything to do with whether someone is a refugee or not. According to my definition, which is in concert with the actual definition, they are. According to yours they're not.

[Anonymous No.9131912]

>>9131868

So you believe:

1) A refugee should be free to flee to a country of their choosing.

2) Said country should be obligated to oblige them.

3) A refugee should have no obligation to return to their native country, even if normality is restored - or better yet - if it actually ends up in a BETTER state than it was in before they fled.

Alright, good luck convincing people. You'll need it.

[Anonymous No.9131945]

>>9131912

That is the definition of a refugee.
I'm not out to convince anyone.