PDA

View Full Version : Faroe Islands Has World's Highest Rate of Adoptions



Aptrgangr
Saturday, October 27th, 2007, 07:16 AM
Faroe Islands has world's highest rate of adoptions

Just 48,000 people live in the Faroe Islands, including children from Ethiopia, Korea and India, who are welcomed with open arms in this remote Atlantic archipelago where adoption rates are the world's highest.

Among the newest citizens is Anna Maria, who has just turned four. Two years ago, Anna Maria was adopted from a New Delhi orphanage by two lawyers from the Faroe Islands. Her brother Ludvik, seven months older, was born in Bulgaria.
A Danish autonomous territory, the Faroe Islands has the highest number of adopted children in the world in proportion to the population, according to Mette Garnes, a social worker at DanAdopt, one of two Danish adoption centres.

With 10 to 15 children adopted each year from Bolivia, Bulgaria, China, Ethiopia, India, South Africa, South Korea and Vietnam, the isolated and remote Faroe Islands have an unusually multiethnic population.
'In terms of appearances, it may look like a multiethnic mosaic, but these children are fully-fledged Faroese and considered as such from the day they arrive there.
'They are not immigrants or foreigners', says Anna Maria's father Heoein Poulsen.

A dozen adoptions a year may not sound like much. In relative terms however, it amounts to four times more than in France or Denmark, according to official statistics from those countries.
Yet surprisingly, the archipelago has a strong birth rate, with women giving birth to an average of 2.6 children.
'Everybody wants to have children,' says Mr Poulsen, who heads a support group for parents hoping to adopt.

He is fighting to get Faroese authorities to raise state allowances to adoptive parents from the current €6,600 per adoption. Adopting a child can cost parents up to €20,000.
'But there's no price tag for a child for us, we can't imagine life without children,' says Mr Poulsen wife Birita Ludviksdoettir, who was unable to have her own children.
The couple waited two years for their adoption to go through.
'The day we came home with Anna Maria and Ludvik was the happiest day of my life. We were met at the airport by our friends and family carrying flags and bouquets of flowers, as if we were heroes," Ms Ludviksdoettir recalls.
'We were finally a family, and here, maybe more than in any other country, children are paramount,' she says.

For Mr Poulsen, who drops his children off at a municipal daycare outside the town every morning, the Faroe Islands is a paradise for children, who live close to nature and their extended families and friends in a peaceful environment with no crime.
The two children appear to have settled well into their new surroundings.
At the beginning, some of their friends were a little curious about their brown skin, but after that they were quickly 'adopted', according to Kristina Soemark who works at the daycare centre.

Like the two lawyers, 60-year-old Knut Gray also believes adopting his children was the best gift ever.
One of the first islanders to adopt children from India in the 1980s, Mr Gray says he and his wife Solrun 'absolutely' wanted to have kids.
Life without daughters Guunva, 23, and Anna, 21, would have been empty, he said. And, he says, his daughters never experienced any racism.
RTÉ News: Faroe Islands has world's highest rate of adoptions (http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1026/adoption.html)


"They are not immigrants or foreigners", they are immigrants and foreigners and no Faorese, no matter what these perverts say.



The leftists' ideal family becomes more and more true, thank's to this insane immigration policy.

Ĉmeric
Saturday, October 27th, 2007, 03:24 PM
:evil0000: This is so wrong. If these people want colored children so badly they should move to Ethiopia or India. These adoptions affect the whole population of the Faoroe Islands - which has a unique genetic heritage - and these selfish bastards are destroying it. I can think of no reason for adopting foreign children except to create "diversity". And if these people really do care about the children , think about this; for the amount of money it would cost to raise a child in a Western nation, a person could sponsor several children in an orphanage or foster home in the Third World. Madonna for example could feed, cloth & education a hundred Malawi children with the same amount of money she will spend on her adopted child from Malawi - but of course she would then not be able to use the child as an accessory to her own personna.

There are bastards in my own area who have adopted colored children. I know of at least three local families that have adopted Chinese girls & two of them already had biological children of their own! Yester the (Evansville) Courier Press ran a story on White families from a Lutheran congregation adopting children from Haitihttp://www.courierpress.com/news/2007/oct/25/haiti-evansville-createfamily-bonds-nine-area-to/. I have a cousin who adopted a tri-racial boy of Mexican or Dominican heritage because she & her husband were childless. Her sister 's daughter became a foster mother & adopted a Negro infant. Both boys were born in the US so they didn't add to the diversity of America but they did increase it within my own family :mad:. I think both women should have concentrated on having their own children when they were in their 20s or early 30s instead of waiting until they were 40 & having no option but to adopt non-White throwaway children.

Jónurin
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 12:23 AM
The earth belongs to no one. The fact that I happen to be born in the Faroes by sheer coincidence doesn't mean the place belongs to me. The same goes for America.

Oswiu
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 12:35 AM
The earth belongs to no one. The fact that I happen to be born in the Faroes by sheer coincidence doesn't mean the place belongs to me. The same goes for America.

That sort of reasoning doesn't do any favours to its proponents when an outsider comes along with different reasoning on the lines of "The Earth belongs to me, Allah said so!"

The Faroes do belong to you, though perhaps you might need to be shown this by the threat of having them taken from you. :(

Schmetterling
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 01:06 AM
I think the people whose ancestors had a part in building a country have the right to call it "their own". If countries belonged to no one, anyone could just come and invade them or oppress them as they wish, with the excuse that "it doesn't belong to anyone". And the inhabitants couldn't reclaim independence because the country "wasn't theirs to begin with". I think ownership is important, because it gives people the right to defend what's theirs.

ChaosLord
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 10:22 PM
The problem lies in the third world countries. The people there produce litters of unwanted bastards and live out of their own means in war-torn areas KNOWING that the U.S. and European adoption agencies will take care of their baggage. The problem with immigration AND adoption of these people to the Faroe islands is very destructive considering the fact that the islands are inhabited by modest number of genetically homogenous people. If this insidious trend continues the Faroe Islands will be a third world island inundated with asians and negroes within twenty years who'll have little, to no respect for the host culture.

stormlord
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 11:01 PM
The problem lies in the third world countries. The people there produce litters of unwanted bastards and live out of their own means in war-torn areas KNOWING that the U.S. and European adoption agencies will take care of their baggage. The problem with immigration AND adoption of these people to the Faroe islands is very destructive considering the fact that the islands are inhabited by modest number of genetically homogenous people. If this insidious trend continues the Faroe Islands will be a third world island inundated with asians and negroes within twenty years who'll have little, to no respect for the host culture.


It is terrible but it will nonetheless be an interesting social experiment that may well prove leftist propaganda wrong. The excuse we always have for the failure of non whites in our societies is cultural differences, social exclusion, racism, deprivation etc. It will be interesting to see what happens when all the non whites come to the country as small children and are raised by well off Faroese families and immersed in the culture from day one. Maybe it will disprove the importance of nurture over nature.

Cythraul
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 08:49 AM
It'll be great! The kids can grow up being taught the songs their Viking "ancestors" used to sing, they can be taught the language their "ancestors" used to speak and generally learn about their "ancestors"...

...except that they're not their ancestors, no matter how much the Faroese parents would educate them to the contrary.

Actually, I feel sorry for the children. They didn't ask to be swept away from their ancestral homelands to a strange windy island and forced into an alien culture. Multi-culturalists really are blind to the realities of their agenda.

Aptrgangr
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 09:11 PM
(...)
Actually, I feel sorry for the children. They didn't ask to be swept away from their ancestral homelands to a strange windy island and forced into an alien culture. Multi-culturalists really are blind to the realities of their agenda.

They are not blind, they purposefully destroy their ethnicity and homeland. Do not underestimate ideologically blindfolded people, they do anything to prove their ideology was right and go over corpes of their own children if needed. Are you aware the most staunch supporters of islamization of our homelands are leftists/liberal women- those that would be tortured and killed for their leftist/liberal views in Muslim countries very quickly? Islam will uproot liberalism, neither Muslims nor other non-Europid people living here will maintain this ideology of multiculturalism and liberal-democracy, should they become a majority here - either because they loath it's inheriting decadence, or because they simply can not maintain any complicated political structure.
The reason why we our own nemesis is rooted in the culture of guilt.

_
An article I recommend:
http://derafsh-kaviyani.com/english/islamsusefulidiots.html

Cythraul
Thursday, May 22nd, 2008, 09:25 AM
They are not blind, they purposefully destroy their ethnicity and homeland. Do not underestimate ideologically blindfolded people, they do anything to prove their ideology was right and go over corpes of their own children is needed.
Really? I made a thread a while back about multi-culturalism as a conspiracy of the elite, but I've never identified a conspiracy among the common people. It seems to me that rather than deliberately sabotage their own blood and culture, the public are merely too short-sighted to see what their idea of "progress" will lead to. If you could show them a vision of Europe in 100 years time - various countries under Sharia law, diluted bloodlines, compromised cultures and mass-urbanization - they'd be horrified and cease to support such leftist ideologies. I've never really thought leftists had a sinister agenda, just the inability to foresee the long-term consequences of their actions.

Interesting thought though. I'd never considered the possibility of multi-culturalism as a sado-masochistic movement.

Drakkar
Friday, May 23rd, 2008, 04:37 AM
The earth belongs to no one. The fact that I happen to be born in the Faroes by sheer coincidence doesn't mean the place belongs to me. The same goes for America.

I just don't understand this reasoning at all. There is obviously a reality of nation and race, whether the idea is uncomfortable to you or not. If this is confronted by the adversity of adoption, which is the intent on bringing in foreigners, these realities are distorted but are still evident. I have talked again and again with adopted American children who have identity problems, so I think it's safe for me to say that it is not a good idea. Diversity is one of the most overrated concepts of all time. The Faroese have to learn that they are not many but enough to flourish in the country that their ancestors created. How, I don't know, but it wouldn't help for a government to come along that understands this dilemma that their people face.

Jónurin
Friday, May 23rd, 2008, 06:11 PM
Dakkar:


I just don't understand this reasoning at all. There is obviously a reality of nation and race, whether the idea is uncomfortable to you or not. If this is confronted by the adversity of adoption, which is the intent on bringing in foreigners, these realities are distorted but are still evident. I have talked again and again with adopted American children who have identity problems, so I think it's safe for me to say that it is not a good idea. Diversity is one of the most overrated concepts of all time. The Faroese have to learn that they are not many but enough to flourish in the country that their ancestors created. How, I don't know, but it wouldn't help for a government to come along that understands this dilemma that their people face.

You talk about "the reality of nation and race". First of all nation: a nation isn't "real". A nation is a pragmatic system, created by people, and if this system gets in the way of human lives, then it is our duty to change that system. Race: I don't believe in difference of races. Yes, it is true that black people run faster than white people, and white people swim faster than black people, but who cares? We can all live together. In fact, a black person can donate an organ to a white person. This is how small the difference is. But if that weren't the case, it still wouldn't make a difference to me.

My encounter with people of different "races" (read: people with different skin and eye colour) has for the most part been beneficial. Growing up with a few adopted children at school and elsewhere around me has only made me more tolerant, and travelling to Africa has lifted my spirits, because the people there are so immensely cheerful. I would recommend it to anyone suffering from depression. My point: all "races" have something to conribute.

Dagna
Friday, May 23rd, 2008, 06:28 PM
Dakkar:



You talk about "the reality of nation and race". First of all nation: a nation isn't "real". A nation is a pragmatic system, created by people, and if this system gets in the way of human lives, then it is our duty to change that system. Race: I don't believe in difference of races. Yes, it is true that black people run faster than white people, and white people swim faster than black people, but who cares? We can all live together. In fact, a black person can donate an organ to a white person. This is how small the difference is. But if that weren't the case, it still wouldn't make a difference to me.

My encounter with people of different "races" (read: people with different skin and eye colour) has for the most part been beneficial. Growing up with a few adopted children at school and elsewhere around me has only made me more tolerant, and travelling to Africa has lifted my spirits, because the people there are so immensely cheerful. I would recommend it to anyone suffering from depression. My point: all "races" have something to conribute.
I agree with you, somewhat. I oppose racism. However, I believe that bringing foreigners into a foreign country and asking them to convert to the lifestyle and habits of the locals counts as racism too. This has happened in my country. Blacks from Africa were brought in as slaves. Today, their African heritage has been wiped out. They are "African-Americans", but other than their skin color and bone shape, there is nothing African left about them. They do not speak an African language and they do not practice the customs practiced by Africans in Africa. We have robbed them of their heritage. I do not believe that is right, because I am a preservationist and I wish for the heritage of all people to be valued and preserved. Today's "democratic" countries are slowly turning into totalitarian regimes, like National Socialist Germany was. The National Socialist took Slavic children (Poles, for example) and turned them into "Aryans". They robbed them of their heritage. This is not acceptable to me. Today, rich people and others who want to make "charity acts" and look good socially, adopt children from third world countries and Eastern Europe. While they enjoy a better material lifestyle there, they grow up as something they are not and lose their heritage forever. Thus, I believe adoptions should only be allowed between ethnically and culturally similar countries (for example, the Scandinavian countries).

Janus
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 12:54 AM
Dakkar:



You talk about "the reality of nation and race". First of all nation: a nation isn't "real". A nation is a pragmatic system, created by people, and if this system gets in the way of human lives, then it is our duty to change that system. Race: I don't believe in difference of races. Yes, it is true that black people run faster than white people, and white people swim faster than black people, but who cares? We can all live together. In fact, a black person can donate an organ to a white person. This is how small the difference is. But if that weren't the case, it still wouldn't make a difference to me.

My encounter with people of different "races" (read: people with different skin and eye colour) has for the most part been beneficial. Growing up with a few adopted children at school and elsewhere around me has only made me more tolerant, and travelling to Africa has lifted my spirits, because the people there are so immensely cheerful. I would recommend it to anyone suffering from depression. My point: all "races" have something to conribute.

A functioning nation is more than just a pragmatic system. It's an identification factor based on common culture, language, ideology and/or heritage. These things are necessary to create cohesion among people. Recent harvard studies have showed that the more "diverse" a neighborhood is the smaller is the cohesion among them hence these similarities to identify with something bigger than yourself are necessary.
Race is also more than just skincolour. Race is scientificly spoken a population with significant morphological, genetic or ethological differences to other populations of the same species. There are a lot of small differences in bones, muscles, hormons,face, skin, reasoning and so on that make them a different race, though still the same species.


Africa would be one of the most boring places for me and if I had money I'd prefer to travel to somewhere in Europe or Asia to experience some more sophisticated cultures with own rich history, architecture and with.... proper toilets (yeah, I need them as somebody suffering from an inflammatory bowel disease).

Drakkar
Sunday, June 1st, 2008, 06:03 AM
You talk about "the reality of nation and race". First of all nation: a nation isn't "real". A nation is a pragmatic system, created by people, and if this system gets in the way of human lives, then it is our duty to change that system.
So would you propose destroying a system composed of a unique society and culture if it "got in the way of human lives"? If so, it sounds like you prefer humanism over any kind of ethnic and cultural preservation.


Race: I don't believe in difference of races. Yes, it is true that black people run faster than white people, and white people swim faster than black people, but who cares? We can all live together. In fact, a black person can donate an organ to a white person. This is how small the difference is. But if that weren't the case, it still wouldn't make a difference to me. My encounter with people of different "races" (read: people with different skin and eye colour) has for the most part been beneficial. Growing up with a few adopted children at school and elsewhere around me has only made me more tolerant, and travelling to Africa has lifted my spirits, because the people there are so immensely cheerful. I would recommend it to anyone suffering from depression. My point: all "races" have something to conribute.

Your stereotypes and overall understanding of the human race confirms your ignorance on the matter. Furthermore, the focus here is not racial understanding; it is protecting what has been used to identify a certain people for centuries.

Jónurin
Sunday, June 1st, 2008, 04:11 PM
Drakkar:

So would you propose destroying a system composed of a unique society and culture if it "got in the way of human lives"?

I wasn't talking about destruction of systems at all, at least that's not what I meant. Rather, I was talking about changing or improving the system. By the way, in case you haven't noticed, the system changes all the time, regardless of conscious human intervention. The point I was trying to make is: The system is there for the people, and not the other way around.


If so, it sounds like you prefer humanism over any kind of ethnic and cultural preservation.

The quality of life for any human being is determined by a lot of different values, some of which conflict with each other at times. Sometimes culture gets in the way of people, and that's when the individual has to decide what matters the most. I choose people. Don't know whether or not that makes me a humanist.


Your stereotypes and overall understanding of the human race confirms your ignorance on the matter. Furthermore, the focus here is not racial understanding; it is protecting what has been used to identify a certain people for centuries.

As I said above, what is used to identify a nation or culture changes all the time. the idea that cultural or national identity is something eternal is an illusion. This doesn't mean that cultural traits are not worth preserving, though. And by the way, if we're not talking about race, what is the problem with adoption then? If the child is brought to the Faroes at the age of 4 months, what difference does it make to culture?

Even if someone with a different cultural background moves to the Faroes, it doesn't mean the "unique" system is destroyed. On the contrary, in many cases the culture is enriched. Many immigrants have contributed to my definition of contemporary Faroese culture.

Janus
Sunday, June 1st, 2008, 09:02 PM
Drakkar:


I wasn't talking about destruction of systems at all, at least that's not what I meant. Rather, I was talking about changing or improving the system. By the way, in case you haven't noticed, the system changes all the time, regardless of conscious human intervention. The point I was trying to make is: The system is there for the people, and not the other way around.
How is mass immigration as it has happened on continental Europe for decades already improving the system? Cultural systems are indeed something fluid but that does not necessarily mean the anti-cultural behaviour we have nowadays among many not-old people. Like Kennedy said, don't ask what your country does for you but ask what you can do for your country. As I said already, nations are more than just pragmatic groups.




The quality of life for any human being is determined by a lot of different values, some of which conflict with each other at times. Sometimes culture gets in the way of people, and that's when the individual has to decide what matters the most. I choose people. Don't know whether or not that makes me a humanist.
It's right that cultures have sometimes negative aspects,too, like it was once widespread to throw people into the bog to drown there. However, as a preservationist, we should should keep the positive and neutral aspects of our culture atleast. No need to throw them into the bog,too. The individual does not necessarily mean most, that's just this way in individualism but there are more people than just yourself and you should think about them,too.



And by the way, if we're not talking about race, what is the problem with adoption then? If the child is brought to the Faroes at the age of 4 months, what difference does it make to culture?
Race is also a part of the collective heritage of a nation and I don't really understand why they adopt them anyways. Aren't there any not so alien people to adopt?Even if blacks or indians in a domestic way they will always search for their roots somewhen...




Even if someone with a different cultural background moves to the Faroes, it doesn't mean the "unique" system is destroyed. On the contrary, in many cases the culture is enriched. Many immigrants have contributed to my definition of contemporary Faroese culture.

If it's just someone, it will not destroy the culture, of course, but it will eventually if that person won't come alone and a lot more will follow. Just look at England's urban areas. They are basicly lost and most immigrants there are not interested at all to constribute something to English culture and do not even identify as such.

Drakkar
Monday, June 2nd, 2008, 10:24 PM
If it's just someone, it will not destroy the culture, of course, but it will eventually if that person won't come alone and a lot more will follow. Just look at England's urban areas. They are basicly lost and most immigrants there are not interested at all to constribute something to English culture and do not even identify as such.Well, remember that old article that reported most non-whites in England and the rest of Great Britain do value their "Britishness," so that's not entirely true.

Even with all this national pride, however, they still practice their customs and culture from back home. Plus, they can never look English or Scottish etc. so it never completely works out for them or for the multicultural governments of today.

My point is that this is a failed experiment and a sense of national belonging is strongest with those of old stock, once you take away the multicultural propaganda telling them that it is not okay to love where you're from. Other cultures and massive immigration does not enrich a country, it only detracts from its original inlaid culture. The degree in how culture is wiped away depends on how much immigration is allowed, basically. It's really that simple. When you see it up close and in person, I promise this will not seem so unrealistic to you.

Nagelfar
Thursday, June 5th, 2008, 10:36 AM
....If you could show them a vision of Europe in 100 years time - various countries under Sharia law, diluted bloodlines, compromised cultures and mass-urbanization - they'd be horrified and cease to support such leftist ideologies.

Some years ago, I was happening through the television channels and came across an episode of a talk show, Jenny Jones, it had something to do with racism. The host read some statistic that in 20 years time whites would no longer be the majority race in the United States but be a minority; the whole audience, mostly white, became wildly excited & cheered enthusiastically.

Cythraul
Thursday, June 5th, 2008, 12:59 PM
Some years ago, I was happening through the television channels and came across an episode of a talk show, Jenny Jones, it had something to do with racism. The host read some statistic that in 20 years time whites would no longer be the majority race in the United States but be a minority; the whole audience, mostly white, became wildly excited & cheered enthusiastically.
Wow! Now that's self-hate on another level... which is just as counter-productive as hating other races.

Old Winter
Thursday, June 5th, 2008, 11:24 PM
For Mr Poulsen, who drops his children off at a municipal daycare outside the town every morning, the Faroe Islands is a paradise for children, who live close to nature and their extended families and friends in a peaceful environment with no crime.


that will change when your adopted kids get older, wonder who you will blame it on...

Some Dutch folks from a all white village adopted some child from Africa, he grew up there from when he was a baby, when he was lets say around 20 i believe he raped a white girl in the village, something that never happened there... its in the beast, good luck Faroe Islands !

Drakkar
Friday, June 6th, 2008, 02:26 AM
Wow! Now that's self-hate on another level... which is just as counter-productive as hating other races.
But it will only further fuel the white nationalist movement, because all the things that they warn about are really coming true.

Diarmuid
Tuesday, June 10th, 2008, 10:22 PM
This comes as a shock to me. Who would've thought that the Faroe Islands would have the world's highest adoption rate? :confused: This is a threat to Faroese genetic, ethnic, and cultural preservation for sure.

I agree with what Ĉmeric said, this is very selfish of the people adopting the third world children. If they truly wanted to help the third world they could help feed and cloth many more kids in those countries instead of turning one third worlder into a spoiled brat. It's this sort of behavior by Westerners that only encouarages people in third world countries to have loads of children. And then they expect our countries to take them in whilst they get paid for giving up the kid, all in the same moment that our people become more and more diluted and our culture imposed on people who could care less about it. What happens when these kids get older and find out who they are and where they come from? Something tells me (and I have seen this) that they will not identify with the people/culture who adopted them.

Jónurin
Wednesday, June 11th, 2008, 06:28 PM
Cythraul:

Wow! Now that's self-hate on another level... which is just as counter-productive as hating other races.Self-hate? what? Since when has the white race become one unit?

Dietsehamer:

Some Dutch folks from a all white village adopted some child from Africa, he grew up there from when he was a baby, when he was lets say around 20 i believe he raped a white girl in the village, something that never happened there... its in the beast, good luck Faroe Islands !Have you done a scientific survey, doctor? Of one person? I can tell you another story: A white austrian kept his daughter in a cellar for 20 years (or so) in order to have sex with her. Good luck Austria, it is full of white austrians who keep their daughters in cellars. Or is it? No, of course not.

Drakkar:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cythraul View Post
Wow! Now that's self-hate on another level... which is just as counter-productive as hating other races.But it will only further fuel the white nationalist movement, because all the things that they warn about are really coming true.Honestly, why is it a problem that it's coming true?

Diarmuid:

This comes as a shock to me. Who would've thought that the Faroe Islands would have the world's highest adoption rate? This is a threat to Faroese genetic, ethnic, and cultural preservation for sure.The Faroese genetic heritage is only valuable for scientific reasons. Adoptions are not a threat to ethnic and cultural preservation. How many times do I have to say this? How can a 4 month year old baby that doesn't have a culture be a threat to a culture in any way?


I agree with what Ĉmeric said, this is very selfish of the people adopting the third world children. If they truly wanted to help the third world they could help feed and cloth many more kids in those countries instead of turning one third worlder into a spoiled brat. It's this sort of behavior by Westerners that only encouarages people in third world countries to have loads of children. And then they expect our countries to take them in whilst they get paid for giving up the kid, all in the same moment that our people become more and more diluted and our culture imposed on people who could care less about it.I don't think their only reason is to help third world countries. Some people can't have children. But I agree that adoption is not a solution to the problems in the third world.


What happens when these kids get older and find out who they are and where they come from? Something tells me (and I have seen this) that they will not identify with the people/culture who adopted them.This depends on the people surrounding the child. If the child is brought up in a good family that truly values other races equally to their own, then there is no problem at all, and I'm telling you, I know great success stories. Adopted children have grown up to become invaluable to the Faroese community and culture. Sadly, though, I also know stories about adopted children brought up in families that didn't take care of them properly, and I'm convinced that this is where the real problem lies. Parents of adopted children have great resonsibility, but then again, all parents have great responsibility.

The problem arises when people adopt children and don't treat them as if they were their own. Their justification is "the child would be worse off if we didn't adopt it", but this is no good justification. People who adopt need to understand that welfare is relative, and if adopted children see that they don't get treated in the same way as their non-adopted siblings, they will feel that they don't belong. But of course, this is not only the case with adopted children, it happens in families with only biological children as well. Johnny Cash is perhaps one good example.

Old Winter
Wednesday, June 11th, 2008, 07:52 PM
Cythraul:

*cut*



About 90% of the victims of interracial crimes are white.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide trends in the U.S.: Trends by race
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm


The Netherlands: young rapists:
The rapists are always none-white immigrants.
The victims are always white girls.
http://frontpage.fok.nl/news.fok?id=14236


Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway - Authorities Look the Other Way
http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/02/muslim-rape-epidemic-in-sweden-and.html

Lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm, who has investigated violent crimes in Svea high court, found that 85 per cent of the convicted rapists were born on foreign soil or by foreign parents.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Fjordman51213.htm

statistics from Sweden National Council for Crime Prevention show that the number of reported rapes against children is on the rise. The figures have nearly doubled in the last ten years: 467 rapes against children under the age of 15 were reported in 2004 compared with 258 in 1995. Legal proceedings continue this week in a case involving a 13 year old girl from Motala who was been subjected to a group rape by four Kurdish Muslims, who raped the girl for hours and even took photos of doing so

While 65 percent of those charged with rape are classed as coming from a non-western background, this segment makes up only 14.3 percent of Oslo's population. Norwegian women were the victims in 80 percent of the cases, with 20 percent being women of foreign background.

An incredibly revealing article that tells us all we need to know about the multiculturalist fetish in Europe and some parts of North America, not to mention the need for change within Islam. Apparently, the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet reported that 65 percent of rapes of Norwegian women were performed by "non-Western" immigrants.

Western Muslims' Racist Rape Spree
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/009563.php


Most rapes in West Europe and Scandinavia are done by none-white immigrants, these are facts you can not deny unless you live somewhere very very very isolated like yourself.

Jónurin
Thursday, June 12th, 2008, 11:07 AM
Are you trying to say that white people are less likely to be criminals than other races? Do you live in this world? What about the slave trade? What about the holocaust? What about the Vietnam War? Guantanamo? Just now, I'm watching a documentary on a Canada's genocide of the Native people. The list just doesn't end... :confused:

Don't talk to me about "white nationalism" whatever that's supposed to mean. I'm not proud of my race.

Richard
Thursday, June 12th, 2008, 06:58 PM
Are you trying to say that white people are less likely to be criminals than other races? Do you live in this world? What about the slave trade? What about the holocaust? What about the Vietnam War? Guantanamo? Just now, I'm watching a documentary on a Canada's genocide of the Native people. The list just doesn't end... :confused:

Don't talk to me about "white nationalism" whatever that's supposed to mean. I'm not proud of my race.

All races conquer, all races wage war. Many ethnic groups and cultures have been destroyed, either through genocide or conquest. Often times human nature leads to some very unsettling historical facts. It is nothing to get hung up on. The Amerindians in Canada and USA, not to mention practically everywhere else in the New World, are still alive. You are fortunate to live in Faroe Islands Jónurin, because you probably experienced little diversity. Wait until the division brought by different ethnic groups and races begins to cause a negative impact on your society.

Diarmuid
Thursday, June 12th, 2008, 08:42 PM
The Faroese genetic heritage is only valuable for scientific reasons. Adoptions are not a threat to ethnic and cultural preservation. How many times do I have to say this? How can a 4 month year old baby that doesn't have a culture be a threat to a culture in any way?

So basically you think the Faroese/Nordic genetic and racial uniqueness is worthless? You are descended from Nordic Vikings (and probably some Celtic people taken from Ireland or Britain). If you think the adopted kids are going to pass on that genetic legacy then you're nuts. Culture and language can be learned, but without the genetic/racial/ancestral link I think it means very little to the person. Don't you see that if this continues, coupled with immigration and racial mixing there won't be a distinct Faroese identity any more?


Are you trying to say that white people are less likely to be criminals than other races? Do you live in this world? What about the slave trade? What about the holocaust? What about the Vietnam War? Guantanamo? Just now, I'm watching a documentary on a Canada's genocide of the Native people. The list just doesn't end... :confused:

Don't talk to me about "white nationalism" whatever that's supposed to mean. I'm not proud of my race.

He's not saying that white people can't be criminals. But look at the facts, statistics prove that non-European people living in Western countries (who are minorities) are way overrepresented when it comes to crime. What more do you need? And don't try and tell me that it's society that makes many non-Europeans into criminals, that's no excuse.

By the way, you sound like you think white Europeans are the only people who have done bad things..

Jónurin
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 05:52 AM
Richard:

All races conquer, all races wage war. Many ethnic groups and cultures have been destroyed, either through genocide or conquest. Often times human nature leads to some very unsettling historical facts. It is nothing to get hung up on. The Amerindians in Canada and USA, not to mention practically everywhere else in the New World, are still alive. You are fortunate to live in Faroe Islands Jónurin, because you probably experienced little diversity. Wait until the division brought by different ethnic groups and races begins to cause a negative impact on your society.

The only reason why racial diversity is a problem is because people see it as a problem. As long as people fear what is different, there will be a problem, because when people act out of fear, what is feared eventually becomes true. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. If you alienate someone, they will eventually become alien, whether or not they were to start with.

Have I not experienced racial diversity? There were two people in my class in primary school with a different skin colour. These two fit in perfectly with the others. It would never cross my innocent childish mind that these two didn't belong because of their skin type. It was just a curious little variation, and I can't imagine what my class would have been without them. There would be something missing.
There are more people of different races. In my extended group of friends about 1 in 10 is mixed or adopted. I am actually ashamed of even discussing the possibility that they are polluting my "unique" race. Some of them have become popular cultural figures in the Faroes.
In addition, I spent 3 months in Africa with two friends, and the "diversity" I experienced there was nothing short of life-changing. In fact, I got along with the natives much better than with some white missionaries.

Diarmuid:

So basically you think the Faroese/Nordic genetic and racial uniqueness is worthless? You are descended from Nordic Vikings (and probably some Celtic people taken from Ireland or Britain). If you think the adopted kids are going to pass on that genetic legacy then you're nuts.

I don't think any race is worthless. Just because I value other races equally doesn't mean I think my race is worthless.

So I'm descended from vikings... Big deal. That doesn't change the fact that I have to earn my own dignity. And then again, many of the vikings were brutal murderers, and that's not something to be proud of.


Culture and language can be learned, but without the genetic/racial/ancestral link I think it means very little to the person. Don't you see that if this continues, coupled with immigration and racial mixing there won't be a distinct Faroese identity any more?

Here is something you've misunderstood: Yes, there is probably a distinct Faroese identity, but you have to understand that the Faroese identity is not the same today as it was yesterday. Culture, no matter how unique, changes all the time regardless of mixing with other cultures. Faroese people 1000 years ago did not speak modern Faroese, they spoke old norse, and chain dancing used to be something that all of Europe had in common. My point is: What we define as being unique Faroese culture changes all the time, regardless of how many or few children we adopt. As I've said before, some immigrants and adopted people have helped define my understanding of contemporary Faroese culture. I think I'm better qualified at deciding what Faroese culture is about.

Culture is not static. This is true of all cultures. Wake up and face the reality.


He's not saying that white people can't be criminals. But look at the facts, statistics prove that non-European people living in Western countries (who are minorities) are way overrepresented when it comes to crime. What more do you need? And don't try and tell me that it's society that makes many non-Europeans into criminals, that's no excuse.

It's no one's fault. The governments of Europe have taken more immigrants than they can handle. Let them in in small amounts, I say, and help them integrate to society properly.


By the way, you sound like you think white Europeans are the only people who have done bad things..

It might have sounded that way, but that's not what I meant. I had to react to Dietsehamer's strong generalisations with some counter examples.

Cuchulain
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 06:11 AM
The earth belongs to no one. The fact that I happen to be born in the Faroes by sheer coincidence doesn't mean the place belongs to me. The same goes for America.

The people who lived on what is now my backyard 300 years had that attitude too. Now they're basically extinct, and I'm grilling steaks in it.

Bloem
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 09:53 AM
A little diversity has never killed anyone. There shouldn't be too much immigration and the immigrants should integrate well in society. That kind of diversity is bearable and even enriching. The racists just take their paranoia to the highest levels. A person with a different skin colour who is raised as a native from infancy will not act like an Asian for example, because he won't be familiar with anything other than the culture he grew up in. The racists' problem isn't that these foreigners won't fit in, their problem is that they look at themselves as superior and consume themselves with hatred for those who are unlike them.

Oswiu
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 03:41 PM
A little diversity has never killed anyone. There shouldn't be too much immigration and the immigrants should integrate well in society. That kind of diversity is bearable and even enriching.
Whenever ONE native European has been killed by a third world immigrant, there has been TOO much diversity. Thousands of Pakistanis live in my town, I went to school with them. I experienced no enrichment. I just get to hear endless whinging about 'racism', smell curry, read job adverts in the paper for Bangla/Gujerati/Urdu speaking council jobs, and discover that there are areas of my town where I cannot walk in safety. You will say that this is the result of too much immigration, but how do you draw a line? "Oh, but you can't prevent my wife-cousin from joining me here, can you? Or my poor widowed grandmother (who will greatly 'enrich' your health service)?" There's no clear place to draw a line; once you begin down this road, you end up at the end of it.


The racists just take their paranoia to the highest levels. A person with a different skin colour who is raised as a native from infancy will not act like an Asian for example, because he won't be familiar with anything other than the culture he grew up in.
Such people are cut from their roots. They will always be conscious of being different from their adoptive people. It's there every time they look in the mirror. They are not going to care deeply about people who lived in their adopted home centuries ago, and won't be too bothered if people living there centuries hence are completely different. They often become resentful, and identify with radical movements like Islam.


The racists' problem isn't that these foreigners won't fit in, their problem is that they look at themselves as superior and consume themselves with hatred for those who are unlike them.
Have you REALLY ever met anyone like that? I haven't. They are dreamt up by the Multiculturalists to further their aims.

Self-hate? what? Since when has the white race become one unit?
Since liberal educationalists and broadcasters began to blacken its name. The White Race exists in the minds of third world immigrants who don't give a damn if you're from a country completely lacking in a colonial past, that didn't conquer and exploit their ancestors, like Finland for example. They just see the white skin, and rejoice to lord it over their former 'oppressors' (as they have been taught to view them by their Marxist teachers). Rape of white girls is a classic result of this.

The Faroese genetic heritage is only valuable for scientific reasons.
I'm afraid such self-effacing objectivity is only really a feature of Europeans.


How can a 4 month year old baby that doesn't have a culture be a threat to a culture in any way?
Because it will become a 24 year old man one day, and may very well react to his peculiar situation in the way I described above.

If the child is brought up in a good family that truly values other races equally to their own, then there is no problem at all, and I'm telling you, I know great success stories.
Too many IFs. We don't live in the ideal world.




[QUOTE=Jónurin;69839]The only reason why racial diversity is a problem is because people see it as a problem.
This is the most significant and relevant thing you have said.


As long as people fear what is different, there will be a problem, because when people act out of fear, what is feared eventually becomes true.
I don't buy the liberal slogan "You don't like something because you FEAR it", but you hint at a fundamental TRUTH:
People dislike what is different. People see racial diversity as a problem. People will always be like this, it's human nature.
You will therefore need to change human nature. Can it be done? They've been trying for decades to change it. And this has meant sustained brainwashing on an unforeseen scale. And guess what, I'm still here! And I'm not the only one.

Third world immigration into European lands may have been the biggest mistake in human history. And I say 'may' as it often seems that those responsible for it knew full well what they were doing. In which case it becomes the biggest crime.

Ĉmeric
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 04:55 PM
A little diversity has never killed anyone. There shouldn't be too much immigration and the immigrants should integrate well in society. That kind of diversity is bearable and even enriching. The racists just take their paranoia to the highest levels. A person with a different skin colour who is raised as a native from infancy will not act like an Asian for example, because he won't be familiar with anything other than the culture he grew up in. The racists' problem isn't that these foreigners won't fit in, their problem is that they look at themselves as superior and consume themselves with hatred for those who are unlike them.

This sounds the like the sort of argument that would be made from the p.o.v. of an Asian immigrant.:rolleyes:

Deary
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 07:59 PM
Any immigration of foreigners is negative, whether they assimilate or not. They relentlessly and violently push their ideas on others when they don't. When they do (if they ever truly do), they have more access to integrate, and eventually, be so accepted as to as to marry into a people. Encouraging assimilation is encouraging foreigners to give up their country and culture for one they have little to no connection to. How's that for preservation? The only good diversity comes is when different people remain separate so they can best protect and preserve what is their own whereas everyone loses in a multicult world.

Bloem
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 08:07 PM
Whenever ONE native European has been killed by a third world immigrant, there has been TOO much diversity. Thousands of Pakistanis live in my town, I went to school with them. I experienced no enrichment. I just get to hear endless whinging about 'racism', smell curry, read job adverts in the paper for Bangla/Gujerati/Urdu speaking council jobs, and discover that there are areas of my town where I cannot walk in safety. You will say that this is the result of too much immigration, but how do you draw a line? "Oh, but you can't prevent my wife-cousin from joining me here, can you? Or my poor widowed grandmother (who will greatly 'enrich' your health service)?" There's no clear place to draw a line; once you begin down this road, you end up at the end of it.
There are plenty of "white" criminals as well. It has nothing to do with race. It has to do with poor education, bad social status, marginalisation and unproper treatment. Or do you get to see millions of "white" criminals from upper and middle class? Our governments just give leeway to the poorest of immigrants and they don't make enough efforts to integrate them. They discriminate against them at work so they are practically pushed to do dirty jobs. Besides, not all immigrants are like that. Some. You have a negative experience with them but judging all immigrants from your personal experience is faulty and often an argument used by racists. I have both positive and negative experience with them, and I learned not to generalised and throw everyone into the same pot.


Such people are cut from their roots. They will always be conscious of being different from their adoptive people.
A child who isn't a biological child might be conscious that he is adopted too. That's life.


It's there every time they look in the mirror. They are not going to care deeply about people who lived in their adopted home centuries ago, and won't be too bothered if people living there centuries hence are completely different. They often become resentful, and identify with radical movements like Islam.
Since when do you speak for them? I know Indonesian immigrants for example, who cherish the Dutch history and culture very much. They care deeply about this country because it's the country they grew up in for generations. They have absolutely no problem fitting in and my Dutch friends and I have absolutely no problem accepting them. The horror, for racists, that is.

All these arguments of "immigrants = criminals", "immigrants = radicals", etc. are just hasty, faulty generalisations made by racists, but when the same generalisations are made about whites, their colonial past, et al., racists are ready to jump and defend themselves and point out the faultiness of the arguments. It shows that racists have no logic and objectivity. No one is promoting full immigration at any costs, but you treat us as if we did.


This sounds the like the sort of argument that would be made from the p.o.v. of an Asian immigrant.:rolleyes:
Or from the p.o.v. of a non-hateful, open-minded Dutch person.


Any immigration of foreigners is negative, whether they assimilate or not. They relentlessly and violently push their ideas on others when they don't. When they do (if they ever truly do), they have more access to integrate, and eventually, be so accepted as to as to marry into a people. Encouraging assimilation is encouraging foreigners to give up their country and culture for one they have little to no connection to. How's that for preservation? The only good diversity comes is when different people remain separate so they can best protect and preserve what is their own whereas everyone loses in a multicult world.
Those who want to preserve their own values and cultures aren't obligated to come here and integrate. Immigrants who give up their countries and cultures have always existed. That's how your country, the USA was formed. Your ancestors didn't do the best job at preserving your cultures and languages, they created something new from the mingling. Assimilation is a natural phenomenon, it has always happened and will always happen. Or do you think ethnogenesis never happened and people don't have substratums and adstratums in their makeup?

Ĉmeric
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 08:34 PM
A little diversity has never killed anyone. There shouldn't be too much immigration and the immigrants should integrate well in society. That kind of diversity is bearable and even enriching.

This sounds so similar to the arguments made in 1965 by the supporters of the Immigration Act of 1965. And we all know what happened. It wasn't suppose to change the demographics of the US (so we were told). It's a multiculturalist argument. And just how is a little diversity defined? And why is it good?




The racists' problem isn't that these foreigners won't fit in, their problem is that they look at themselves as superior and consume themselves with hatred for those who are unlike them.



Racist as you use it is just a slur against those opposed to the transformation of their societies into multiracial heelholes for the benfit of a few, a way of trying to stifle debate on the subject. Just because we don't want them in our countries doesn't mean we feel superior to them -what is racist about being opposed to the colonization of your own country?

Your own opinions comes across a "racist". You imply that that the admixture of certain immigrants - I presume you mean some Asian groups - would be beneficial & an improvement to the basic Dutch bloodstock. If you truly are Dutch then you have a self-loathing image of the Dutch folk & feel your society is in need of enrichment from alien groups.

Old Winter
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 08:42 PM
Richard:


The only reason why racial diversity is a problem is because people see it as a problem. As long as people fear what is different, there will be a problem, because when people act out of fear, what is feared eventually becomes true. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. If you alienate someone, they will eventually become alien, whether or not they were to start with.

Have I not experienced racial diversity? There were two people in my class in primary school with a different skin colour. These two fit in perfectly with the others. It would never cross my innocent childish mind that these two didn't belong because of their skin type. It was just a curious little variation, and I can't imagine what my class would have been without them. There would be something missing.
There are more people of different races. In my extended group of friends about 1 in 10 is mixed or adopted. I am actually ashamed of even discussing the possibility that they are polluting my "unique" race. Some of them have become popular cultural figures in the Faroes.
In addition, I spent 3 months in Africa with two friends, and the "diversity" I experienced there was nothing short of life-changing. In fact, I got along with the natives much better than with some white missionaries.

Race is more then just skincolor, if it was only skincolor then Japanese would be of the white race as much as Dutch are.

Hindus can be very dark, the Hindus that we have in the Netherlands are one of the best immigrants we have compared to the very light brown/white Moroccans who are a plague here, if you think skincolor is what makes us react think again.



Diarmuid:


I don't think any race is worthless. Just because I value other races equally doesn't mean I think my race is worthless.

So I'm descended from vikings... Big deal. That doesn't change the fact that I have to earn my own dignity. And then again, many of the vikings were brutal murderers, and that's not something to be proud of.



Here is something you've misunderstood: Yes, there is probably a distinct Faroese identity, but you have to understand that the Faroese identity is not the same today as it was yesterday. Culture, no matter how unique, changes all the time regardless of mixing with other cultures. Faroese people 1000 years ago did not speak modern Faroese, they spoke old norse, and chain dancing used to be something that all of Europe had in common. My point is: What we define as being unique Faroese culture changes all the time, regardless of how many or few children we adopt. As I've said before, some immigrants and adopted people have helped define my understanding of contemporary Faroese culture. I think I'm better qualified at deciding what Faroese culture is about.

Culture is not static. This is true of all cultures. Wake up and face the reality.



It's no one's fault. The governments of Europe have taken more immigrants than they can handle. Let them in in small amounts, I say, and help them integrate to society properly.

*ahum*
Faroe Islands has world's highest rate of adoptions



It might have sounded that way, but that's not what I meant. I had to react to Dietsehamer's strong generalisations with some counter examples.

Vingolf
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 08:42 PM
Besides, not all immigrants are like that. Some. You have a negative experience with them but judging all immigrants from your personal experience is faulty and often an argument used by racists. I have both positive and negative experience with them, and I learned not to generalised and throw everyone into the same pot. [...] Since when do you speak for them? I know Indonesian immigrants for example, who cherish the Dutch history and culture very much. They care deeply about this country because it's the country they grew up in for generations. They have absolutely no problem fitting in and my Dutch friends and I have absolutely no problem accepting them.
Having a good time contradicting ourselves by generalizing, are we? ;)


It shows that racists have no logic and objectivity. No one is promoting full immigration at any costs, but you treat us as if we did. [...] Assimilation is a natural phenomenon, it has always happened and will always happen. Or do you think ethnogenesis never happened and people don't have substratums and adstratums in their makeup?
(suppressing a big yawn...). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy

Old Winter
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 08:55 PM
A little diversity has never killed anyone. There shouldn't be too much immigration and the immigrants should integrate well in society. That kind of diversity is bearable and even enriching. The racists just take their paranoia to the highest levels. A person with a different skin colour who is raised as a native from infancy will not act like an Asian for example, because he won't be familiar with anything other than the culture he grew up in. The racists' problem isn't that these foreigners won't fit in, their problem is that they look at themselves as superior and consume themselves with hatred for those who are unlike them.

You ignore the fact that most if not all racist murders and crimes in the Netherlands have and are still done by immigrants, even immigrants who kill and attack other immigrants because they are of another race.

All the loverboys (young men who force girls into prostitution) are all none-white immigrants from muslim and black lands.

Now then, who is the real racist here ?

I can work together with Chinese and Hindu people and be friends with them, but Moroccans ? those people hate everyone, they attacked a Hindu temple in Den Hague, are more and more known to attack Chinese people and of course the of the scale racism towards Dutch people because Moroccans think for some reason that they are superior aldo they have nothing that can get even close to the Dutch, Chinese and Hindu people.


There are plenty of "white" criminals as well. It has nothing to do with race. It has to do with poor education, bad social status, marginalisation and unproper treatment. Or do you get to see millions of "white" criminals from upper and middle class? Our governments just give leeway to the poorest of immigrants and they don't make enough efforts to integrate them. They discriminate against them at work so they are practically pushed to do dirty jobs. Besides, not all immigrants are like that. Some. You have a negative experience with them but judging all immigrants from your personal experience is faulty and often an argument used by racists. I have both positive and negative experience with them, and I learned not to generalised and throw everyone into the same pot.

poor ? poor ? for two years i worked in the middle of the city and every time i looked outside my window i saw young Moroccans, Turks and Blacks driving in expensive cars that even my dad can not buy, every time at times that most people have to work, i even saw one of them on tv being interviewed, he openly said he got all that because he was dealing in drugs, he got more money then most Dutch people have, was he arrested ? no, Moroccans say openly here that they control the streets, that they have the money and the criminal world in they're hands, that no one can and ever does shit to them because they are ''superior''...

Free vacations for immigrant criminals at some expensive hotel with a big pool in some foreign land on our tax money, did you ever hear that Dutch criminals even got 1% of that ? discrimination indeed, positive discrimination.

A police station was attacked by Moroccan youth, torch cars of the police and other people, what happened ? nothing, discrimination ? yes, against the Dutch people.

now, what did you say about racism ?



A child who isn't a biological child might be conscious that he is adopted too. That's life.


Since when do you speak for them? I know Indonesian immigrants for example, who cherish the Dutch history and culture very much. They care deeply about this country because it's the country they grew up in for generations. They have absolutely no problem fitting in and my Dutch friends and I have absolutely no problem accepting them. The horror, for racists, that is.

All these arguments of "immigrants = criminals", "immigrants = radicals", etc. are just hasty, faulty generalisations made by racists, but when the same generalisations are made about whites, their colonial past, et al., racists are ready to jump and defend themselves and point out the faultiness of the arguments. It shows that racists have no logic and objectivity. No one is promoting full immigration at any costs, but you treat us as if we did.

Why do you ignore all my facts and sources that i placed in this topic ? why do you ignore the fact that 55% of the prisoners in the Netherlands are not born here and then we are not even counting the none-Dutch who are born here, you must know this, you are in the Netherlands.



Or from the p.o.v. of a non-hateful, open-minded Dutch person.

Move to my city Rotterdam.



Those who want to preserve their own values and cultures aren't obligated to come here and integrate. Immigrants who give up their countries and cultures have always existed. That's how your country, the USA was formed. Your ancestors didn't do the best job at preserving your cultures and languages, they created something new from the mingling. Assimilation is a natural phenomenon, it has always happened and will always happen. Or do you think ethnogenesis never happened and people don't have substratums and adstratums in their makeup?

Cythraul
Friday, June 13th, 2008, 11:03 PM
the scale racism towards Dutch people because Moroccans think for some reason that they are superior aldo they have nothing that can get even close to the Dutch, Chinese and Hindu people.
May I suggest that this is due to their Islamicism. Islam teaches superiority, often violently so. I think that if the Morroccans had never adopted Islam they'd be a far more agreeable people.

Elysium
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 11:35 AM
May I suggest that this is due to their Islamicism. Islam teaches superiority, often violently so. I think that if the Morroccans had never adopted Islam they'd be a far more agreeable people.

I disagree. Predominantly Muslim countries do not have such thing. When they come to Western countries, our own people tell them what they are entitled to, what is racism, etc., etc. It obviously goes over as them being more privileged, because all immigrant groups since such programmes have been adopted have been annoying.

Old Winter
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 12:59 PM
May I suggest that this is due to their Islamicism. Islam teaches superiority, often violently so. I think that if the Morroccans had never adopted Islam they'd be a far more agreeable people.
Well that and the inbreeding part, i am not joking, a big part of them inbreed, so the children get more mentally unstable, entire villages have moved to my land that where 100% inbreed, generation on generation on generation, Dutch people have to work longer now before they can retire because the immigrants cost so much, but yes, Mohammed’s 9 year old Aisha was his family too, you can also see this with the Pakistanis, the Hindus do not inbreed but the Pakistanis do, what’s the difference ? one group is Muslim the other is not, they want to follow the footsteps of the prophet Mohammed so much that they even copy his perverted sex life.

Vingolf
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 01:14 PM
May I suggest that this is due to their Islamicism. Islam teaches superiority, often violently so. I think that if the Morroccans had never adopted Islam they'd be a far more agreeable people.
Islam is a universalistic, not an ethnocentric, religion. Middle Easterners have always belonged to some of the most hyper-ethnocentric, superiority-maniac tribes on this planet, the Biblical "chosenites" being the most obvious example. The Volksgeist goes deeper than ideology (religion).

Siebenbürgerin
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 05:15 PM
@Jónurin and the other diversity proponents. Diversity is when several ethnic groups live near each other, retaining their cultural and linguistic traits. It's not diversity when you take a child from a foreign country, bring him to a new one and raise him in a different culture from his original (native) one. By importing foreign children and raising them as Faroese, the original culture is killed off. I lived in a very ethnically mingled region all my life, with at least four ethnic groups sharing it: Romanians, Magyars, Germans and Gypsies. In the South there are also Tatars and Turkic peoples. It is very difficult to maintain specific cultures. Precisely because I am not a racist, I want the preservation of all ethnicities, cultures and languages. That can't be done by stealing the child's identity and giving him a new one. In my region I am lucky enough to have political support for the preservation of my culture and language, but other people don't so much. Integration is racist. The foreigner is basically told that his culture and language aren't good enough, so he must fit other standards.

Bloem
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 08:06 PM
This sounds so similar to the arguments made in 1965 by the supporters of the Immigration Act of 1965. And we all know what happened. It wasn't suppose to change the demographics of the US (so we were told). It's a multiculturalist argument. And just how is a little diversity defined? And why is it good?

Racist as you use it is just a slur against those opposed to the transformation of their societies into multiracial heelholes for the benfit of a few, a way of trying to stifle debate on the subject. Just because we don't want them in our countries doesn't mean we feel superior to them -what is racist about being opposed to the colonization of your own country?Come on, we both know that all this "it doesn't mean we feel superior to them" is a lie. Many people here voted that they believe the white race is superior and they subscribe to this very thought.


Your own opinions comes across a "racist". You imply that that the admixture of certain immigrants - I presume you mean some Asian groups - would be beneficial & an improvement to the basic Dutch bloodstock. If you truly are Dutch then you have a self-loathing image of the Dutch folk & feel your society is in need of enrichment from alien groups.Not really, I don't think in good/bad, black/white terms. There are things that happen and I choose to accept them. I am not a homosexual or think homosexuality is particularly "good" or think everyone should be homosexual, but I also accept the existence of homosexuality in this country and don't spew hatred against homosexuals.

There is nothing racist about it by the way, look up the term "racist" to see what it means.


You ignore the fact that most if not all racist murders and crimes in the Netherlands have and are still done by immigrants, even immigrants who kill and attack other immigrants because they are of another race.
See below about statistics.


All the loverboys (young men who force girls into prostitution) are all none-white immigrants from muslim and black lands.

Now then, who is the real racist here ?There are non-white girls forced into prostitution too.


I can work together with Chinese and Hindu people and be friends with them, but Moroccans ? those people hate everyone, they attacked a Hindu temple in Den Hague, are more and more known to attack Chinese people and of course the of the scale racism towards Dutch people because Moroccans think for some reason that they are superior aldo they have nothing that can get even close to the Dutch, Chinese and Hindu people.Some immgirants integrate better than others.


poor ? poor ? for two years i worked in the middle of the city and every time i looked outside my window i saw young Moroccans, Turks and Blacks driving in expensive cars that even my dad can not buy, every time at times that most people have to work, i even saw one of them on tv being interviewed, he openly said he got all that because he was dealing in drugs, he got more money then most Dutch people have, was he arrested ? no, Moroccans say openly here that they control the streets, that they have the money and the criminal world in they're hands, that no one can and ever does shit to them because they are ''superior''...Poor was only one factor, I named others.


Free vacations for immigrant criminals at some expensive hotel with a big pool in some foreign land on our tax money, did you ever hear that Dutch criminals even got 1% of that ? discrimination indeed, positive discrimination.Who says I approve of such things?


A police station was attacked by Moroccan youth, torch cars of the police and other people, what happened ? nothing, discrimination ? yes, against the Dutch people.

now, what did you say about racism ?Here you go again generalising. Now that is racism.


Why do you ignore all my facts and sources that i placed in this topic ? why do you ignore the fact that 55% of the prisoners in the Netherlands are not born here and then we are not even counting the none-Dutch who are born here, you must know this, you are in the Netherlands.I don't buy statistics and studies, they claim to represent everything but in reality they don't. it's the same as saying "60 % germans don't believe in democracy", it's not truly 60 %, the study is only based on a handful of people.

@ Vingolf, when you have some real arguments rather than ad hominems, I'm going to discuss with you too. Until then...

Jónurin
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 08:50 PM
Oswiu:

Too many IFs. We don't live in the ideal world.

Are you telling me I haven't witnessed successful adoptions? I've witnessed successful adoption stories, and I've witnessed unsuccessful ones. Guess what, in some of the unsuccessful adoption stories the adopted person was native Faroese, so don't tell me adoptions are unsuccessful because of racial differences. It ultimately comes down to the parents.


I don't buy the liberal slogan "You don't like something because you FEAR it", but you hint at a fundamental TRUTH:
People dislike what is different. People see racial diversity as a problem. People will always be like this, it's human nature.
You will therefore need to change human nature. Can it be done? They've been trying for decades to change it. And this has meant sustained brainwashing on an unforeseen scale. And guess what, I'm still here! And I'm not the only one.

Ok, here is what we agree upon: "SOME people see racial diversity as a problem". My reaction towards this fact is that I try to influence people to look at things differently.

What you do is a big mistake: From the fact that SOME people see racial diversity as a problem, you take the enourmous metaphysical leap that ALL people see racial diversity as a problem, and this will never change. You're basically saying that there's nothing we can do. But you're giving up too early.

Of course we can do something: we can try to change ourselves. We can do what Gandhi said: "You must be the change you wish to see in the world". Of course, one person cannot change the world, but the least you can do is try to change the one person you are in control of: yourself. First of all, you have to acknowledge that your disliking of other people is a disgrace. I cannot force you to acknowledge this, but I'm encouraging you. And it's for your own good, because you basically have no choice. Your surroundings are going to change from familiar to unfamiliar whether you like it or not, and this will happen regardless of immigration.

The Lawspeaker
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 08:57 PM
Oswiu:



Are you telling me I haven't witnessed successful adoptions? I've witnessed successful adoption stories, and I've witnessed unsuccessful ones. Guess what, in some of the unsuccessful adoption stories the adopted person was native Faroese, so don't tell me adoptions are unsuccessful because of racial differences. It ultimately comes down to the parents.


I don't think that it would be wise to adopt foreign children as long as local children still end up in foster homes (we have seen the same thing happen here with many Dutch children geiing stuck in foster homes, while "poor" African and Indian children get Dutch families -and I am a "victim" of that multicultural tidal wave in that respect. - I was raised by the State). And perhaps the country not accept them at all, because most of them will later on still feel alienated.





Ok, here is what we agree upon: "SOME people see racial diversity as a problem". My reaction towards this fact is that I try to influence people to look at things differently.


Agreed. Racism is a stupid thing that never made people any better and never will since it poisons their heart.



Of course we can do something: we can try to change ourselves. We can do what Gandhi said: "You must be the change you wish to see in the world". Of course, one person cannot change the world, but the least you can do is try to change the one person you are in control of: yourself. First of all, you have to acknowledge that your disliking of other people is a disgrace.
I think that mr. Gandhi was wise but naive. Good he kicked out the British without actually kicking them out but he couldn't stop the Hindu's and Muslims from slaughtering each other afterwards- eventhough he nearly killed himself in a desperate hunger strike.
I doubt whether the world can be changed but we need more sound policies. Yes- I believe in a Fortress Europe: we cannot solve the existence of the Third World by importing them wholesale and we cannot take care of their children- since they only produce them in such numbers to make sure that we pity them enough to squander and plunder our own treasuries and resources to feed them, while the Third World came into existence only after their own incredible dumb, corrupt, outdated (downright idiotic, pseudo-socialistic/nationalistic/ racist) policies.

Oswiu
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 09:34 PM
There are plenty of "white" criminals as well.
Wow, what a great reason to import more criminals from outside! :rolleyes:


Or do you get to see millions of "white" criminals from upper and middle class?
Don't you have televised parliamentary debates in your country? :p

Our governments just give leeway to the poorest of immigrants and they don't make enough efforts to integrate them.
Yep. It needs EFFORT. Effort translates as money and time. All of which could be better spent on improving the lives of our countrymen.

Oswiu:
Are you telling me I haven't witnessed successful adoptions? I've witnessed successful adoption stories, and I've witnessed unsuccessful ones.
Again, we have the advocation of wasting effort on outsiders that could better be used on native kids. The good adoptive parents get their fashionable dark little baby, while Faroese kids get lumped with less suitable couples. Great. :rolleyes:

Ok, here is what we agree upon: "SOME people see racial diversity as a problem". My reaction towards this fact is that I try to influence people to look at things differently.

What you do is a big mistake: From the fact that SOME people see racial diversity as a problem, you take the enourmous metaphysical leap that ALL people see racial diversity as a problem, and this will never change.
How can I be making this leap, when I daily have to contend with people like yourself? I said nothing about ALL people, just the fact that there will always be some people like me, and worse than me. You will never eliminate them all, and as long as they exist, you shouldn't force things on them that they don't want.

You're basically saying that there's nothing we can do. But you're giving up too early.
I have to make an effort? To create your fantasy world?

Of course we can do something: we can try to change ourselves. We can do what Gandhi said: "You must be the change you wish to see in the world". Of course, one person cannot change the world, but the least you can do is try to change the one person you are in control of: yourself.
And where do we end up? The same place we started in - with people like you who are 'good' and 'evil' people like me. The opposition to immigration will always exist. There will always be antagonisms. Murders. Rapes. All of which could SO easily have been avoided.

You get a situation in which a large section of your population is seriously disaffected. Why do you want this? Why cause the trouble? If in a family, some members want to do something which the others are adamantly opposed to, should those who want this force it upon the others? The family will break up if they do. Why can this not be translated onto the national level?

First of all, you have to acknowledge that your disliking of other people is a disgrace. I cannot force you to acknowledge this, but I'm encouraging you. And it's for your own good, because you basically have no choice.
Thankyou for taking my choice away from me, as our governments have been doing for decades. And you expect us not to moan at it, even to be grateful. :rolleyes:


Your surroundings are going to change from familiar to unfamiliar whether you like it or not, and this will happen regardless of immigration.
And we're not allowed to push for the sort of change we want. Thanks a bunch, mate.

Bloem
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 09:49 PM
Wow, what a great reason to import more criminals from outside! :rolleyes:
No, just a counter argument to the ignorant racist view that immigration = crime.

No one said we should import criminals by the way, only well-behaving people should be welcome.


Don't you have televised parliamentary debates in your country? :p
Sure we do.


Yep. It needs EFFORT. Effort translates as money and time. All of which could be better spent on improving the lives of our countrymen.
It can be spent on that too. It doesn't have to be either or. Our country always opened its doors to visitors and guests, and we will continue to do so, whether you approve of it, or not.


How can I be making this leap, when I daily have to contend with people like yourself? I said nothing about ALL people, just the fact that there will always be some people like me, and worse than me. You will never eliminate them all, and as long as they exist, you shouldn't force things on them that they don't want.
Racists don't seem to apply that kind of thinking to themselves. They want to eradicate other races from their countries and thus force their world view on the more open-minded, pro-diversity people.

The Lawspeaker
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 10:00 PM
No, just a counter argument to the ignorant racist view that immigration = crime.

No one said we should import criminals by the way, only well-behaving people should be welcome.

Agreed. I wonder how fast some of the worst racists would run when their own country went down the drain:D
I can just close my eyes and see them knocking with their fists on the gates of some Asian border- begging for entry.
But I do think that the number of admissions should be kept very low- why ? Because we can no longer allow ourselves to let in just everybody. We should do the same thing as Japan does: only when they have a proper job here or when they are married to a native.




Sure we do.


It can be spent on that too. It doesn't have to be either or. Our country always opened its doors to visitors and guests, and we will continue to do so, whether you approve of it, or not.


Yes we should increase funds to educational programs for the valuable immigrants (entrepreneurs, highly skilled labourers, artisans and the foreign partners of our natives- note: that does not include brides being brought in by our non-natives), the not so valuable immigrants should just be turned down and and brought outside EU territory.

I would like to request the next posters to return to the original meaning of the thread. This is not about immigration but about adoption (o.k I realise that that is also a part of immigration)

Vingolf
Saturday, June 14th, 2008, 10:35 PM
Vingolf, when you have some real arguments rather than ad hominems, I'm going to discuss with you too. Until then...
What ad hominems? The fact that you're constantly contradicting yourself?

Flash Voyager
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 01:50 AM
Here we have a similar situation with Chinese children. What I really abhor is that most of these people are becoming adoptive parents more on the grounds that it is trendy rather than actually caring about the welfare of these children. Last year, I saw a interview-laden documentary about adopted children(mostly Chinese) and the adoptive parents made countless allusions to how it's such a modern phenomenon and how "cool" it is, they even went as far as mentioning Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. They were implicitly saying that essentially their a bunch of irresponsible conformists.

Jónurin
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 11:53 AM
Again, we have the advocation of wasting effort on outsiders that could better be used on native kids. The good adoptive parents get their fashionable dark little baby, while Faroese kids get lumped with less suitable couples. Great. :rolleyes:

It's not like the adoption agency decides that native Faroese kids get the bad parents. That is obviously not true. They have no way of being certain whether parents are good or not. Sometimes when a Native Faroese child needs adoption, the best solution at the time seems to be a close relative of one of the parents, but this obviously no guarantee for a successful adoption.
Even if we knew how good the adoptive parents would turn out to be, it would still be morally wrong to give foreign children to the "bad" parents.


How can I be making this leap, when I daily have to contend with people like yourself? I said nothing about ALL people, just the fact that there will always be some people like me, and worse than me. You will never eliminate them all, and as long as they exist, you shouldn't force things on them that they don't want. Yes, but I have the right to try and persuade you and others to think otherwise. That's what freedom of speech is about. I have my opinions, and I can tell people what my opinions are. One of them is: people should try to accept other people, even if it's difficult sometimes. Very simple.


I have to make an effort? To create your fantasy world?Yes, you have to make an effort.


And where do we end up? The same place we started in - with people like you who are 'good' and 'evil' people like me. The opposition to immigration will always exist. There will always be antagonisms. Murders. Rapes. All of which could SO easily have been avoided. I don't care if you think that opposition to immigration will always exist, and by the way, there's your metaphysical leap again. I don't see how you can know that opposition to immigration will always exist, and even if you're right, the fight against racism is still a cause worth supporting.
It sounds like you think immigration is the route to all evil. That's just not true.


You get a situation in which a large section of your population is seriously disaffected. Why do you want this? Why cause the trouble? If in a family, some members want to do something which the others are adamantly opposed to, should those who want this force it upon the others? The family will break up if they do. Why can this not be translated onto the national level? Because some of us family members want to translate the family metaphor not just onto the national level, but even further: onto the global level. Imagine this family scenario: two people, let's call them A and B, both have kids from different marriages, and they decide to get married and become a family. The children of parent A are now faced with a situation of which they have no control: They are going to live with the children of parent B, whether they like it or not. What is the best solution for the children of parent A: (1) to tell A that they are dissatisfied and to try and break up the relationship between A and B OR (2) to try and make friends with the children of parent B?
I would say that (2) is a better solution for the family as a whole and for the children of parent A.


Thankyou for taking my choice away from me, as our governments have been doing for decades. And you expect us not to moan at it, even to be grateful. :rolleyes: Well, here you are faced with a situation which is difficult to change, so I suppose that you try and make the most of it. That's what we all have to do sometimes, but of course, that doesn't mean you should accept status quo at any cost. I just don't think that a racist attitude will get you very far.


And we're not allowed to push for the sort of change we want. Thanks a bunch, mate.Obviously, I don't have much power other than the power of persuasion, so what I think doesn't affect you in a direct way. Don't worry, mate ;)


Here we have a similar situation with Chinese children. What I really abhor is that most of these people are becoming adoptive parents more on the grounds that it is trendy rather than actually caring about these children. Last year, I saw a interview-laden documentary about adopted children(mostly Chinese) and the adoptive parents made countless allusions to how it's such a modern phenomenon and how "cool" it is, they even went as far as mentioning Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. They were implicitly saying that essentially their a bunch of irresponsible conformists.

I agree that when parents decide to adopt because it's fun or because they want to rescue a child from poverty and nothing more, they are not responsible enough, and should not adopt. Adoption is a serious matter, and if people don't understand this, they should not be allowed to adopt.

I forgot to mention that I think having children is equally serious, and the only difference is some people fail to realise it.

Siebenbürgerin
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 12:08 PM
Yes, but I have the right to try and persuade you and others to think otherwise. That's what freedom of speech is about. I have my opinions, and I can tell people what my opinions are. One of them is: people should try to accept other people, even if it's difficult sometimes. Very simple.
I totally agree on this. But I think in the current system, our societies don't accept other people as they are, Jónurin. Because in society they ask the immigrant to integrate, to leave his/her old values behind and become like the Faroese/English/Germans and the list could go on. We don't allow Muslims to wear Burquas for example. And an Asian or African or Arab child who is raised as Faroese has the chance to be raised like his ancestors taken away.

Jónurin
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 05:02 PM
I totally agree on this. But I think in the current system, our societies don't accept other people as they are, Jónurin. Because in society they ask the immigrant to integrate, to leave his/her old values behind and become like the Faroese/English/Germans and the list could go on. We don't allow Muslims to wear Burquas for example. And an Asian or African or Arab child who is raised as Faroese has the chance to be raised like his ancestors taken away.

I can see your point. This is the classic conflict between culture and development, and it has no easy solution. The world would definately be a boring place if everyone was the same, but at the same time, we need development, we need to cooperate more and more with people very different from ourselves, as the world becomes more globalised, and we are facing enourmous problems of poverty, pollution and climate change at this moment that that cannot be solved without global cooperation.

Development might be a threat to cultural preservation, but thet are both necessary. The key is to find the right balance between the two.

I can tell you an example of this problem in the Faroes:

On the island Sandoy there are about 2000 inhabitants. They say that their island will become deserted in the near future unless a tunnel is made that connects Sandoy to Streymoy (on which Tórshavn lies). This would be sad, they say, because Sandoy is a unique place. They claim that if a tunnel the tunnel is made, then more people will want to live on the island, because there is lots of space and it's a good place for families with children to live.

What I'm wondering is the following: Will the uniqueness of Sandoy be preserved after the tunnel is made, when lots of people will migrate to the island? But when I think about it, the answer to this problem is obvious: If they won't make the tunnel, there will be no-one living on Sandoy in some years, and there will of course be no uniqueness to discuss.

Some loss of culture is an inevitable consequence of human development, and if there wasn't any development, we wouldn't have reached the digital age, we wouldn't even have reached as far as the vikings did.

Ossi
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 05:06 PM
Adopting foreigners into a country they don't belong is TREASON to that country and this comes from a nationalist, not a racist because I am not a propenent of the "white race" garbage. I equally reject white Slavs and Mediterraneans in my country as I reject Chinese and Africans.

The Lawspeaker
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 05:09 PM
Adopting foreigners into a country they don't belong is TREASON to that country and this comes from a nationalist, not a racist because I am not a propenent of the "white race" garbage. I equally reject white Slavs and Mediterraneans in my country as I reject Chinese and Africans.
You mean- in a sense that it forces orphaned or otherwise problematic local children into an orphanage while "orphaned", "poor" foreign children get a family ?

Yes, I'd consider that to be treason too. It's completely unncesary. I don't think that we can care for the entire world (eventhough some members of our societies would bloody well love that- as long as they don't have to pay the cost themselves.)

Old Winter
Sunday, June 15th, 2008, 07:51 PM
Come on, we both know that all this "it doesn't mean we feel superior to them" is a lie. Many people here voted that they believe the white race is superior and they subscribe to this very thought.

Not really, I don't think in good/bad, black/white terms. There are things that happen and I choose to accept them. I am not a homosexual or think homosexuality is particularly "good" or think everyone should be homosexual, but I also accept the existence of homosexuality in this country and don't spew hatred against homosexuals.

There is nothing racist about it by the way, look up the term "racist" to see what it means.


See below about statistics.

There are non-white girls forced into prostitution too.

So ?



Some immgirants integrate better than others.

Poor was only one factor, I named others.

Who says I approve of such things?

Here you go again generalising. Now that is racism.
Facts, all those parasites who where rioting in Slotervaart where Moroccan, proof me wrong.



I don't buy statistics and studies, they claim to represent everything but in reality they don't. it's the same as saying "60 % germans don't believe in democracy", it's not truly 60 %, the study is only based on a handful of people.

@ Vingolf, when you have some real arguments rather than ad hominems, I'm going to discuss with you too. Until then...Then you want to be blind, everyone knows that most prisoners here are not Dutch and come from none-Western lands.


Oswiu:


Are you telling me I haven't witnessed successful adoptions? I've witnessed successful adoption stories, and I've witnessed unsuccessful ones. Guess what, in some of the unsuccessful adoption stories the adopted person was native Faroese, so don't tell me adoptions are unsuccessful because of racial differences. It ultimately comes down to the parents.



Ok, here is what we agree upon: "SOME people see racial diversity as a problem". My reaction towards this fact is that I try to influence people to look at things differently.

What you do is a big mistake: From the fact that SOME people see racial diversity as a problem, you take the enourmous metaphysical leap that ALL people see racial diversity as a problem, and this will never change. You're basically saying that there's nothing we can do. But you're giving up too early.

Of course we can do something: we can try to change ourselves. We can do what Gandhi said: "You must be the change you wish to see in the world". Of course, one person cannot change the world, but the least you can do is try to change the one person you are in control of: yourself. First of all, you have to acknowledge that your disliking of other people is a disgrace. I cannot force you to acknowledge this, but I'm encouraging you. And it's for your own good, because you basically have no choice. Your surroundings are going to change from familiar to unfamiliar whether you like it or not, and this will happen regardless of immigration.
Says someone who is very isolated from the rest of the world, why don't you go and live in my city, or the suburbs of Paris named Trappes, you sound very racist towards European people.

btw your Ghandi was a big personal friend of Adolf Hitler.

Jónurin
Monday, June 16th, 2008, 03:08 AM
Says someone who is very isolated from the rest of the world, why don't you go and live in my city, or the suburbs of Paris named Trappes, you sound very racist towards European people.

I've been living in a very multicultural town in England for 9 months. What do you mean I'm racist towards European people? Is there a European race by the way? I don't understand.


btw your Ghandi was a big personal friend of Adolf Hitler.

This doesn't change the fact that he said something profound:

"you must be the change you wish to see in the world".

Does it matter who said it? Isn't it obviously true regardless of who said it?

Oswiu
Monday, June 16th, 2008, 02:05 PM
No one said we should import criminals by the way, only well-behaving people should be welcome.
That's impossible to work. As long as your utopia remains practically unachievable, we should content ourselves with the traditional composition of our nations.

It can be spent on that too.
i.e. My money should be spent on foreigners as well as on my people. Guess what, my funds aren't infinite. And I don't actually WANT them spent on outsiders. Where is this bottomless bucket of state gold that you people seem to know all about?


Racists want to eradicate other races from their countries and thus force their world view on the more open-minded, pro-diversity people.
Again, these amazing 'racists'... :rolleyes: Can you argue with your opponents without using these magic words? They may work out in PC-land, but they don't have the same power here where we know them for what they are.

But anyway; Wasn't the multikult worldview forced on these racists in the first place? Were they ever given an honest chance to get out of what deceitful politicians were anxious to create? And now you say that I'm trying to force something on you! :(

I've been living in a very multicultural town in England for 9 months.
So you've been on what could be called an extended bit of tourism among us. Obviously more than enough time to argue against people who've spent their entire lives in England. Plus the fact that you came from a very remote place and were dazzled by the exotic big-city life. Hardly a position from which to tell native Englishmen how to think about the state of their country.

Yes, you have to make an effort.
In answer to my "Do I have to make an effort to realise your fantasy world?"
Well, I'm not going to, and I'm not the only, and lo and behold, your fantasy has scuppered again. What you want is unworkable, and will never happen, until the natives have been bred out. What a delightful prospect.

I don't see how you can know that opposition to immigration will always exist
As I just said, it won't when we're all mestizos. Not too far off. And these people are hardly going to give a damn for your language or culture. Multiracial people are going to have far wider prospects than your archipelago can cater for. The language will disappear. Not too unrealistic to imagine that it will be a distorted version of English, actually, though nothing for Anglo-Saxons to be pleased with, as Tupac will be of more influence on it than Shakespeare.


Imagine this family scenario: two people, let's call them A and B, both have kids from different marriages, and they decide to get married and become a family. The children of parent A are now faced with a situation of which they have no control: They are going to live with the children of parent B, whether they like it or not. What is the best solution for the children of parent A: (1) to tell A that they are dissatisfied and to try and break up the relationship between A and B OR (2) to try and make friends with the children of parent B?
I would say that (2) is a better solution for the family as a whole and for the children of parent A.
Good scenario. Now go and read the wealth of international folklore on the motif of the 'stepmother'.

Snow White's Daddy usually pops his clogs. And guess what? Yep, Stepmum and the Ugly Sisters usually have interesting plans for her...

Old Winter
Monday, June 16th, 2008, 04:00 PM
I've been living in a very multicultural town in England for 9 months. What do you mean I'm racist towards European people? Is there a European race by the way? I don't understand.

There are things i just do not believe, and yes racist against Europeans by forcing mass immigration into their lands.



This doesn't change the fact that he said something profound:

"you must be the change you wish to see in the world".

Does it matter who said it? Isn't it obviously true regardless of who said it?
Hitler also said things but if i quote him i am called a racist, if you like mass immigration and race mixing so much then why don't you come and live in my city.

Jónurin
Tuesday, June 17th, 2008, 12:38 AM
So you've been on what could be called an extended bit of tourism among us. Obviously more than enough time to argue against people who've spent their entire lives in England. Plus the fact that you came from a very remote place and were dazzled by the exotic big-city life. Hardly a position from which to tell native Englishmen how to think about the state of their country.

I'm not telling you what to think about the state of your country, I honestly think restricting immigration to some extent is probably a good idea. What I'm saying is it's not a good idea to nourish your contempt for other people. For your own sake too.


In answer to my "Do I have to make an effort to realise your fantasy world?"
Well, I'm not going to, and I'm not the only, and lo and behold, your fantasy has scuppered again. What you want is unworkable, and will never happen, until the natives have been bred out. What a delightful prospect.Well, if that's your attitude, we might as well set this discussion aside, but I'm still convinced that putting effort into respecting other people regardless of appearance and background is the way forward, and I'm not the only anti-racist either.


As I just said, it won't when we're all mestizos. Not too far off. And these people are hardly going to give a damn for your language or culture. Multiracial people are going to have far wider prospects than your archipelago can cater for. The language will disappear. Not too unrealistic to imagine that it will be a distorted version of English, actually, though nothing for Anglo-Saxons to be pleased with, as Tupac will be of more influence on it than Shakespeare.Immigration is no threat to Faroese culture and language at the moment. The major threat that I can see at the moment is American pop-culture, and tourism is also on the rise.


There are things i just do not believe, and yes racist against Europeans by forcing mass immigration into their lands.

Forcing whom to do what? Do you know that I'm just a student with no power whatsoever to force anyone to do anything, and with no wish to have control over people if I had the opportunity? What I'm doing is speaking my mind. It's called freedom of speech. My words are not final, I'm open to critique of my viewpoints as long as you provide good arguments.


Hitler also said things but if i quote him i am called a racist, if you like mass immigration and race mixing so much then why don't you come and live in my city.I haven't said I like mass immigration. Where have you found me saying this? Cross-breeding between two people is their own choice and obviously none of your business.

You're right, I don't know what it's like to live in your town, and I'm open towards what you have to say about this matter. I'm all ears.

The Lawspeaker
Tuesday, June 17th, 2008, 12:45 AM
I'm not telling you what to think about the state of your country, I honestly think restricting immigration to some extent is probably a good idea. What I'm saying is it's not a good idea to nourish your contempt for other people. For your own sake too.
Agreed. But I think that immigration should be restricted, not because of race or linguistic and cultural protection alone, but because people will abuse mild restrictions or rules. People, regardless of ethnicity, are bound to do that when they have the chance. Why ? Because as we would say here "the grass on your neighbour's laws is always greener" That's why. It could be a well-groomed Nigerian clerk that could come our way- but also a criminal or someone infected with, for instance, HIV. That's why. The clerk is welcome when he has a good education and a job and when he is clean and willing to fit in.




Well, if that's your attitude, we might as well set this discussion aside, but I'm still convinced that putting effort into respecting other people regardless of appearance and background is the way forward, and I'm not the only anti-racist either.
Indeed... I agree with you here. I am not a racist and appearances alone make no impression on me. What matters is what is your heart and in your head. But for the sake of preservation can certain remote areas best be kept "unspoiled" when it comes to immigration. Your country doesn't need them. Whether they are western or non-western is not even an issue. One shouldn't be a problem- but as much as 100 is. The Faroer are just a bunch of rocks lying somewhere pretty far away from the rest of the world so your language is still quite clean but your culture is already being poluted.




Immigration is no threat to Faroese culture and language at the moment. The major threat that I can see at the moment is American pop-culture, and tourism is also on the rise.
Agreed- but it will become a problem when people realise the "potential gains" of going to the Faroer.....potential gains for them.. not for you.
American pop-culture and mass tourism always damage a language and a culture. But so will mass immigration.



I haven't said I like mass immigration. Where have you found me saying this? Cross-breeding between two people is their own choice and obviously none of your business.
Indeed.

Bloem
Tuesday, June 17th, 2008, 08:06 PM
That's impossible to work. As long as your utopia remains practically unachievable, we should content ourselves with the traditional composition of our nations.
It's not impossible, our politicians just need to implement it. Racists would like to think it's impossible, that's another story.


i.e. My money should be spent on foreigners as well as on my people. Guess what, my funds aren't infinite. And I don't actually WANT them spent on outsiders. Where is this bottomless bucket of state gold that you people seem to know all about?
Don't exaggerate, no one mentioned any bottomless bucket. Foreigners also invest in our countries.


Again, these amazing 'racists'... :rolleyes: Can you argue with your opponents without using these magic words? They may work out in PC-land, but they don't have the same power here where we know them for what they are.
I don't know (or care) what power you mean, I am simply calling people what they are.


But anyway; Wasn't the multikult worldview forced on these racists in the first place? Were they ever given an honest chance to get out of what deceitful politicians were anxious to create? And now you say that I'm trying to force something on you! :(
It wasn't forced on anyone, we had democratic elections and the racists could have voted for their parties. We are a free country. So, if you don't like the "multiculturaliats", go ahead and vote them out.


Hardly a position from which to tell native Englishmen how to think about the state of their country.
LOL. You do the same thing, you tell the Faroese member what he shouldn't accept in his country. Have you even set foot on the Faroes? You aren't in a better position to tell him about his own country.

Old Winter
Wednesday, June 18th, 2008, 02:07 AM
I haven't said I like mass immigration. Where have you found me saying this? Cross-breeding between two people is their own choice and obviously none of your business.

You're right, I don't know what it's like to live in your town, and I'm open towards what you have to say about this matter. I'm all ears.
Faroe Islands has world's highest rate of adoptions

So you are against the high rate of adoptions ?

And on my city, if a blond nice girl goes to curtain parts of my city now she will be raped by immigrant racists.

Says enough, yet real racism is not attacked by the so called ''anti-racists''.

Hamar Fox
Wednesday, June 18th, 2008, 08:21 AM
It's not impossible, our politicians just need to implement it. Racists would like to think it's impossible, that's another story.


Don't exaggerate, no one mentioned any bottomless bucket. Foreigners also invest in our countries.


I don't know (or care) what power you mean, I am simply calling people what they are.


It wasn't forced on anyone, we had democratic elections and the racists could have voted for their parties. We are a free country. So, if you don't like the "multiculturaliats", go ahead and vote them out.


LOL. You do the same thing, you tell the Faroese member what he shouldn't accept in his country. Have you even set foot on the Faroes? You aren't in a better position to tell him about his own country.

Can you make a post without using the word racist? Maybe do it it just once or twice to prove you know how.

I'd like to question why you continually use the word as though it were a charge against a person's character. People who are 'racist' obviously don't care that they're 'racist', so perhaps a different mode of argumentation should be applied.

It's quite obvious to me that the people you're arguing against have little if any regard for prevailing ethical concepts as defined by ideological systems alien to them. The 'moralistic' approach (and your use of 'racist' is obviously morally charged) is quite redundant to those who don't subscribe to your ethical concepts, so the argument is reduced from any semblance of rational, persuasive debate to something that is essentially a pointless exchange of "I want this" and "I don't care if you want that".

You should present a case more convincing than personal value judgements which those you argue against clearly don't accept. Try naming some universal advantages of immigration, multi-culturalism or multi-racialism that transcend your personal taste. Until that happens, you lack the intellectual or "moral" authority you clearly seem to believe you hold.

BerserkerGangr
Friday, June 20th, 2008, 08:07 PM
Jónurin if you are in England then take a trip to London, don't just visit Big Ben, stay true to your beliefs and walk around the backstreets of Brixton, Streatham, Tooting and Hackney, should be fun and they will really like you I'm sure..

Immigration isn't a huge problem here yet, but the people seem hell bent on changing what is today a paradise compared to the rest of the world, if it isn't broken then don't fix it.

Unfortunately like the rest of the world the young Faroese people are very liberal minded, because that is what TV tells them to be, they're also very uninterested in the Faroe Islands and many are ashamed of their culture, especially in Tórshavn.

The Faroe Islands were always a homogenous country and that made our culture what it is today, bring in mass immigration and the culture and our nordic genes disappear over generations and become something else.

I read an article a short while ago that you should probably read as well if you are in favour of multiculturalism:


http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html

Bärin
Friday, June 20th, 2008, 08:31 PM
@Jónurin, I don't think 9 months in a multiculti town is enough to experience the downsides of multiculturalism. Try living 18 years in a city like Berlin. :o You see, I was lucky to have my friends come in time and defend me from Turks or I would be raped and have my life destroyed now. I live near two of the most notoriously criminal districts of Berlin, and I can't walk alone in them at any time of the day. Why? Because of Germans? No, because of the foreigners who immigrated here. Is it a coincidence that these criminal districts are made of majority immigrants? They "enriched" my city so much that there's a case of violence there nearly every week. Diversity is great, if everyone sits in his country and comes here as tourist or temporary worker only. And Berlin isn't the only example, there is London like people say here, and other metropolis where immigration reaches high levels. The Faroese have a smaller population than other countries. If more and more immigrants come, even in the form of adopted babies, in a few decades your population will die out and become a mishmash of ethnicities. Do you really want your children to live in such a place like in the city where I live? Because that's what happens with multiculturalism, it only gets worse and worse.

Janus
Saturday, June 21st, 2008, 08:07 PM
You can live all your life in a multi cultural town without noticing the problems because the people loving multi culturalism most are almost entirely from the middle class upwards and live in parts of the town the masses of immigrants cannot afford to live in. They live their live among other Germans and a small number of intergrated poster boy type of immigrants and think they'd be representative while sending their children to nice schools without immigration problems (most Gymnasien in Germany are like that, it seems) and never experience the downsides of immigration on their own. Nationalists are often displayed as uneducated and frustrated lower class people and it's usually even true because those do, in contrast to the middleclass people, the hardships of immigration in their own life. Faroer has never had these problems so it is hard to understand those problems there, especially because the media rarely show them.

Flash Voyager
Saturday, June 21st, 2008, 09:21 PM
In order to understand this adoption craze we must probe into this mindset; most of today's parents have an unhealthy fixation with children, not so long ago children weren't so overvalued, overrated and so ill-disciplined because the parents feared they would be too "austere". A few decades ago transracial adoption was unheard of, this grew gradually and simultaneously accompanying this new form of soft parenting.

LaNordisante
Sunday, June 22nd, 2008, 05:09 AM
OK. This is my first post and I may split some hairs, but...

How exactly is this a threat to Faroese culture when the kids are being raised in it? It's not even a threat to the genetics, either, since their offspring would still carry the Faroese genetic markers (if there are any unique ones, I would assume their genetic makeup would be similar the people of Western Norway).

If you cared about Faroese culture, you really should be outraged at my French-Canadian grandparents who adopted a Faroese kid, my father. They raised him as a French-Canadian (he was a walking stereotype too :lol:) he did not retain any of the culture of his ancestors. If it was the other way around and a French-Canadian kid was adopted by a Faroese family, would that make him any less Faroese? His genes would be quite different that the majority, so by your logic he would be just as capable of "destroying the Faroese identity"?

It's not like we're talking about people of a different culture forming enclaves and not learning the language, not respecting the culture, etc. That type of behaviour is unacceptable. If I was to move to the Faroe Islands, I would lean the language and culture, respect their laws, and raise my kids speaking Faroese I would never speak French to them, and I expect that of immigrants coming to where I am. I'm a firm believer of "when in Rome, do as the Romans do".

I would love to learn more about Faroese culture, definitely, but I didn't really get an interest in it until I heard the band Tyr.

I found it surprising that there are so many adoptions up there, though, considering people there tend to have more children than in other countries.

Janus
Sunday, June 22nd, 2008, 01:07 PM
...

I also do not think that those still relatively few adoptions threaten the traditional way of Faroer in any way but they are an indicator for a darker future. Why do they want to adopt totally foreign children? Isn't that weird way of xenophilia also a step to be indifferent towards immigrants and eventually your own culture? To say it a bit shorter: the possible conseqences worry people more than the adoptions themselves.
Furthermore, all those really foreign children will somewhen want to discover their biological roots,too.

As for adopting other Europeans, it's often a matter of homogenity. A French-Canadian could, not necessarily though, still fit into the overall appearance there whereas Africans or Indians cannot.

Old Winter
Sunday, June 22nd, 2008, 04:09 PM
You can live all your life in a multi cultural town without noticing the problems because the people loving multi culturalism most are almost entirely from the middle class upwards and live in parts of the town the masses of immigrants cannot afford to live in. They live their live among other Germans and a small number of intergrated poster boy type of immigrants and think they'd be representative while sending their children to nice schools without immigration problems (most Gymnasien in Germany are like that, it seems) and never experience the downsides of immigration on their own. Nationalists are often displayed as uneducated and frustrated lower class people and it's usually even true because those do, in contrast to the middleclass people, the hardships of immigration in their own life. Faroer has never had these problems so it is hard to understand those problems there, especially because the media rarely show them.

You just perfectly explained the problems in my land.

LaNordisante
Sunday, June 22nd, 2008, 04:18 PM
I have to admit, that I am up in the air about foreign adoption.

Charity starts at home. There are orphans in our own countries and children who need loving homes. People who adopt foreign children usually are good parents, but they should have considered becoming foster parents instead. I find a lot of people overlook that option.

However, I do not see how this is a threat to Faroese culture considering they are raised in it.

BerserkerGangr
Sunday, June 22nd, 2008, 07:49 PM
The majority of the adopted children are from third world countries. In the longterm that changes our genetic makeup. We are made of nordic and celtic genes (Norway & Scotland).

In the 1900's whites made up 35% of the world population. In 2007 we made up 9%. According to the UN, within this century whites will make up 2% of the world population. They claim to want diversity, but what cost does diversity come? Every ethnic group has a perfectly valid claim to its own homeland.

However, it's nowhere near as bad here as in the rest of Europe.

Nachtengel
Thursday, August 14th, 2008, 07:16 PM
What a pity. Nature and endangered species can be preserved, why not endangered ethnicities too?

johanpeturdam
Friday, August 15th, 2008, 05:47 AM
I'd just like to point out, that 'racial purity' so to speak, has a big flaw/downside/disadvantage: The huge chance of inbreeding.

The Faroes by themselves are way too small to counter this, and recent DNA/genetic tests have shown, that certain gene defects are around 3-4 times more common than in other places. We, for a lack of a better word, need more diversity to our gene pool, otherwise we won't be able to procreate by ourselves, or something, that's worse.

Also, I think that some of you have put a equal sign between ethnicity and culture, which IHMO is wrong and a shame. If you think about it, most cultures are actually multiethnic in the first place. The Faroese for instance, is bascially Norse-Gael, with tints of Danish, German, French and possibly even Moor (or Maur? how's this spelt?) genes in the mix there somewhere.

SwordOfTheVistula
Friday, August 15th, 2008, 05:38 PM
I'd just like to point out, that 'racial purity' so to speak, has a big flaw/downside/disadvantage: The huge chance of inbreeding.

The Faroes by themselves are way too small to counter this, and recent DNA/genetic tests have shown, that certain gene defects are around 3-4 times more common than in other places. We, for a lack of a better word, need more diversity to our gene pool, otherwise we won't be able to procreate by ourselves, or something, that's worse.

Also, I think that some of you have put a equal sign between ethnicity and culture, which IHMO is wrong and a shame. If you think about it, most cultures are actually multiethnic in the first place. The Faroese for instance, is bascially Norse-Gael, with tints of Danish, German, French and possibly even Moor (or Maur? how's this spelt?) genes in the mix there somewhere.

If that's the case, then they should only adopt from those places which they have heritage from, Nordic and Gaelic countries

Old Winter
Friday, August 15th, 2008, 06:50 PM
It's not even a threat to the genetics, either, since their offspring would still carry the Faroese genetic markers (if there are any unique ones, I would assume their genetic makeup would be similar the people of Western Norway).

Excuse me ? didn't you read the article ?

With 10 to 15 children adopted each year from Bolivia, Bulgaria, China, Ethiopia, India, South Africa, South Korea and Vietnam

Since when does a negro, a Hindu and a Chinese have the same genetic makeup as Norwegians ???


I'd just like to point out, that 'racial purity' so to speak, has a big flaw/downside/disadvantage: The huge chance of inbreeding.

The Faroes by themselves are way too small to counter this, and recent DNA/genetic tests have shown, that certain gene defects are around 3-4 times more common than in other places. We, for a lack of a better word, need more diversity to our gene pool, otherwise we won't be able to procreate by ourselves, or something, that's worse.

Also, I think that some of you have put a equal sign between ethnicity and culture, which IHMO is wrong and a shame. If you think about it, most cultures are actually multiethnic in the first place. The Faroese for instance, is bascially Norse-Gael, with tints of Danish, German, French and possibly even Moor (or Maur? how's this spelt?) genes in the mix there somewhere.

There is no difference between Danish, Germans, French, learn more.

Next thing you know you will say that Dutch and Flemish people are two different races :rolleyes:

johanpeturdam
Tuesday, August 19th, 2008, 05:46 AM
Well, yes, you're right of course. I'm no geneticist, so I'm merely speaking from a layman's point of view, and thus tend to make mistakes. But I still believe to have read, that whilst most of those peoples I mentioned are at the end of the day of the same root, there's still enough genetic variation to consider them distinct. Culturally as well, although culture can be learnt, that is a Negroid or some other people raised in say the Faroese culture would eventually become a cultural Faroese.

But: SwordOfTheVistula: Why is 'whence' so important a question? In the end, we're all humans.

Thrymheim
Tuesday, August 19th, 2008, 08:27 AM
Also, I think that some of you have put a equal sign between ethnicity and culture, which IHMO is wrong and a shame.


Culturally as well, although culture can be learnt, that is a Negroid or some other people raised in say the Faroese culture would eventually become a cultural Faroese.

But: SwordOfTheVistula: Why is 'whence' so important a question? In the end, we're all humans.

Reading these two posts I get the impression that you believe that race doesn't exist/matter. If you look at England you will soon realise that just because you raise a child in a different culture it doesn't become one of that culture it is still an alien. It doesn't stop them acting exactly the same here as they would at home and why should you deny that child the right to it's own culture.

We may well all be humans but most of us here would like to preserve the differences, if my aunt wants to add some new blood to her Welsh cobs she imports another one from another area, she doesn't go and get a shire horse!

Sigurd
Tuesday, August 19th, 2008, 12:09 PM
Culturally as well, although culture can be learnt, that is a Negroid or some other people raised in say the Faroese culture would eventually become a cultural Faroese.

You only become member of an ethnicity/society/culture if people can recognise you as such for face value. Chances are that if I see a Black person on the road, the last place I would expect him to be from would be the Faroe islands. He can partake in the Faroese culture all he wants and portray it in a positive manner to outsiders, but he can never and will never become a ethnic Faroe Islander. Even should he beget children with a Faroese woman, will these children be of "dual heritage".

In fact, if you are going to adopt a child of a foreign heritage, I would consider it important that you do not only make him aware of your own cultural ways as he would have to deal with them on a daily basis, but much more importantly keep the child in touch with his ethnic heritage. A Chinese baby adopted in Britain in that case can always if he/she wants to, go to China afterwards and be taken as one of theirs, but the average man on the street would not consider them to be British.

Of course you could go on to represent Britain at the Olympics or England at the football world cup, but the only way people would know that you identified with that country is because of your fame for representing that country. To the "unenlightened" man on the street, your 08/15 foreign-descended subject will not trigger the "he's indigenous" response. May the zeitgeist imply all that, but the innate biological "defence mechanism" for that makes us react differently to that which looks rather different from us: Whenever I see a blonde woman with her mongrel child at a supermarket, the initial thought that occurs, even before considering racial mixture is along the lines of "where did she kidnap that one?" And that's not being "racist", that's just a natural reflex. :p

lei.talk
Tuesday, August 19th, 2008, 02:27 PM
...The huge chance of inbreeding.

The Faroes by themselves are way too small to counter this, and recent DNA/genetic tests have shown, that certain gene defects are around 3-4 times more common than in other places. We, for a lack of a better word, need more diversity to our gene pool...scrambling in different genes
(some good, some bad)

does not remove the original set of bad genes.

eugenics does that.

even simple breeders of farm-animals
understand this obvious truth.

one does not remove undesireable attributes
by breeding to many others.

it disappears from the gene-pool
by isolation.

Old Winter
Wednesday, August 20th, 2008, 12:10 AM
Well, yes, you're right of course. I'm no geneticist, so I'm merely speaking from a layman's point of view, and thus tend to make mistakes. But I still believe to have read, that whilst most of those peoples I mentioned are at the end of the day of the same root, there's still enough genetic variation to consider them distinct. Culturally as well, although culture can be learnt, that is a Negroid or some other people raised in say the Faroese culture would eventually become a cultural Faroese.

But: SwordOfTheVistula: Why is 'whence' so important a question? In the end, we're all humans.

African Americans are ''Americans'', they speak English and do not follow another culture, they have been living in America for hundreds of years yet they still rape and kill whitey, why ? its in the genes, you want mix ? go to North Africa, its not healthy.

Do not come knocking on the door of some white land for money because we all warned you what would happen if you would mass import third world people.

ow and btw, you are also ignoring the health part, dark skin mixed with a cold climate with less sun is not a good idea.

johanpeturdam
Sunday, January 11th, 2009, 07:31 PM
Well, the American society isn't really helping African-Americans, so maybe that's your answer.

And what's the bad idea about dark skin mixed with a cold climate? I'm just asking as a normal ignorant person.

@lei.talk: I've never bred nor do I intend to breed farm animals, so you have to spell it out for me.

Siebenbürgerin
Monday, January 12th, 2009, 08:25 AM
And what's the bad idea about dark skin mixed with a cold climate? I'm just asking as a normal ignorant person.
The dark pigment is an adaptation for very warm climates and the light skin for cold ones. That explains why in Africa there are people with almost black skin and in Northern Europe the skin is white. Just like people with white skin have problems in hot climates, the sunrays burning the skin and causing skin cancer, people with dark skin have problems in cold climates.

Here some material:

Skin color, for example, is determined largely by the amount of melanin, a dark pigment, in the outer layer of the skin. (Carotene imparts a yellow tint.) In sunny climates close to the Equator, natural selection has favored dark, melanin-rich skin, which protects its owner by absorbing harmful ultraviolet rays before they penetrate to lower layers. But some ultraviolet light must penetrate the skin so that the body can produce Vitamin D. Thus, at higher latitudes, where sunlight is less intense, pale skin with little melanin is the norm.

http://eng.1september.ru/2003/29/1.htm

Ragner
Monday, January 12th, 2009, 12:51 PM
That sort of reasoning doesn't do any favours to its proponents when an outsider comes along with different reasoning on the lines of "The Earth belongs to me, Allah said so!"

The Faroes do belong to you, though perhaps you might need to be shown this by the threat of having them taken from you. :(

Exactly Oswiu, well said.

No place belongs to you if you cannot defend it. That's the core of your statement, I think. :)
This means that you have the duty to defend your own place. Defend it for the good of your family and children.
That some woman, somewhere in the world conceives a child doesn't give us any obligations at all.

We need to understand that this world is not a kindergarten and our existence is the reasult of our own abilities and doings.

Women living in our part of the world need to be thankful for that OR face the consequences.

Rozenstorm
Monday, January 12th, 2009, 03:11 PM
Well, it's not really completely the fault of the Faroese, or European, for that matter parents who want Southern children. Because of liberal policies that promote abortion, in case of unwanted pregnancy nobody really thinks about giving your new-born kid up for adoption, so it can still have a happy life, they rather kill it and throw it in the dumpster with help of abortion. Thus, there is a shortage of white children for adoption and then they go to the South to get coloured children.

You would almost think that it's a left-wing conspiracy...

Old Winter
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 09:35 AM
Well, the American society isn't really helping African-Americans, so maybe that's your answer.

And what's the bad idea about dark skin mixed with a cold climate? I'm just asking as a normal ignorant person.

@lei.talk: I've never bred nor do I intend to breed farm animals, so you have to spell it out for me.

Negro's get more help in America then whites do, they get more money and special positive discrimination laws, they are put on top of the university list and even have special negro college fund groups, they are even free to be racist while you can not even say anything about that.

Second, a darker skin absorbs less sun then light skin, all the immigrant females in my land have big vitamin loss because of them living here, big health issues.

I can't believe that you do not know this.

Sigurd
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 10:49 AM
The dark pigment is an adaptation for very warm climates and the light skin for cold ones. That explains why in Africa there are people with almost black skin and in Northern Europe the skin is white.

It'd be great if it's that easy. The real causes of pigmentation are still nebulous and there are various theories. In that event, however - how do you explain the comparedly dark pigment of the Sami? If the assumption is correct that modern homo sapiens sapiens evolved only a few dozen of thousand years ago, then surely a folk group that has been inhabiting the colder climates for a majority of that period, or at least most likely longer than us other relatively depigmentated folks would be of equally light pigment? As such, I am afraid that the climate theory will probably not stand the test of time in the long run. :shrug

forkbeard
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 11:29 AM
The problem with genetic diversity being introduced into a population is that it destroys altruism. The same as introducing soap into a bowl of detergent.
The values in a diverse population are very much selfish and revolve around money. This is the antithesis of the values in Germanic society which are supposed to revolve around blood and kin.
My ancestors fought ferociously for England/Britain because it was a homoenous Germanic society with Germanic values. It didn't matter if you died because you were replaced by your own kin.
Now, because of genetic diversity I will do everything in my power to oppose and annihalate that system. I owe it nothing and will contribute nothing to the system, neither money nor labour but will work to undermine it and destroy it at every opportunity.
We must realise and awaken our people that a war of extermination is being waged against our Germanic peoples. A war originating in Asia.
Xerxes one-worldist war against Free Greece. The Romans multi racial Empire against Germania.
Roman Emperors regularly waged attempted extermination against the Germanic peoples. Emperor Probus offered gold coin for every barbarian head with blue eyes, man, woman and child. (Gibbon)
It continued with Charlemagnes 25 year war against the Saxons that finally led to the imposition of Christian multi-racialism and no doubt they thought that would be the end of us.
The roots of the wars aginst Germania in the 20th century were the same. "Germans had to be exterminated like plague rats" ran the propaganda in WW1. Niall Fergusons book "The pity of War" exposed how surrendering Germans were summarily shot by the British during WW1. (extending the War by 2 years)

The German Kaiser Wilhelm was correct in saying the 20th Century was the "be or not to be for Germania," with all the outside powers acting against it.
My own theory is that because Wilhelm II was a none free mason, (unexpectedly Emperor on the death of his older brother) and because he was not prepared to participate in worship of the "black dwarf." The world decided to wage war against the Germanic peoples once and for all.
A war best summarized in Theodore Kaufmans book " Germany must perish"
Anyone not familiar with this and the Morgenthau plan needs to look it up.
Henry Morgenthau and Kaufman (working within the US government) called for the mass sterilisations of all Germanics world wide. This included allied soldiers fighting the Reich. It called for the "annihalation of the cause of war" (i.e Germanics) by outbreeding the Germanic strain with other ethnicities.
It is this War, still being waged against our blood, that is behind adoption, immigration and the like.
It is time our people woke up, acted politically or even reverted to barbarism in defence of our sacred blood.

Huginn ok Muninn
Wednesday, February 4th, 2009, 11:05 AM
My ancestors fought ferociously for England/Britain because it was a homoenous Germanic society with Germanic values. It didn't matter if you died because you were replaced by your own kin.

This is a very astute point. A homogeneous nation has a past, present, and future. When we die we live on in our kinfolk. Our children will not outbreed with those utterly foreign to ourselves, so if we were to go ahead in time 500 years, we would recognize our many greats-grandchildren as our own blood. There is something infinitely comforting in that.. something no money could ever buy. But this is what the powers that be have tried to substitute for a cohesive society.. the false pleasures of mammon.

This Poulsen fellow is nothing but an agent of destruction. You would think a lawyer would be intelligent enough to realize that any child does not equal one's own children.

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Thursday, May 14th, 2020, 01:06 PM
Although this increases diversity and lessens common genes, it's not going to help the Islands with their bids for independence from Denmark, because it will become an offshore banana republic from Britain and Iceland--not exactly a nurturing, burgeoning society, but a victim of intranational globalism.

How disgusting and I used to want to live there, probably of all the Viking settlements and I would have tested like a local in the male line down to the haplogroup subclade, even if Mum isn't Gaelic but Saxon, a far cry from the intangible alteration I would have "introduced" to damage society.

The saddest thing is that pathetic SJW Fĉroese chap, who could be fake but I'm not holding my breath, while I'd predict he'd try to ban my own "immigration" for the sin of "racism", even if I would blend in with the people and not be "racist" against the natives.