Taxing fuel in Europe seems to be a vicious cycle (that for some strange reason the governments cannot see and hence never break):
The government needs money, so it taxes fuel heavily. Taxing fuel heavily stifles the economy (because, among other things, transportation is completely vital for a working economy). A stifled economy means less money for the government in the form of taxes. Which means the government raises the fuel taxes to get more money. And so on and so forth.
The only possible result if this vicious cycle is not broken is a complete collapse of the economic system and the government. The government is killing itself.
It's difficult to come up with a short and clear name for the two concepts. "Minimum presses" could indeed relatively unambiguously refer to the minimum amount of button state changes from unpressed to pressed, but a term for the count of frames that a button is held down is more difficult. Perhaps there isn't anything better than "minimum holds".
After some deliberation, I have decided to excise the furret from my avatar set to make it more pure ferrety goodness. Replacing my standard and hope avatars are these two:
This is the publication that never ends... yes it goes on and on my friends...
Personally I'd prefer one publication where each possible frame has been shaved off, than three publications with one frame improvement each... (In other words, this constant submission updating doesn't bother me at all.)
My first world problem of the day: reading a thread that the previous posters have missed the point of.
It is indeed very true that the purpose of this thread was to be humorous and lighthearted, and it got sidetracked to politics and controversial subjects. While these are also "first-world problems", it was not the intent of this thread. On the other hand, it's sometimes difficult to keep the controversial discussions at bay when the subject comes up, so it's easy to see why the sidetracking happened.
So to return to the original intent of this thread:
I hate it when I order something from play.com and it takes almost 3 weeks to arrive.
I do this always with a certain bank card because I have lost the PIN code due to no fault of my own, and it costs money to order a new one.
Isn't it suspicious to go to a store, use the card and say "sorry, I forgot my pin number; no it's not stolen or anything, it's my card"? It would feel awkward... :P
But what about my other comment? You said that no scientific progress had come from Islamic countries, and I proved you 100% wrong. No comment on that?
You seemingly have some reading comprehension problems. How do you jump from "very little scientific progress has come from any islamic countries" to "no scientific progress..."?
I know perfectly well that in the distant past arabic countries were at the height of the world's scientific civilization. It is no coincidence that the digits we use today are called "arabic numerals". Also quite many stars and constellations have arabic names, and that's not a coincidence either. (Yes the naming comes from those times.)
One of the main reasons why they were at this height, a position they indirectly inherited from the earlier hellenistic culture (which was the previous height of human scientific advance) was because the Roman church had basically shut down most of the scientific progress in Europe.
But then something changed something like a thousand years ago, which set back islamic cultures back to the bronze age. What is it that happened? Islam happened.
With that I don't mean that immediately when islam as a religion was first created it shut down all the scientific progress. However, at some point islamic religious leaders decided that science, especially math and astronomy, are the work of the devil and started preaching against them (there are pretty good records of this). This effectively stopped scientific research and education and set up a culture of permanent medievalism which has mostly prevailed to this day.
When I talked about little scientific progress having come from islamic countries, I was talking about modern times, which should have been clear from the context of Nobel prizes and comparison to Israel (which is just 50 years old).
I wonder why credit/debit cards still have the magnetic stripe even when it also has the chip. The chip adds security (afaik it's significantly harder to copy by simply trying to read it), but this security is completely nullified by the card having the magnetic stripe which serves the same function. What's the point?
It might be true, but it could also be that our rulers are preparing for a WW3, so they're trying to feed us propaganda so that the whole world would hate muslims, like the world hated jews before WW2 because they were fed with propaganda.
Being you, that's probably written seriously. You never disappoint with your wackiness.
This is definitely true. I don't understand why they want to live in our countries if they'd rather they turned into the same kind of hellhole they came from. It makes no sense to me. If you move to Europe, you're accepting that it's a better place to live than where you came from, so why are you trying to change our way of life?
It's basically that they want to keep the cake and eat it too. They want the welfare system of first-world countries and they want Sharia and the islamic culture (even the aspects that are detrimental to a welfare system) at the same time.
A multiculturalist fundie will immediately protest that the islamic culture and a welfare system are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps a heavily modified one might not be, but the prevalent one certainly is.
Just as an example of this, compare the number of Nobel prizes awarded to jewish people, and the amount awarded to muslim people. The difference is staggering. (Over a hundred Nobels have been awarded to jewish people, while something like three have been awarded to muslim people, two of which have been the completely useless peace prize.)
Why is this so? Is it because the Nobel prize committee discriminates against muslims? No. Is it because muslims are dumber than jews? No. The real reason is that it's a consequence of the islamic culture. This culture shuns scientific education and progress (in favor of religious education). Not in every islamic country in the same amount, of course, but enough so that very little scientific progress has come from any islamic countries. (Compare to the amount of scientific discoveries and inventions that have come from Israel. You would be surprised.)
And no, not all muslims in the west are like this. However, a non-insignificant portion of them is, and that's the problem.
Uh, not sure if you were trying to be funny, but I don't want any group exterminated, I only oppose massive immigration and "multiculturalism"..
I do not oppose immigration. People should be free to go and live wherever they want, and have equal opportunity everywhere. However, for societies to work, everybody has to work together to build those societies. This means that the people who move from one place to another have to want to integrate and contribute to the target society.
This is where the worship of diversity is at odds with the practical goal of a successful society. What might sound good on paper causes only division for the detriment of the society in practice. In practice the worship of diversity, the ideology that people not only have the right to, but moreover should retain their original culture and customs as far as possible, is detrimental to the wellbeing of the society, which can only prosper if everybody works together, rather than separate isolated groups being formed.
Of course not all societies are equal, even if they are homogeneous. That may be politically incorrect to say, but it's just a fact. There are many societies where draconian barbaric inhuman laws are enacted, where there is no freedom, equality and democracy. Those types of society do not belong to free democratic countries. Freedom, equality and democracy are virtues that should always be held as the golden standard, and any immigrant subcultures that want to subvert them are not welcome. These groups are detrimental.
This has absolutely nothing to do with skin color. If a group of the whitest nordic people you could imagine would want to establish Sharia in Europe, I would oppose it exactly as vehemently as if the darkest African people you could imagine would do so. Who advocates this barbaric law doesn't matter. It has no place in a free society.
Ok, let's see your arguments why. I'll refer to reputable sources in my response, I'd like to see yours.
Yes, he's so terrible for being sensitive to the fact that Muslims are by far the greatest recipients of racist anger today. And yes, he's just a dumb "leftist multiculturalist" for thinking that perhaps we should lay off on those Muslims and stop pretending to be good liberal intellectuals by complaining about Islamist practices that aren't actually in play here in Europe and by extension incriminating those who practice any form of Islam.
For even suggesting that Islamophobia is fuelled by racism we're automatically "playing the racist card", which means we're wrong and we're just like white power supremacists. Hey, what's that about hypocrisy again?
Do you have any idea how many Muslim houses of prayer are literally being attacked? How many Muslims fall victim to hate crimes? How many people are beaten up because they're Muslim? How many Muslims don't get a job because the one hiring thinks they're dangerous?
So you are basically implying that islamic religion and culture should be exempt from any kind of criticism because muslims are victims of discrimination in Europe? They should get a free pass, no matter how barbaric their culture might be?
Not a barbaric culture? How about genital mutilation of muslim girls being rampant in Europe? This is a direct result of their culture, and I wouldn't call 2000 cases in Britain alone isolated fringe cases.
Europe is, by and large, more racist now than the US is, and you are proof: you are perfectly content to keep demonizing an entire group of people simply because "I'm really criticizing Islam" and "they're not a race, so I'm not racist". You may not be racist yourself—I don't know—but you're enabling those that are.
And you are enabling those muslims who are racists themselves, in the accurate sense of the word, by giving them a free pass and exempting them from criticism.
What, muslims cannot be racists? How about jews having to move out of their home towns because of rampant anti-semitism? Guess who is doing the anti-semitism. No, the answer is not the white power supremacists. And Sweden is by far not the only country where this is happening.
But then again, I'm probably just an indoctrinated "leftist multiculturalist" whose crime is I prefer everybody to be able to live and be themselves here in peace.
Most critics of islamic culture wouldn't have any problem with muslims if they indeed wanted to live here in peace.
Warp wrote:
Your argument "islamophobia is just racism is disguise" would have a greater weight if the islamic culture would indeed be like that of any other religion, such as buddhism, hinduism, shintoism, hare krishna and so on.
And this is exactly what I mean. People are so keen to look at the actions of the few, or even things that happen all the way over in Saudi Arabia, as a way of trying to convince everybody that Muslims are "different" and that they reject Western values.
The multiculturalist "the problematic people are only an extremely small minority, just a fringe group of radicals who do not represent the majority" argument would carry more weight if it didn't contradict actual studies. How about 33% of muslim students in Britain back killing for islam and 40% want Sharia law. Sure, 33 and 40% are technically speaking a minority. Not a very small one, though. The word "few" just doesn't apply.
Or how about death threats against women and homosexuals in London? Which the London police tried to cover up. These "small fringe groups" are trying to establish entire zones of Sharia law in Britain.
And the UK is not alone in this. If you want to find even worse examples, do a bit of research on what's happening in Sweden. I'll dig up some sources if you really want, but I suspect you won't. After all, I'm just a "racist", or at the very least an "enabler of racism".
Btw, I would like to know if you think these people are racists too.
Forget about the fact that European Muslims are vastly more liberal than their Middle-Eastern and African counterparts. Forget about it entirely: they're Muslims. They're DIFFERENT! I am Warp and I am not a racist.
I don't mind the "vastly more liberal" muslims. I mind the very significant portion of them who want to establish Sharia in European countries, who commit acts of anti-semitism and barbaric cultural practices such as female genital mutilation. I also oppose the leftist multiculturalist movement that tries to deny that this is a big problem, and wants to shut down all criticism of the islamic culture on the basis that they are "victims or racism".
So, where are your sources?
Look, be pedantic all you like, but we both know that most Muslims have brown skin, and that political fear of Muslims is just the socially acceptable suit that fear of brown people wear, so that members of the public can say with a straight face (and believe it themselves) that they're not being racist, they're just against Islam.
The fact is, Islamophobia is rooted in racism. Maybe not all people who are Islamophobics believe they are racist, and maybe not all people who are Islamophobics actually are not racist (which are totally different things of course.) But it doesn't really matter. Politically, Islamophobia was created to attract the racists without being openly racist, sort of a wink wink nudge nudge, we're on your side.
I think that it's quite sad that you are completely oblivious to the fact that that's a perfect example of playing the racism card. The leftist multiculturalist propaganda has taught you well, and you have swallowed it whole, hook, line and sinker.
You know how white power supremacists like to play the "jew card". In other words, whenever a white person opposes their arguments, they dismiss it with a "he must be a jew, and hence his arguments are not valid". Accusing people of being jewish is quite convenient because it allows them to dismiss any counterarguments made by white people (as many western jews could well pass for caucasians).
Multiculturalists have a similar card: The racism card. Any criticism of islam is dismissed by it being "racist". It's quite convenient that the majority of muslims happen to be from the middle east and Africa, which happen to be people with darker skin tones, and hence any criticism of islam can be diverted to be criticism based on ethnicity. Guilt by association, of sorts. Hence any such arguments can be dismissed.
Your argument "islamophobia is just racism is disguise" would have a greater weight if the islamic culture would indeed be like that of any other religion, such as buddhism, hinduism, shintoism, hare krishna and so on. However, most of those are not western caucasians either, yet you seldom see the "racists" presenting heavy criticism of them. Why not? If criticism of a religious culture would indeed by caused by prejudiced racism, you would expect them to criticize all such religions with the same fervor.
The real answer is that buddhists and hinduists seldom come here to do this. Buddhists and hinduists also seldom enact, at governmental level, the stoning to death of apostates, adulterers and homosexuals (while thousands of spectators watch), and advocate bringing those barbaric laws to the western countries. This has nothing to do with skin color.
It's not necessary to be that explanatory. Something simpler like "uses heavy glitches such as the Backwards Long Jump (a glitch that allows traveling at enormous speeds and glitch through walls)", and a link to the SM64 tricks page.
Criticism of Islam, misguided as I think it usually is, isn't what I was referring to. To too many people it's just thinly veiled Islamophobia.
Even if it's "islamophobia" (whatever that might actually mean), it's still not racism. Religion has nothing to do with ethnicity. Most people who oppose islam (whether it's because of rational reasons or because of irrational prejudice) would oppose it regardless of who advocates it.
As said, if "islamophobia" is racism, then opposing christianity is too. It makes no sense.
Fear of Muslims isn't "racist" by the dictionary definition, because "Muslim" isn't a race.
That's truly the new "I'm not racist, I have a black friend."
No. Calling people who criticize the islamic culture and religion "racists" is just a dirty tactic. It's a way to vilify and demonize the critics, while ignoring the actual arguments. In other words, it's a perfect example of an ad hominem (attack the person, not his arguments).
Criticizing islam as a culture and as a religion has absolutely nothing to do with ethnicity. Using "racism" in this context is a complete and deliberate misnomer. It's basically namecalling. It's the same thing as calling someone "fascist" or "a nazi" even though they may not necessarily hold a political or ideological view that adheres to those. It's just a senseless attack.
If you call people who criticize islam and islamic culture "racists", you should by the exact same logic call people who criticize christianity and christian culture "racists". Nobody does that, though. It's a hypocritical double standard.
And how is it "racist" (my god, that term has become meaningless).
It's not meaningless. It simply has lost its original meaning. In the modern political discourse "racist" means, approximately, "any kind of perceived prejudice that white people have towards non-white people" (completely regardless of the reason for this prejudice). It doesn't have to be about ethnicity or race. Even criticizing non-Christian religion is considered "racism" (even though religion has absolutely nothing to do with ethnicity).
Of course the reason why it has lost its original meaning and has been broaden to cover everything from nazi white power supremacy ideology to rational criticism of islam is that it's a convenient weasel word to discredit people. It has suffered the same kind of inflation as eg. the term "terrorism" has (and for similar reasons).
Anybody who even doubts this is demonized and considered a second class citizen.
Oh come on. There are entire political parties making great strides all around Europe right now on that very platform. Based around the very idea of multiculturalism having "failed", and that the left-wing hippie elites are willfully ignorant of this because they don't care about "their own kind". Here in the Netherlands one of the coalition parties subscribes to an Islamic takeover conspiracy theory, and the prime minister spoke about "giving the Netherlands back to the Dutch".
And these are precisely the parties that are widely demonized, vilified and compared to nazis (by both the other parties and the media at large). Very much here in Finland, and I know for a fact that it happens also (and even worse) in Sweden. The equivalent party in the UK is also generally vilified. I don't know what the exact situation is in Denmark.
The worship of cultural/ethnic diversity has indeed all the symptoms of a religion. It is good and right as a matter of course. This claim does not require any actual evidence or proof. Anybody who even doubts this is demonized and considered a second class citizen. Doubting this universal fact is considered sacrilege.
