the-pi-guy said:
Slimebeast said:
The Merkel and Macron are planning for a tighter knit union just as we speak. EU is constantly working towards increased integration between the members. The unified currency was just one small part to achieve this. The ultimate goal of the EU elite is to remove the governments at the state level, and replace them completely with the EU Parliament.
In parallell with this the UN will probably be the organ which in the future will tie the EU, USA, Japan and whatever else we have then together into a super-state.
The UN has no real power. It's not a form of government. The UN is basically there to stop these things from happening.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II
That's literally it. There is no push to become more and more part of the UN. We are not all going to be part of one giant world wide country.
It's correct that Swedes are still in majority looked at the country as a whole. But if you look at youngsters in big cities, they're minority. And with our current rate of massive immigration it's only gonna take a couple decades until people under the age of 30 are in massive minority.
Out of 10 million people in Sweden today, 3.5 million have foreign background. Recently our statistics office released a projection that by the mid of this century, Sweden will have 14 million people, from which less than 6 million are ethnic Swedes and most of whom will be old, and there'll be 8 million with foreign background made up of young people. Among children and in the child-bearing age groups, ethnic Swedes will be a tiny minority by then.
People accept immigrants because they have been brainwashed and lied into believing that immigrants actually would have been killed otherwise. Which they wouldn't. The vast majority coming to Sweden are economic migrants, and the few who come from persecution of sorts could instead have fled to a different part of their country, or to a safe haven in neighboring countries. Not a single person had to come to Sweden to save his life.
Your segment about what is considered Christian and un-Christian I will save for another time.
Scientifically and religiously, all people are of one species. You don't know that not a single person did. You don't know what it's like in their countries.
I just wanted to show you that social change covers the terms institution and values in a very obvious way. We're going through an enormous cultural revolution that encompasses all levels of society. But you don't seem to be very aware of it, perhaps due to your young age.
"Literally no one wants to destabilize our institutions and values."
That's such a weird thing to read in light of everything I've witnessed changed socially and when it comes to values and institutions in so many areas, even during the short timespan of the late 80s to 2017, when I've personally been able to follow politics and change in society.
Destabilizing has nothing to do with changes. The entire history of the world is filled with changes. Changes in politics, language, lands, people. The last few decades have been relatively stable by comparison.
|
|
1. But you don't deny that the EU is slowly working towards a super state, the United States of Europe. If the UN won't be the organ for the global government I am sure they will come up with an alternative. There are many thinkers, politicians, visionaries, ideological movements who envision a world government at the end of this century. I also believe that many regular politicians and activists are dreaming about such a thing semi-consciously, in a more vague manner, about the ultimate goal of mankind's utopia. Some people argue that the world's inability to effectively prevent climate change will require a world government of sorts. Socialists on the grassroot level argue and agitate against nation states all the time.
Obviously this project will take several decades, but I can imagine a totally different world in the year 2050 when such plans could start taking form, and it will certainly be easier if nation states have been made powerless by then and all their peoples have been mixed together.
2. Mankind is made up of one species, yes, but it's also divided in multiple races and in ethnic groups based on race, history, language and culture.
3. Actually I do know a lot about the countries where migrants come from.
I do acknowledge that a few thousand people die each year because of war and persecution, atrocities and organized crime. This is fact. And I do acknowledge that the lives of a few thousand people are saved because they are able to flee, to move away from danger. But it's never ever because they came to Sweden.
The tens of thousands fleeing from the war in Syria saved their lives because they moved to another region within Syria or to a neighboring country, often to live in a refugee camp. The 200,000 Syrians that came to Sweden had already saved their lives long before they started their long migration through Turkey, Greece, Makedonia, Croatia, Hungary, Germany, Denmark until they finally crossed the border to Sweden. Not the poor ones though, only those with at least $10,000 per person to pay smugglers. Remember also that many Syrians weren't threatened by the war directly, but they saw quality of life falling in a wartorn country and decided to seek a better life in the West.
Same with the 150,000 Iraqis we have accepted. Same story as the Syrians. But only those with at least $10,000 per person to pay smugglers.
The 50,000 Eritreans Sweden accepted fled from being recruited in the Eritrean army. All of these guys also had >$10k to pay smugglers.
The 50,000 Afghan "unaccompanied youth" we let in actually most of them come from Iran. They're all economic migrants who feel they don't have a bright future in Iran as they belong to the despised underclass of Hazars. Again, only those with >$10,000 could come.
The 100,000 somalis we have went through half of Africa before they even reached Southern Europe by boat. Their other options were to move to a safe region in Somalia, to live in a refugee camp within or just outside Somalia and wait until the war is over (which it is now), but they decided they wanted to come to Sweden instead. Not the poor ones though, only those with at least $10,000 per person to pay smugglers.
These are just the largest migrant groups here, but in summary:
* not a single person fled for his life when they entered Sweden
* they're all here instead of a UN sanctioned refugee camp, or another part of their home country, like the regular tens of millions of refugees out in the world, because these individuals demanded a better quality of life and had the resources to do so.
If Sweden had a sane immigration policy not a single person should have been allowed to come. Literally 0 migrants. Because it's totally pointless, just a bizarre theatre for some Swedes to show how humane we are. But in reality a theatre that is very destructive and negative for Sweden and the original Swedes due to the enormous costs and social consequences, de facto completely transforming the nature of Sweden into something else.
4. To destabilize is a form of change, so you're semantically wrong here. It's funny though, you're using one of the most common arguments that are used to silence people who are sceptical towards immigration here in Sweden. "Oh, but the change!", "Society has always changed", "Migration has always been a part of mankind", "Don't resist change", "People are just afraid of change" (a classic). 
As if that was an argument for anything!
Those are really unintellectual arguments, it's really scraping from the bottom, and should be seen as really offensive for any intellectually honest person. My blood gets boiling. That I'm forced to live in such an anti-intellectual society.
