 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | David wrote: | | ^ Do you have any evidemce to suggest that a higher percentage of Muslims in a given country correlates with higher numbers of terrorist attacks? Or are you not actually talking about terrorism here? If the latter, that would be an unfortunate conflation. |
^ Evidence that the number of Muslims in a country might correlate with the number of Islam-inspired attacks ? No, none at all. Why would there be any correlation between terrorism inspired by an ideology and the number of people in a community who profess that ideology? I'm honestly surprised that this demands any discussion at all, it is so obvious. Anyway, perhaps you could consider the actual proportions shown in this article and correlate it with places where significant attacks have taken place. I can do a Pearson's r-squared if it'll satisfy you, but it should not be necessary.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/datablog/2014/oct/30/australians-think-muslim-population-nine-times-greater
cf - just counting mass murders, not the killing of innocent individuals - London (twice), Paris (twice), Brussels, Mumbai, Nice, Berlin, Sweden, and countless incidents in the Middle East. Madrid is a bit of an outlier, which can be ascribed to its proximity to the major Muslim population centres (and to El Cid).
Australia has been largely spared major atrocities (pace Bali) because it has a small Muslim population, and it is far from Muslim population centres. Ditto South Korea, Japan, Poland etc. If you must be an apologist for this Bedouin religion which is so deeply opposed to the liberal views you hold so dear, then a better strategy than denying the obvious is required.
In response to the "unfortunate conflation", I am not sure what point you are making, but no, I am not talking specifically about terrorism. I am talking about a bloc of people who adhere to an assertive ideology (faith) which makes no distinction between the demands of religion and the state, and believes it is supreme truth. If you import that en masse, you risk civil strife, illiberal laws, and a changed identity for Australia. It may feel uncomfortable, but reality is often so. |
Albania, interestingly, has had virtually no terrorist activity despite being 59% Muslim. Afghanistan is 99% Muslim and has nearly daily attacks; Turkmenistan is 93% Muslim and has had none as far as I can tell. The UK has under 5% and has had a few over the last decade. Clearly, there are a lot of factors going on here that have nothing to do with Muslim population size.
Even if we're dealing in common sense guesswork alone, the relative rarity of terror attacks in the west actually tends to weigh against your point: after all, it only takes a handful of people to carry out the huge attacks like the ones seen in France over the past couple of years. When you're dealing with such tiny proportions (what is it, 0.0001%?) of actual terrorist actors compared with overall Muslim populations, you would have to think that the correlation between Muslim population and number (or severity) of attacks would be close to negligible.
But let's move on from conjecture and look at some facts. Here's every country in the world by Muslim population, by the way. Feel free to look through and compare the countries which have had more or fewer terrorist attacks, or more or fewer people killed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
I'll take your Pearson's r-squared, by the way indeed, that's the minimum I would expect if you're going to make such serious claims. Given the grave consequences of what the facts in this debate actually are not least in the increasing political push to cap or suspend Muslim immigration we need to make sure that we're actually getting this right.
My understanding remains that cultural work, social policy and policing remain far more useful than immigration control when it comes to curbing terrorist activity. The conclusion that you and Sonia Kruger find obvious, on the other hand, seems more like gut feeling than anything grounded in hard evidence.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The number of people considered to be extremists in the UK by MI5 is around 3,000 - around one in a thousand. I'd say that's a lot of potential mass murder, personally, where my children are concerned. Your small percentages are irrelevant when there is a large base number, and the costs - when the risks become manifest in events - are so grievous.
You would be wise to reflect a little more deeply on the nature of correlation between relevant variables. When .00001% of the mutations within a viral strain cause an epidemic of death, the correlation between death and the total presence of the virus in the population is high.
I can quite accept that the strain of Islam is clearly important when it comes to terrorist actors - Salafist strains clearly tend to be more violent, and the ex-Ottoman world (eg Albania) is relatively less affected, though poor Turkey suffers regularly from its proximity to the more deadly strains. this is relevant to the intention to avoid importing mass murderers.
As to "grave consequences", this is a good example of the way that very odd Leftist assumptions have metastasized to become mainstream. There is nothing "grave" about deciding who you permit to come into your house or your country. What a strange idea of sovereignty you Leftists have.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I would say the western world as a whole closing its door on the Syrian refugee crisis due to a desire to limit Muslim immigration would be a very grave consequence indeed. Have you considered the consequences of what you're suggesting?
Thank you for at least acknowledging some factors other than raw number of Muslims in the prevalence of domestic terrorist attacks, though. The more of these we acknowledge, the less likely it becomes that there will be a strong correlation between overall population size and terror attacks. Even within the 0.1% extremist category you list above, there will be (and, indeed, quite evidently are) strong fluctuations between population and enacted violence. I would suggest interrogating some of those factors further before proposing something that is likely to increase radicalisation.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Here's a thought. Syrians don't actually want to leave Syria and make new lives overseas in a strange country. They just want to be able to live their lives without all the bullshit.
We blather on about refugees which is treating the symptom. Let's put more work into treating the disease. If that means more military intervention, it does. If there's a different solution, great.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ You're absolutely right that most Syrians don't want to leave their homeland. And yet they have, by their hundreds of thousands, because they have no other option.
The fact is that there is no magic bullet here. You talk about military intervention. The US put the full force of their military, the most powerful in the world, into a quick and efficient war in Iraq that would lead to regime change and democracy. The result? Nearly 15 years of carnage and a constant flow of refugees out of the country. I absolutely understand why they're hesitant to try the same thing in Syria. And so people keep fleeing and will continue to do so until the country is repaired and functional if that ever happens.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Last edited by David on Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Thanks for your criticism, to lack the ability to develop emotional connection. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | ^ You're absolutely right that most Syrians don't want to leave their homeland. And yet they have, by their hundreds of thousands, because they have no other option.
The fact is that there is no magic bullet here. You talk about military intervention. The US put the full force of their military, the most powerful in the world, into a quick and efficient war in Iraq that would lead to regime change and democracy. The result? Nearly 15 years of carnage and a constant flow of refugees out of the country. I absolutely understand why they're hesitant to try the same thing in Syria. And so people keep fleeing and will continue to do so until the country is repaired and functional if that ever happens. |
I broadly agree, David, though I do not think that America put anywhere near the full force of its military into Iraq. Part of the problem is that America no longer does this, because it is not prepared to make the domestic sacrifices that war requires. Its irresponsibility in that regard is the biggest problem with its intervention anywhere. It does enough to break a country but not enough to rebuild it. It is possible that a force of millions of men in Iraq would have pacified that country and given the Iraqi people a good future, but that was never on the cards.
The Syrian refugee crisis demands a response, and I have no issue with us trying to help, but I do not believe that permanent resettlement of a large number of Syrians in Australia is the best solution. The best solution is to provide a safe, well-patrolled space under UN protection out of the conflict zone, with assisted repatriation when the conflict subsides. i know it does not serve the Left's purpose of obliterating Western culture and values in favor of a formless global diversity, but that's why it's a good idea.
As it happens, I do not have a real problem with incorporating twenty or thirty thousand Syrians into Australia (though Germany's experience shows that filtering Syrians from others is nigh on impossible), if we reverse our policy of mass immigration and sharply lower rates of Islamic immigration more generally. Twenty thousand Muslims do not present an integration challenge or a change in the character of a nation. Three million do.
I saw the "Kill Rushdie" demonstrations in Birmingham long ago, and it was alightning bolt that changed everything for me. Formerly a naive globaliser and diversifier, I realised then that I care more about our traditions of free speech and artistic freedom than I do about their violent, backward and politically combustible religion. I also realised that they are prepared to be intolerant and we are not, that history can certainly go backwards to a darker age, and that my optimism was merely complacency : I had believed that I could always have Western values without making uncomfortable choices to defend them. It was not easy for me to move rightward at the time, but as Camus said, " if the truth seemed to me to be on the right, I would be there".
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | ^ You're absolutely right that most Syrians don't want to leave their homeland. And yet they have, by their hundreds of thousands, because they have no other option.
The fact is that there is no magic bullet here. You talk about military intervention. The US put the full force of their military, the most powerful in the world, into a quick and efficient war in Iraq that would lead to regime change and democracy. The result? Nearly 15 years of carnage and a constant flow of refugees out of the country. I absolutely understand why they're hesitant to try the same thing in Syria. And so people keep fleeing and will continue to do so until the country is repaired and functional if that ever happens. |
I think where we get it wrong is in the view of democracy.
having never studied any of this stuff, in my mind, democracy means basically peoples choice. We interpret that as the need to shove our version of democracy down the throats of people who are utterly unfamiliar with the concept and it breaks down.
Old habits come back, dictators by whatever label, bubble up.
maybe a solution is a caretaker government of a different form with oversight from a selected council (not the UN, they're a disaster) with the power to remove the government if they don't meet specific KPI's. Some economic, some social. Bring the population along for the ride slowly while always balancing their culture and history against the need to progress.
At some point in the future, the populace gets to chose the version of democracy that works for them, in the meantime with a stable governing system, you can encourage investment into the country to help with infrastructure, social and economic issues.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | The best solution is to provide a safe, well-patrolled space under UN protection out of the conflict zone, with assisted repatriation when the conflict subsides. i know it does not serve the Left's purpose of obliterating Western culture and values in favor of a formless global diversity, but that's why it's a good idea. |
On the first part, that sounds more or less like what happened during the Balkan conflict probably worth looking at the consequences of that, for better and for worse. I think some of Stui's proposals above have merit; but these things often seem a lot cleaner and prettier in theory than they might turn out to be in practice, and I think there's a good reason why many refugees migrate for life and not just as a temporary measure.
On the second sentence quoted above, that's just a silly exaggeration I know of no leftist who wants to systematically eradicate Western culture in the way you describe, and indeed the multiculturalist project's biggest cheerleaders often seem to come from the liberal centre-left and neo-liberal centre/centre-right more than the capital-l Left.
If you could accuse the broader left of anything in this area, it's apathy they're more concerned with rights and equality than the preservation of culture.
I tend to sit on the fence on that. I'm yet to be convinced that multiculturalism actually works, and still have some sneaking sympathy for more old-fashioned assimilationist discourse. I also think that some of the 'Western' values you describe (the scare quotes are because I don't think they're quintessentially Western, but perhaps that's a topic for another thread) are very much worth preserving and certainly not held as strongly right now by other cultures. But I also think that the danger posed to Western culture by immigration (whether it be refugees or otherwise) is greatly overstated by those on the right, many of whom seem to think that integration only happens with a hammer or else by keeping the barbarians out.
I also think that, in times of global crisis and horrific inequality, we have to make a few sacrifices. Where I fall in line with much of the Left is that I think it is reasonable to prioritise human lives over sovereignty and cultural protectionism.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | | The best solution is to provide a safe, well-patrolled space under UN protection out of the conflict zone, with assisted repatriation when the conflict subsides. i know it does not serve the Left's purpose of obliterating Western culture and values in favor of a formless global diversity, but that's why it's a good idea. |
On the first part, that sounds more or less like what happened during the Balkan conflict probably worth looking at the consequences of that, for better and for worse. I think some of Stui's proposals above have merit; but these things often seem a lot cleaner and prettier in theory than they might turn out to be in practice, and I think there's a good reason why many refugees migrate for life and not just as a temporary measure.
On the second sentence quoted above, that's just a silly exaggeration I know of no leftist who wants to systematically eradicate Western culture in the way you describe, and indeed the multiculturalist project's biggest cheerleaders often seem to come from the liberal centre-left and neo-liberal centre/centre-right more than the capital-l Left.
If you could accuse the broader left of anything in this area, it's apathy they're more concerned with rights and equality than the preservation of culture. . |
I agree that the libertarian right tend to undermine Western values, but I do not think that is their aim. They just want efficient markets and to make money - also ignoble, but indifferent, not actually hostile to our culture. I think it is very evident, however, that the reflex position of most of the Left is oppositional. It tends to the overthrow of the existing order, and it tends to adopt a position which is hostile to our institutions and patterns of belief. This position is abetted greatly if our culture becomes disunited and fragmented into various solitudes among different identity groups. Surely it is no coincidence that the Left in almost all its forms is everywhere pro mass-immigration. To reject the self, you must embrace the other.
On your last sentence, there is always global crisis and inequality, most of it caused by bad government, mismanaged history and destructive cultural norms. The responsibility for durably fixing that can only lie with the people of the nations concerned, and It is folly to be forever making sacrifices to support those who hail from countries over which we have no control or influence. That way madness lies. Those who wish to sacrifice their own welfare to support others in need, have great credibility when they do so out of their own labour and their own funds, rather than socializing their conscience via the taxpayer.
I don't see how Stui's proposals can work without enforcement and I don't think many of us are happy to see our sons sucked into that kind of work, or to pay the costs of it. In the end, people can only free themselves.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
List of Islamic Terror:
Last 30 Days
This is part of the list of Islamic terror attacks maintained by TheReligionofPeace.com.
During this time period, there were 143 Islamic attacks in 23 countries, in which 1179 people were killed and 1142 injured.
So far, this year...
there have been; 619 Islamic attacks in 41 countries, in which 4356 people were killed and 4991 injured.
Last year, 2016....
there were 2478 Islamic attacks in 59 countries, in which 21241 people were killed and 26680 injured.
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | ^ You're absolutely right that most Syrians don't want to leave their homeland. And yet they have, by their hundreds of thousands, because they have no other option.
The fact is that there is no magic bullet here. .... |
I think millions is closer to the mark David.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Right on election time. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
