Ben No.3

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

Ist ja nett.

The "west"? Isn't the party line to trot out the ole "the majority of terrorism happens in ME countries". What did they do to deserve it? Oh yeah, slightly different interpretation of the scripture. I guess pretty much anything is a valid reason huh?Well you were bleating about Crusades and others so you weren't looking at the West? Isn't all that hard to understand things don't reach a point without a lot of hands involved. Ah well. No the West must take some responsibility for the rise of Islamic extremism, it would be disingenuous to suggest the West has played no part I would say the West is maybe 8-10 % responsible for Islamic extremism, the rest is other factors most Muslim countries are grappling with like implementing human rights and particularly recognizing the rights of minorities like women and other groups ... 8-10%? Yes I realize this may sound excessive but lets accept some historical blame ?The west has DEFINITELY messed up more than 8-10% of the Middle East. A lot more. Your view is delusional at best. I hope this is a joke I'm not getting.

We?

The "west"? Isn't the party line to trot out the ole "the majority of terrorism happens in ME countries". What did they do to deserve it? Oh yeah, slightly different interpretation of the scripture. I guess pretty much anything is a valid reason huh?Well you were bleating about Crusades and others so you weren't looking at the West? Isn't all that hard to understand things don't reach a point without a lot of hands involved. Ah well. No the West must take some responsibility for the rise of Islamic extremism, it would be disingenuous to suggest the West has played no part I would say the West is maybe 8-10 % responsible for Islamic extremism, the rest is other factors most Muslim countries are grappling with like implementing human rights and particularly recognizing the rights of minorities like women and other groups ... 8-10%?

Vox - A conversation with chess champion Garry Kasparov. Meh, US bought the 1996 election for that incompetent drunkard Yeltsin. So they gave Yeltsin one chance and it was the last free election they had as well. Yeah, except, for:Îles des Saintes Marie-Galante la Désirade Martinique Clipperton Island Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Martin Saint Bartholemew Mayotte Reunion French Guyana Tahiti New Caledonia I guess I could add all the colonies that the UK still holds as well (such as Diego Garcia, which the UK depopulated in the 60s/70s, to show how enlightened they'd become), but nah. Most people have never heard of half those places...you have to list relevant countries So only relevant people deserve sovereignty? And if so what determined relevance? If you go down that path you'll get into some very dangerous places I'm sure you don't include into "responsible capitalism"

Oh cmon, this is insulting. Our own countries shoot people trying to escape to Western world. I would say it was almost 0 people who get out of CCCP who wanted to create communism in the West. On contrary there are tons of Muslims in West who actually want to create sharia laws and caliphate inside of western world. Sharia laws are similar to ten commandments and laws in old testament, meaning that Muslims that don't live according to them are living in sin. There are lots of christian in western world that wants to make our countries laws more like laws in old testament, but that want alone don't make it become reality. And that is the fear that we somehow would suddenly accept Muslims code of morals instead of our own, and they would not and their children will not adopt our ethical codes and standards and assimilate them to their religious belief is the thing that currently drives lot of our policies and is one of the roots cause that drives resurgence extremist politics in main stream. In Finland we have over 100k people with Russian heritage and 70k of them speak Russia as their first language, big sunk of them are from Soviet times. In comparison there are 40k-65k Muslims in Finland. It is Muslims that are taking over our country according to our politicians. Not sure what are you saying by this. Also 10 commandments probably are not against most of secular laws in West, where Sharia sure is. Also I didn't heard that Christians are creating their own courts outside of regular secular courts. Like You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant (original translation slave), his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. Or Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Thus you will say to Israel’s sons: “Yahweh your fathers’ deity, Abraham’s deity, Isaac’s deity, and Jacob’s deity – He has sent me to you;” This is My name to eternity, and this is My designation age (by) age. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain." And laws in old testament go even more against many of our laws. There are Christian religions that have their own courts. Like for example in Finland we have Laestadianism which is a conservative Lutheran revival movement started in Lapland in the middle of the 19th century. Which has their elder council that judge over its members and their members often don't even go in our regular secular courts when it comes to disputes between two members. And they aren't only Christian sect that has their own court system. well, bad for you I would say as for the commandments - are there any rules/punishments for breaking them? Except not being considered good christian any more? Ask the Muslims who suffer under the Anti-balaka.

Not at all, as I mentioned numerous times Western democracies work even if there is some valid criticism and responsible Capitalism is the best way to grow most economies... Because western democracy and capitalism hasn't been used to "justify" any extremism? Oh it has historically but again you seem to ignore the data that is freely available when it comes to the best systems of government nowadays, we should not ask ourselves " what are the wealthiest top 10 countries " as the best metric as wealth doesnt always equate to happiness which should be more important. We should ask " what countries overall have the happiest citizens " ....they almost all Western countries, I don't need to convince anyone Western values offer the most effective governments. The facts are the facts http://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/top-10/2016-worlds-happiest-countries/ http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/23/travel/feat-world-happiest-countries-2015/index.html https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/the-worlds-happiest-countries-in-2016/ And even in those happy western countries, many fall to extremism. Extremism is nothing inherent to any (non extremist) ideology, it exist in any human society. That is, of course, true for extremism as for other things such as corruption. But it shows that extremism must be caused by other factors than merely the system people live under.. Besides, I'm very sceptical towards happiness measurements. What exactly do they measure?

Not at all, as I mentioned numerous times Western democracies work even if there is some valid criticism and responsible Capitalism is the best way to grow most economies ... Because western democracy and capitalism hasn't been used to "justify" any extremism? And does a working society equals a good society? Feudalism worked. Slave societies worked. They were also growing the economy.

Let's just agree that all ideologies and religions can be used in order to justify extremism, shall we?

Applies to Breivik?I don't know anything about him. I will say that there are always individuals who acted differently for different reasons, but we need to understand extremism as a social phenomenon, not and individual one.

They are not fleeing islam as a religion. They colonising and creating their own societies. You mean to say that most of them are fleeing war, persecution or poverty in their own countries and we don't let them to integrate to our society but instead we put them for years in centers where they have little to none daily interaction with main population. I would point out that tens of thousands of Muslim refugees are willing to convert to Christianity (although often motivated y hope that makes us to let them stay) Thank you. And that last part about converting, am I the only one who thinks that it points out an almost ridiculous problem of our oh so free society?

Okay, before I get in any deeper... does everyone here realise that there are causes of why people turn to extreme ideologies outside of the ideology itslef? Why do people turn to extremism? Usually it's due to poverty or oppression. Another possibility, especially in our modern world, is that people feel lost, or let down. Isolation is a big factor. We need to create a society that is open and caring, so people don't get the notion that the world they live in failed in. I'll write more later, right now I lack the time.

Oh my Bruce.... I'm disappointed. This deserves a more thought through answer. Give me a bit time.

"Be nice to muslims or they will kill you, because islam is the religion of peace", the post. No The message is "if someone becomes an extremist, help him and solve the problems that made him an extremist, don't just radicalise him further by showing more hate". Is that really so difficult to understand?

You people amuse me.... you recognise that a minority feels oppressed enough to go ahead and shoot people, and your saying that instead of oppressing we should now completely exclude the minority. And this is true both on a national and international level. Great logic guys. Let's answer extremism with hate... cause that always works

Isn't there a fundamental difference. One is protecting a specific target, the other is excluding everyone from a certain direction. It's the difference between putting a camera next to your safe or scanning every person that enters your house.

Well Merkel is part of the Conservative party, and they are loosing votes both to the left (especially to Martin Schulz and the SPD, the social democrats) and to the right. She tries to get back the votes she lost, and since she's in the Conservative party, that's easier by going that more right winged protectionist direction. If she tried to get more votes on the left, she'd had to stand up against Schulz, and would at the same time loose even more votes to the nationalist AfD. Schulz is the former EU parliament president. He had to overcome much harshness in his life, but managed to get quite far within the world of politics. Although never having worked in the German government before, he receives increasing popularity amongst voters. Inside the Center left SPD, Schulz is part of the more left wing (of the party). If the SPD is to win the elections and Schulz will be appointed chancellor, he could potentially enter a correlation with the other big left parties in Germany, the ecological oriented Green Party and the socialists (and kinda left populist, although not to the extent the AfD is right populist) party called simply "the left".

Is that a compliment? Besides, "12 or 13".... -.-

A conservative explains what he wants his political opponents to be more like: conservative. He'd like Europe. "Liberal" around here means mainly to advocate for a free market with less regulation. On the other hand, we have green parties, social democrats, socialists....

I feel like you are referring to Charlie Chaplins great dictator, but I don't get how

"guys, can't you just make thread named Trump? Its like 6th thread where every second post is about Trump. I fear that I will open fridge and there will be hidden Trump..." Okay We're gonna build huge walls of text, and we'll make Obsidian pay for it.

Wait... as a non American, I'm confused... if the constitution says that immigration is the legislatives job, how is it even possible for Trump to even attempt to control immigration?

Who needs a president to think when he has good guts? I mean look at those guts. He has great guts. They are the best guts. They just are! He can't help it. They're yuuuge.

Regarding question 20: It's "can" not "will". Basically the question is wether it will increase the chance of fascism rising.