Bomb and shooting in Norway

[Meshugger]

USA had it as well, until about the time of the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

[Hell Kitty]

Didn't Australia use to have a blatantly racist immigration policy. If you were white you got in, that sort of thing.

 

White Australia policy

[Gorth]

Aborigines became citizens of Australia in 1967. Before that, they were classified as 'Flora and Fauna'.

 

Before that, there was the stolen generation, attempts to 'breed out' the 'aboriginesness' of people etc.

 

Not exactly a muster example of a tolerant, multicultural society.

[Nightshape]

Australia Multi-cultural as f***

[Gfted1]

USA had it as well, until about the time of the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

 

Care to elaborate? As everyone is aware, the US is almost entirely comprised of immigrants. Im not aware of any group specifically singled out as not being alowed entry.

[Nightshape]

USA had it as well, until about the time of the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

 

Care to elaborate? As everyone is aware, the US is almost entirely comprised of immigrants. Im not aware of any group specifically singled out as not being alowed entry.

 

It's the US, I can certainly believe it but yeah, totally want to see some reference.

[Morgoth]

Immigrants coming to the US are commited to become American citizens (unlike many immigrants who come to Europe...). That's by definition not multiculturism, but multi-ethnicy.

[Walsingham]

I do often think that tolerance of multi-culturalism is in directly inverse proportion to how actually multi-cultural a place is. Everything's hunky-dory until suddenly 40% of people don't agree with your notions on birth control or nepotism or paying taxes.

 

Amd I'm specifically talking culture here, not how one dresses or the colour of skin. I often find I have more in common with Indians than I do with Middle England.

 

You know, that makes think. Perhaps multi-culturalism is as much a function of the speed with which society is changing as a whole, with technology and the media as it is with mass movement of people.

[Nightshape]

You know, that makes think. Perhaps multi-culturalism is as much a function of the speed with which society is changing as a whole, with technology and the media as it is with mass movement of people.

 

Good call.

 

I actually think you've a fair point here, I have nothin in common with pretty much everyone, except for the fact of being a Yorkshireman gives me something in common with other, Yorkshiremen. Past that, I just wish everyone would feck off.

 

Seriously though, I do think you're onto something with the rate of change observation. I saw Bradford change from a white working class city into Bradistan over a period of about 10 years. That kind of stuff is going to cause riots, far as I know, now most of the white folk have moved out they've begun turning on each other.

Edited August 3, 2011 by Nightshape

[Orogun01]

Immigrants coming to the US are commited to become American citizens (unlike many immigrants who come to Europe...). That's by definition not multiculturism, but multi-ethnicy.

There just so many more factors to Immigration in the US that make the comparison unjust.

Namely the facility with which the US absorbs immigrants, after two generations they are completely "Americanized". The US also tends to absorb practices from different cultures as their own, e.g: Hanuka and Cinco de Mayo.

 

There is probably some geopolitical issues that make migrations in Europe different to the US, such as land resources.

[Meshugger]

USA had it as well, until about the time of the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

 

Care to elaborate? As everyone is aware, the US is almost entirely comprised of immigrants. Im not aware of any group specifically singled out as not being alowed entry.

 

Certainly,

 

Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

 

which abolished the previous,

 

National_Origins_Formula

[Humodour]

If I were you, Krezack, I wouldn't be so optimistic about Australia. You're right that it is in a very good position politically and economically to grow as a stable and reliable powerhouse over the next few decades, and of course it's one of the better places to live in. But if we look at multiculturalism, for instance, I don't see much indication that Australians as a whole have a deeply embedded ideology of multiculturalism and tolerance (beyond the general Western standard). The openness to Asia and Asians, fuelled in part by the recognition that they are critical for Australia's trade prospects, is not the whole picture - there's also a fair bit of latent xenophobia, as exemplified, say, in the Australian media & politics' knee-jerk reaction to the Chinalco-Rio Tinto deal back in 09/10. (Basically, everyone crying OH GOD THE CHINESE ARE TAKING OVER WE DONT WANT THEIR SORT HERE, as if China = Big Brother...) The burqa issue, i.e. a non-issue that has been made into an issue, that has now crossed from France to Australia/NZ will also be a big litmus test in the next few years. In short, I think Australia has been able to afford to be multicultural and tolerant because its economy's been going well and because that's been the dominant paradigm, but I don't see anything really deeply rooted that suggests Australian society will hold on to that as a high priority value if things go bad/different.

 

I flat-out disagree and what you said sounds like the opinion of somebody who reads a lot of warped coverage about Australia in the news, but has little actual exposure to the country. The fact that you referenced the failed Chinalco (owned by the Chinese government) bid to buy out entirey Australia's and the world's second largest resource miner fully affirms my feeling that you're talking **** (China is not Japan, Taiwan, or Korea - all countries which Australians like. China is a totalitarian state which shares none of our democratic liberal values, unlike Taiwan, Korea, and Japan, and has further shown disturbing aggression towards its aforementioned neighbours since its inception through to current times).

 

Moreover, I want to point out the stark differences in tolerance and attitude to multiculturalism between the younger (18 to 30) generations and the older ones. Clearly given the overwhelming number of youth who strongly support multiculturalism and racial tolerance compared with their elders the general trend is going to be the opposite of your silly little prediction - an increasingly multicultural and tolerant Australia. And fewer idiot redneck bogans (please do NOT confuse the vocal minority with the silent majority!).

[Humodour]

Aborigines became citizens of Australia in 1967. Before that, they were classified as 'Flora and Fauna'.

 

Before that, there was the stolen generation, attempts to 'breed out' the 'aboriginesness' of people etc.

 

Not exactly a muster example of a tolerant, multicultural society.

 

Oh yeah? And what has happened since the official adoption of a policy of multiculturalism decades ago? You're using what Australia used to be like many decades ago to somehow 'prove' that Australia is intolerant now? My age would have to be about 3 times larger for me to begin to have a sound understanding of those days. Talk about misleading.

[Walsingham]

You know, that makes think. Perhaps multi-culturalism is as much a function of the speed with which society is changing as a whole, with technology and the media as it is with mass movement of people.

 

Good call.

 

I actually think you've a fair point here, I have nothin in common with pretty much everyone, except for the fact of being a Yorkshireman gives me something in common with other, Yorkshiremen. Past that, I just wish everyone would feck off.

 

Seriously though, I do think you're onto something with the rate of change observation. I saw Bradford change from a white working class city into Bradistan over a period of about 10 years. That kind of stuff is going to cause riots, far as I know, now most of the white folk have moved out they've begun turning on each other.

 

To those reading this and thinking "Nightshape's gone mental", go to Bradford. Look at it, and tell me honestly you don't think it's a bit damned strange.

 

It's not that I don't think the infusion of new cultures won't be beneficial in the long run. I myself come from continental stock back in the 1600s. But I do think that in general system terms rapid change of any kind provokes system instability and in extreme cases total system collapse.

 

The trouble is that the 'solution' is completely beyond me. Although I rather like the notion of accepting anyone into the country provided we turf out some wanker instead on a like for like basis.

[Nightshape]

You know, that makes think. Perhaps multi-culturalism is as much a function of the speed with which society is changing as a whole, with technology and the media as it is with mass movement of people.

 

Good call.

 

I actually think you've a fair point here, I have nothin in common with pretty much everyone, except for the fact of being a Yorkshireman gives me something in common with other, Yorkshiremen. Past that, I just wish everyone would feck off.

 

Seriously though, I do think you're onto something with the rate of change observation. I saw Bradford change from a white working class city into Bradistan over a period of about 10 years. That kind of stuff is going to cause riots, far as I know, now most of the white folk have moved out they've begun turning on each other.

 

To those reading this and thinking "Nightshape's gone mental", go to Bradford. Look at it, and tell me honestly you don't think it's a bit damned strange.

 

It's not that I don't think the infusion of new cultures won't be beneficial in the long run. I myself come from continental stock back in the 1600s. But I do think that in general system terms rapid change of any kind provokes system instability and in extreme cases total system collapse.

 

The trouble is that the 'solution' is completely beyond me. Although I rather like the notion of accepting anyone into the country provided we turf out some wanker instead on a like for like basis.

 

How does one decide on what level of wankery is acceptable?

 

The comings of goings of people globally don't bother me one bit, most people are harmless, they just wish to work hard, and have a better life. Its when you get large groups gathering togeather in the same place, and the motivation is "England in Spain", or "Pakistan in England" etc... Etc... I find that to be destructive to soociety, and basically results in a despora of people whom had been born in an area for generations. You can see that as good or bad, but I can understand the anger of people who get left behind, whom rememeber how things were, and have problems adapting to the change.

 

This happend alot in Eastern Europe, alot of the older generation, who only knew commie ways, struggled to adapt to a more free society based on capitalism.

[obyknven]

[obyknven]

You know, that makes think. Perhaps multi-culturalism is as much a function of the speed with which society is changing as a whole, with technology and the media as it is with mass movement of people.

bull****

Inventions of the Third Reich (mono-cultural and intolerant):

 

Volkswagen

KdF

computer, invented by Konrad Zuse 1941.

Jet plane in 1939 by Heinkel Flugzeugwerke.

The first manned rocket flight in 1945 (unfortunately it lasted only some seconds and pilot Lothar Sieber died)

Nazi doctors, in line with their campaign for public health were the first to write a major scientific paper linking smoking with lung cancer, I believe smoking was even banned, for a brief time in the Luftwaffee.

Nazis invented Nerve gasses Sarin and Tabun.

Invented first effective automatic rifle, single person anti-tank weapons (precursors to RPGs).

You can see some magnificant architecture by Speer that was planned in nearly any documentary on the man.

Autobahns

Stealth technolgy was invented by the Horten brothers during the Reich.

Audio technology using magnetic tape was a Third Reich invention. Copying German tape recorders was how the famous American corporation Ampex got its start. Magnetic tape was also essential later for the video tape recorder. Allies hadn't a clue how the Axis was transmitting speeches and programs hours apart to different locations and having them sound "live." It was top of the list of technologies to capture as the war concluded.

Management systems for keeping massive and complex development programs on track was another "invention" transferred to the US, along with its scientists and project managers. These systems allowed the Germans to have developments underway in numerous categories and perform them remarkably well.

The Wankel engine, which is now referred to as the "rotary engine" was invented during the Third Reich. Mazda uses this engine extensively.

 

Someone mentioned the Autobahnen as really an idea thought up during the Weimar Republic. Yes, but that brings to light another achievement, and that is simply the will and energy to put unemployed workers to work doing things that needed to be done, something the Weimar government was totally inept at doing. "Parliamentary chaos" combined with acquiescence to WWI reparations were the problems.

 

Missile technology: Ground-to-ground, air-to-air, air-to-ground, ground-to-air, ship-to-ship, etc., using wire guidance, TV guidance, IR guidance (everything but laser quidance). Most of these missiles were not at the highest form of development, but their work launched and made a bundle of money later on for corporations like Boeing, Raytheon, Hughes Aircraft, North American Aviation (Rocketdyne Div.), etc. All of these companies had their German "Chief Scientist" heading up research and development operations.

 

The promising IR technologies were mostly all developed during the Third Reich. They had "night vision" devices while the Allies were still wondering if such things were possible.

 

Modern sewer treatment facilities are all derived from Third Reich technology. You've probably seen them with their settling ponds and huge skimmers.

 

While the Englishman, Farnsworth, gets credit for the invention of a very rudimentary television, it was the Third Reich that perfected television and conducted the first broadcasting.

 

Application of geophones for seismic wave detection was used for locating artillary.

 

The "wishbone cannon" was invented and installed at Calais, France. It was destroyed before it was operable.

 

The "rail gun" was another significant invention, which the US and SU copied. This weapon employes a series of ring magnets to propell a rail mounted projectile. The significant feature of this "gun" is that it can accelerate the projectile at a speed nearing infinity -- at least in theory. Conventional explosives are limited by their individual, finite rates of expansion and hence constrained in how fast they can make a projectile move.

 

The intial "invention" of the Third Reich that made everything possible was the breaking away from the international banking system, which made its money on debt finance; i.e., usury. This act was probably the most important event which caused WWII to later occur. In the Thirties the German economy was booming and all sorts of new humane benefits were granted to workers. Elsewhere, deep economic depression was underway, and Roosevelt, for instance, really couldn't get things to moving until we went into a war economy mode.

 

In all, 300,000 patents and copyrights were expropriated from Germany by the Allies after 1945.

 

The Fischer-Tropsch process to produce synthetic fuels from coal, which fueled Germany's armed forces throughout the war.

 

The dicovery of the ingesting of faecal bacteria to cure gut problems

 

Dr Morell used his Mutaflor to treat Hitler's foul smelling stools. And used today as Symbioflor

 

The chemical enhancing of soldiers' ability to fight

 

During the Nazi era, German scientists and engineers either developed or greatly improved television, jet-propelled aircraft (including the ejection seat), guided missiles, electronic computers, the electron microscope, atomic fission, data-processing technologies, pesticides, and, of course, the world's first industrial murder complexes. The first magnetic tape recording was of a speech by Hitler, and the nerve gases Sarin and Tabun were Nazi inventions.

 

Third Reich scientists also performed extensive work in the area of occupational carcinogenesis. Physicians documented the health hazards of asbestos, and in 1943 Germany became the first nation to recognize lung cancer and mesothelioma caused by asbestos inhalation as compensable occupational illnesses.

Nazi Germany also pioneered what we now call experimental epidemiology: two striking papers -- a 1939 article by Franz H. M?ller of Cologne, and a 1943 paper by Eberhard Schairer and Erich Sch?niger of Jena -- presented the most convincing demonstrations up to that time that cigarettes were a major cause of lung cancer.

 

Inflatable sex doll - Dr. Rudolf Chargeheimer, a psychiatrist appointed by Himmler to help develop the prototype, wrote that "the purpose and goal of the dolls is to relieve our soldiers. They have to fight and not to mingle with 'foreign women.'"

 

The opiate drugs methadone (the heroin substitute) and pethidine (a powerful pain killer) were Nazi inventions.

 

Our society, in fact Western society in general, absorbed as much of the Nazi technology and social control mechanisms as we could lay our grubby hands on. Turbine engines (the kind on airplanes and in powerplants), modern aircraft designs, rockets, superhighways, propaganda techniques, political manipulation, modern insecticides, nerve gas and audiotape are all Nazi inventions. We didn't invent them, and we weren't working on them at the same time. We took them from the Nazis wholesale (and we were entirely right to do so). Oddly, I'm not hearing anyone getting bent out of shape about the existence of freeways.

 

Much of what we know about hypothermia (re-warming techniques and cold-water suits) comes, chillingly, from Nazi medical experiments.

 

 

Custom-designed, IBM-produced punch cards, sorted by IBM machines leased to the Nazis, helped organize and manage the initial identification and social expulsion of Jews and others, the confiscation of their property, their ghettoization, their deportation, and, ultimately, even their extermination.

IBM's German subsidiary was Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft, known by the acronym Dehomag.

For example, one series of punch cards was designed to record religion, national origin, and mother tongue, but by creating special columns and rows for Jew, Polish language, Polish nationality, the fur trade as an occupation, and then Berlin, Nazis could quickly cross-tabulate, at the rate of 25,000 cards per hour, exactly how many Berlin furriers were Jews of Polish extraction. Railroad cars, which could take two weeks to locate and route, could be swiftly dispatched in just 48 hours by means of a vast network of punch-card machines. Indeed, IBM services coursed through the entire German infrastructure in Europe.

 

Microwave cooking too.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Gorth
Language

[Gorgon]

And of course Kentucky fried chicken. not a lot of people know this.

[Morgoth]

You forgot Nazi UFOs. They were actually an Austrian invention (Viktor Schauberger), but I see your point about the Third Reich...

Edited August 4, 2011 by Morgoth

[Gorgon]

Historically scientific advances follow prolonged warfare, so whether a society is inclusive or not is not as important than whether it has a perceived sense of urgency. It need not be active warfare, take the US and the USSR space race for instance.

[Morgoth]

Yeah but remember the US wouldn't have gotten so far in rocket engineering and the Space race without the help of the Germans...

[Tigranes]

I flat-out disagree and what you said sounds like the opinion of somebody who reads a lot of warped coverage about Australia in the news, but has little actual exposure to the country. The fact that you referenced the failed Chinalco (owned by the Chinese government) bid to buy out entirey Australia's and the world's second largest resource miner fully affirms my feeling that you're talking **** (China is not Japan, Taiwan, or Korea - all countries which Australians like. China is a totalitarian state which shares none of our democratic liberal values, unlike Taiwan, Korea, and Japan, and has further shown disturbing aggression towards its aforementioned neighbours since its inception through to current times).

 

Moreover, I want to point out the stark differences in tolerance and attitude to multiculturalism between the younger (18 to 30) generations and the older ones. Clearly given the overwhelming number of youth who strongly support multiculturalism and racial tolerance compared with their elders the general trend is going to be the opposite of your silly little prediction - an increasingly multicultural and tolerant Australia. And fewer idiot redneck bogans (please do NOT confuse the vocal minority with the silent majority!).

 

I'd be interested to hear more about what you feel are the distortions in my impression - in the end it's hard to beat actually being in the country. I can definitely agree with the generational shift argument, though I'm less convinced that the 'silent majority' in Australia (and to an extent, NZ) stands so far apart from the vocal minority. If anything, there are two vocal minorities - the 'crazy' anti-immigrant voice, and the 'higher values we are the world' voice of tolerance - and the 'silent majority' oscillates between depending on the issue and their own demographic. In particular, it'll be interesting to see the actual public opinion makeup on the burqa issue, 'boat people' refugees, etc.

 

Re. Chinalco, if you're saying that the media hoopla was just that, a circus, fair enough, but I don't think you can say that it's different just because it's China. If we're talking the specific arguments for and against the Chinalco bid, I'd definitely agree that there were legitimate concerns with the Chinese government in the background, etc., but I'm talking about the way in which a rather blanket, uninformed anti-Chinese rhetoric was so widely mobilised. A lot of the discourse was at the level of "this is CHINA. No explanations necessary. Hide your children" - Australia has a lot to worry about China in terms of the natural resources market, regional soft power, etc., but that is different.

[Calax]

I'm with gorgon about that, but I did want to point out that AR's were produced before the Reich (the BAR was 1917 I believe, just never used).

 

And England had the first anti-smoking writer (King James I)

[Enoch]

USA had it as well, until about the time of the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

 

Care to elaborate? As everyone is aware, the US is almost entirely comprised of immigrants. Im not aware of any group specifically singled out as not being alowed entry.

 

Certainly,

 

Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

 

which abolished the previous,

 

National_Origins_Formula

There were also 19th-century policies aimed to actively exclude immigrants from China and Japan.

 

There's a long history of nativist politics in America, in spite of its immigrant roots. Early on, nativist groups were primarily anti-Catholic. By the late 19th century, they took on more racial tones (recall that thinkers like Herbert Spencer were still quite well thought of at that time), particularly with regard to Asians and folks from central America and the further Southern and Eastern portions of Europe. However, prior to the 1920s, business interests (who wanted a continued source of cheap immigrant labor) were successful in keeping the nativists from implementing any seriously restrictive policies.

[Meshugger]

USA had it as well, until about the time of the civil rights movement of the 1960's.

 

Care to elaborate? As everyone is aware, the US is almost entirely comprised of immigrants. Im not aware of any group specifically singled out as not being alowed entry.

 

Certainly,

 

Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

 

which abolished the previous,

 

National_Origins_Formula

There were also 19th-century policies aimed to actively exclude immigrants from China and Japan.

 

There's a long history of nativist politics in America, in spite of its immigrant roots. Early on, nativist groups were primarily anti-Catholic. By the late 19th century, they took on more racial tones (recall that thinkers like Herbert Spencer were still quite well thought of at that time), particularly with regard to Asians and folks from central America and the further Southern and Eastern portions of Europe. However, prior to the 1920s, business interests (who wanted a continued source of cheap immigrant labor) were successful in keeping the nativists from implementing any seriously restrictive policies.

 

I hear ya. I didn't know about the anti-catholic movement though.

 

I just wanted to point that the US immigrant policy wasn't a free-for-all, as some might think it was.