Dutch director killed by islamist fanatic!

[CARLHAYDEN]

Apparently you didn't read (or understand) my previous postings.

I did NOT say that elections in Germany were regularly won by banning the opposition.

I did say that there was a record in western europe of banning the opposition, and cited specific examples of the same.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Do you remember how in Iran the 'elections' were rigged by banning all candidates who did not adhere to islamo-facism?

In much of western europe, elections are 'won' on a similiar basis by banning those who disagree with the idiotology of the 'politically correct.'

...

In both the Netherlands and Germany, banning parties that do not adhere to political correctness is done, just as in Belgium.

The rulers of many western european countries are afraid of their own people and are slowly inflicting a totalitarian state there to hold onto power.

Facts are facts.

The Iranian council banned candidates who did not toe their line and in Belgium (and other counties cited), if you dare disagree with the prevailing line you get banned as well.

Are you denying that parties in Belgium and Germany are banned if they don't toe the line on poltical correctness?

First hypothesis: "In much of western europe, elections are 'won' on a similiar basis by banning those who disagree with the idiotology of the 'politically correct.'"

Second hypothesis: "In both the Netherlands and Germany, banning parties that do not adhere to political correctness is done, just as in Belgium.
The rulers of many western european countries are afraid of their own people and are slowly inflicting a totalitarian state there to hold onto power."

Third hypothesis: "The Iranian council banned candidates who did not toe their line and in Belgium (and other counties cited), if you dare disagree with the prevailing line you get banned as well."
(Other countries cited would include Germany).

[CARLHAYDEN]

You really need to learn something both about language and logic (in this case set theory)

First, in Iran, candidates were banned from the ballot who did not agree with the mullahs (do you dispute it?)

Second, you have acknowledged that parties have been banned in Germany, will not adress the fact that parties have been banned in other western european countries, and that the governments of several western european countries have threatened to ban other parties (intimidating them into toeing the line).

Third, you have not comprehended the difference between some elections and ALL elections.  If all parties allowed the particpate agree to toe the line, there is NO need to ban them and the public has the 'choice' so deliciously parodied by Jonathan Swift of 'choosing' between parties whose disagreements are comparatively minor.

Fourth, when parties are aware that advocating a 'politically incorrect' position may result in their being banned, it is quite understandable that they will avoid those positions, even if favored by the electorate (its called intimidation).

So, in conclusion, the threat of banning, couples with tangible examples of the same having been done, is often sufficent to prevent policies from being advocated by parties.
 
Doesn't seem to me to be a particularly difficult concept to comprehend.

[Lunar]

Lunar,

I cited specific examples of where the europeans have banned political competition.

I would appreciate it if you could cite similiar examples of where political parties have been banned in the United States over the past fifty years.

We were "banning" leftist political organizations through intimidation, but not parties really.  My point earlier was simply put that we wouldn't want people to judge America by its own actions 50 years ago either.

In response to the last post:
I don't believe Old Europe ever advocated that banning parties is good.  He only disputed what he felt was exaggeration in your rhetoric.

[Middle-aged Europe]

You really need to learn something both about language and logic (in this case set theory)

First, in Iran, candidates were banned from the ballot who did not agree with the mullahs (do you dispute it?)

Second, you have acknowledged that parties have been banned in Germany, will not adress the fact that parties have been banned in other western european countries, and that the governments of several western european countries have threatened to ban other parties (intimidating them into toeing the line).

Third, you have not comprehended the difference between some elections and ALL elections.  If all parties allowed the particpate agree to toe the line, there is NO need to ban them and the public has the 'choice' so deliciously parodied by Jonathan Swift of 'choosing' between parties whose disagreements are comparatively minor.

Fourth, when parties are aware that advocating a 'politically incorrect' position may result in their being banned, it is quite understandable that they will avoid those positions, even if favored by the electorate (its called intimidation).

So, in conclusion, the threat of banning, couples with tangible examples of the same having been done, is often sufficent to prevent policies from being advocated by parties.
 
Doesn't seem to me to be a particularly difficult concept to comprehend.

But that´s not fully consistent with your earlier statements. Basically you changed your position from "In much of western europe, elections are 'won' on a similiar basis by banning those who disagree with the idiotology of the 'politically correct'" to "In much of western europe, extremist parties are forced to take a more moderate stance because they may fear getting banned". That way it makes much more sense.

Considering that all three "major" neo-Nazi parties in Germany are far from being "politically correct", I wonder to what extent your theory is plausible. Maybe a immediate short-term effect could be expected, but not much more. Especially the NPD was rather self-confident in the last time.

And personally I would appreciate it that you stop using inappropriate remarks like "You really need to learn something both about language and logic (in this case set theory)", "Apparently you didn't read (or understand) my previous postings", "I realize you have a great deal of difficulty..." or "I know you find this difficult to understand, but...". Thanks.

[Middle-aged Europe]

In response to the last post:
I don't believe Old Europe ever advocated that banning parties is good.  He only disputed what he felt was exaggeration in your rhetoric.

Well, in a world that isn´t just black and white it is a difficult issue without a satisfying solution.

I could repeat what I already said in answer to CARLHAYDEN´s question about how many bannings are too many: "I have no idea, but it should as close to zero as possible." And even CARLHAYDEN finally admitted that party bans are justified under extreme circumstances (the martial law thing).

Let´s say I´m very reluctant concerning the bans of parties.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Lunar,

I cited specific examples of where the europeans have banned political competition.

I would appreciate it if you could cite similiar examples of where political parties have been banned in the United States over the past fifty years.

We were "banning" leftist political organizations through intimidation, but not parties really.  My point earlier was simply put that we wouldn't want people to judge America by its own actions 50 years ago either.

In response to the last post:
I don't believe Old Europe ever advocated that banning parties is good.  He only disputed what he felt was exaggeration in your rhetoric.

I appreciate you point, but my point was that the banning of a political party in Belgium happened earlier this month, not fifty years ago.

I then pointed out that Belgium was not the only western european country to ban, and threaten to ban political parties.

Old europe chose to focus on the bans in Germany that were actually implemented, and ignored those in other countries which were more recently implemented, and the threatened bans in Germany (which have occured in the past few years).

He also chose to insert the concept of "all" elections, which was NOT my intent.

I have also pointed out that the intimidation is not limited to banning parties, but includes fineing those who engage in politically incorrect speech or writing (re: Bridget Bardot) and handing out lenient sentences to those who murder leaders of 'politically incorrect' parties (the Dutch example I previously cited).  Further, please note the requirement for licensing of churches, which was denied in Germany to the Scientologists.

In short, the banning of parties is but part of a larger whole of legal harassment of the 'politically incorrect' in much of western europe.

[freek]

I have also pointed out that the intimidation is not limited to banning parties, but includes fineing those who engage in politically incorrect speech or writing (re: Bridget Bardot) and handing out lenient sentences to those who murder leaders of 'politically incorrect' parties (the Dutch example I previously cited). 

About the lenient sentences in the Netherlands: Mr Van der Graaf received an 18-year sentence for murder. That is extremely high for a single murder, committed by someone without a criminal record, and with a low chance of repeat. The court gave a higher sentence than usual because a politician was murdered. Normally, a single murder would result in a 12 year sentence.

Although the maximum sentence in the Netherlands is life imprisonment, this has only been used very sparsely, and only for multiple murders.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Ah, but Freek, the murderer will be released in 2014, as the sentences are pretty meaningless since early release is the norm.

Compare, Sirhan Sirhan mudered Robert Kennedy in 1968 (36 years ago).  He's in prison today, and probably will continue to be imprisoned for the forseeable future (unless he dies in prison soon).

[freek]

Ah, but Freek, the murderer will be released in 2014, as the sentences are pretty meaningless since early release is the norm.

That's right. Maybe the sentence looks low in your eyes. But he is sentenced by a Dutch court, and he did not receive a lenient sentence  in Dutch eyes.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I can remember some friends of mine who lived in the Netherlands at the time, and they reported that many of the supporters of the murdered party leader where very angry with the sentence, while the local lefties were celebrating  the sentence.

I am not suprised that from your perspective. and perhaps that of your friends the sentence was considered to be 'reasonable.'

I wonder if someone murdered the leaders of the left parties if the court would be so 'reasonable' (lenient).

[phk]

Religous people should be fed to Loins.

Good for population control as well.

[freek]

I can remember some friends of mine who lived in the Netherlands at the time, and they reported that many of the supporters of the murdered party leader where very angry with the sentence, while the local lefties were celebrating  the sentence.

Not really celebrating, but they agreed with the court. Fortuyn's supporters would have considered any sentence lower than the death penalty (performed in the most cruel way possible) as lenient.

[opebo]

Religous people should be fed to Loins.

Good for population control as well.

Brilliant sentiment!  I couldn't agree more.

Though in general - and assuming no religious infestations - I like a rapidly growing population.

[phk]

Immigration should be well-regulated to secular-minded folks.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Tenderloin sandwich anyone?

[Huckleberry Finn]

120 replies already!  Probably my most popular thread.

About the sentence of Fortyun's murderer. 18 years in jail is very long time in most European countries.

Personally I support much longer sentences.

[CARLHAYDEN]

But, nobody serves the sentence in Denmark.

Care to bet the murderer is out long before the so-called sentence is due to be completed?

[opebo]

They should've sentenced him to be fed to the lions.

[Governor PiT]

we really need an American Pym Fortun.

[Middle-aged Europe]

we really need an American Pym Fortun.

So, America needs an openly gay politician, who opposes Muslim immigration and gets assassinated by an environmental activist?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Please don't respond to any comments the troll posts when he bumps threads. It's just giving him what he wants; attention.