• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Germany Fights Population Drop

Graffias

Rogue
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
924
Reaction score
309
Location
Midwest U.S
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/w...nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130814&_r=1&

SONNEBERG, Germany — At first glance, this town in central Germany, with rows of large houses built when it was a thriving center of toy manufacturing, looks tidy and prosperous. But Heiko Voigt, the deputy mayor here, can point out dozens of vacant homes that he doubts will ever be sold. The reality is that the German population is shrinking and towns like this one are working hard to hide the emptiness. Mr. Voigt has already supervised the demolition of 60 houses and 12 apartment blocs, strategically injecting grassy patches into once-dense complexes. “We are trying to keep the town looking good,” he said.

There is perhaps nowhere better than the German countryside to see the dawning impact of Europe’s plunge in fertility rates over the decades, a problem that has frightening implications for the economy and the psyche of the Continent. In some areas, there are now abundant overgrown yards, boarded-up windows and concerns about sewage systems too empty to work properly. The work force is rapidly graying, and assembly lines are being redesigned to minimize bending and lifting. In its most recent census, Germany discovered it had lost 1.5 million inhabitants. By 2060, experts say, the country could shrink by an additional 19 percent, to about 66 million.

Very simple fix to this solution. Get women out of the workforce and back to making babies and raising kids. Force out foreigners who are breeding at a faster rate than native Germans. Ban feminism and make motherhood respectable again. Offer generous tax credits for families who have three or more children. Bring back the Lebensborn.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,216
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"Ban feminism"

hahaha
 

Fallenangel

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
3,416
Reaction score
1,099
Location
Israel/Russia/UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
One thing from this article looked especially weird to me, this quote:
“If you look closely at the numbers, what you see is the higher the gender equality, the higher the birthrate”

Dunno where they got this from or what are they are basing this assertion on...has anyone got any ideas?

Cheers,
Fallen.
 

Ryan5

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
2,191
Reaction score
483
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/w...nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130814&_r=1&



Very simple fix to this solution. Get women out of the workforce and back to making babies and raising kids. Force out foreigners who are breeding at a faster rate than native Germans. Ban feminism and make motherhood respectable again. Offer generous tax credits for families who have three or more children. Bring back the Lebensborn.


An interesting topic and good thread.


One thing I've noticed in life so far is that my views have changed. I used to be a very staunch 'More is better' advocate. Then as I started to go through young adulthood I realized that there are no real benefits to having tens of millions of consumerist, lower class populations that are generationally 'doomed' in many respects due to their parents, their parents and their parents generally having all been raised poorly without any basic values attributable to anything. No religion. No family connections as children. No role models. 'Go out and exist' populations. Having 100 people of which only 50 are truly capable of making it in todays world without succumbing to the dregs of vice and consumerism because their parents gave them nothing in values, you do have to begin to ask yourself, I certainly have, do we truly benefit from the other 50 people out of those 100 existing or do they sink us? To me the answer is clear.


Basically, is it better for 50 drunks, addicts and void individuals to exist for the sake of mass consumerism or is this essentially a crime in and of itself? Could the true human rights issue of our day be that it's unfair for these people to be born in the first place into a life of nothingness that they had no real way to prevent? I honestly do not think Germany needs to replicate America's 'WalMart white Ghetto Hells'. They offer nothing. They should be prevented.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,216
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
One thing from this article looked especially weird to me, this quote:
“If you look closely at the numbers, what you see is the higher the gender equality, the higher the birthrate”

Dunno where they got this from or what are they are basing this assertion on...has anyone got any ideas?

Cheers,
Fallen.

That must be a typo, it's counter to everything known to sociology.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
19,844
Reaction score
9,666
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
One thing from this article looked especially weird to me, this quote:
“If you look closely at the numbers, what you see is the higher the gender equality, the higher the birthrate”

Dunno where they got this from or what are they are basing this assertion on...has anyone got any ideas?

Cheers,
Fallen.

Scandinavian countries have higher gender equality than most other Western countries and the article states they are part of the fertility belt that includes Britain. The link above is a clickable graphic which shows that Finland, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK all have gender equality of 60% and above and they also according to the papers on Sweden linked below explain why higher gender equality means higher birthrate.

Princeton Paper

Indexmundi Chart

However some will read anti-immigrant / anti-muslim websites and tell you all the kids being born in Sweden are brown / muslim.

This paper from the Max Planck Institute examines the historical rise in fertility in Sweden and again attribute very family friendly social practice as the main reason.

There is a band of fertility in Europe, stretching from France to Britain and the Scandinavian countries, helped along by immigrants and social services that support working women.

This means that mothers have security in return to the workplace, feel valued as workers and that society has placed childcare in place to help with raising kids. If you read on - ending the school day at lunchtime is going to put pressure on one parent to stay at home to keep the kids safe.

So... banning feminism, making mothers stay at home and simple tax credits (the OP) is not going to work.

As for Lebensborn... holy crud.

/end thread.
 

German guy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
5,187
Reaction score
4,255
Location
Berlin, Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I don't think there is a single town in Germany literally dying out because of demographic problems. Never heard of this, and this article is obviously misleading.

What you do have, though, is inner-German migration away from economically declining/weak towns and regions into economically more prosperous and/or attractive regions: In most big German cities, rents for apartments are increasing. Even here in Berlin, which used to have a lot of free apartments a few years ago. But now, everybody and their dog is moving here. Hamburg and Munich are almost approaching a situation as in London or Paris, when it comes to rents. Former heavy industry towns and some rural regions are abandoned, on the other side.

So this article is misleading at best. There is indeed a demographic population decline, but it's nowhere near as dramatic as the image of deserting towns suggests, if it's even a problem (nothing directed immigration can't solve). The fact that many quarters in "rust belt" cities are deserting is no evidence, not even an illustration of a general decline in population of the US either.
 

Dooble

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
311
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/w...nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130814&_r=1&



Very simple fix to this solution. Get women out of the workforce and back to making babies and raising kids. Force out foreigners who are breeding at a faster rate than native Germans. Ban feminism and make motherhood respectable again. Offer generous tax credits for families who have three or more children. Bring back the Lebensborn.
Much, much too radical. Just demolish the empty homes and grow hemp fields in the empty lots.
 

Dooble

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
311
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/w...nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130814&_r=1&



Very simple fix to this solution. Get women out of the workforce and back to making babies and raising kids. Force out foreigners who are breeding at a faster rate than native Germans. Ban feminism and make motherhood respectable again. Offer generous tax credits for families who have three or more children. Bring back the Lebensborn.
Germany's citizens should also start brushing up on their Arabic.
 
Last edited:

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
37,939
Reaction score
13,546
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Boy this thread stinks of American right wing fantasy and borderline neo nazi thinking..
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
7,751
Reaction score
4,718
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm so sick of this crap. Can ignorant right wing nutjobs stop making threads at DP please? Better yet, just stop posting to the internet.

Feminism didn't make motherhood disrespectable, it let women do more things with their lives than be baby receptacles.

There is ZERO evidence that Germany's problems are related to feminism. How about the cost of living thanks to RIGHT WING globalists who care about profit over ensuring that people in society can afford to live?

The growth model is defunct. We don't need more people on this planet, we need fewer people and better living.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,966
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm so sick of this crap. Can ignorant right wing nutjobs stop making threads at DP please? Better yet, just stop posting to the internet.

Feminism didn't make motherhood disrespectable, it let women do more things with their lives than be baby receptacles.

There is ZERO evidence that Germany's problems are related to feminism. How about the cost of living thanks to RIGHT WING globalists who care about profit over ensuring that people in society can afford to live?

The growth model is defunct. We don't need more people on this planet, we need fewer people and better living.

It's not European countries that are facing overpopulation. Though they are facing a lot of illegal immigration. It's africa, ME and some asian countries that have too many people and too low standards of living. Tell them to stop having so many kids. So this doesn't apply here.

This doesn't mean I agree with the OP. I really couldn't care less what he has to say, he wrote socialist in his description and that's enough to drive me off.
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
7,751
Reaction score
4,718
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's not European countries that are facing overpopulation. Though they are facing a lot of illegal immigration. It's africa, ME and some asian countries that have too many people and too low standards of living. Tell them to stop having so many kids. So this doesn't apply here.

This doesn't mean I agree with the OP. I really couldn't care less what he has to say, he wrote socialist in his description and that's enough to drive me off.

I'm happy to have a rational conversation about this, and it seems you are too. What I can't respect is an Americentric OP who thinks the war on socialism is global and thinks that feminism and immigration are Germany's or Europe's problem right now.

Europe is suffering from the same economic root problems as the United States, caused by rampant speculation and insolvent fiscal policy. Saying that it's women's fault for not staying at home and being baby machines or immigrants for migrating toward prosperity is just ludacris.
 

Dooble

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
311
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm happy to have a rational conversation about this, and it seems you are too. What I can't respect is an Americentric OP who thinks the war on socialism is global and thinks that feminism and immigration are Germany's or Europe's problem right now.

Europe is suffering from the same economic root problems as the United States, caused by rampant speculation and insolvent fiscal policy. Saying that it's women's fault for not staying at home and being baby machines or immigrants for migrating toward prosperity is just ludacris.
Do you believe in motherhood?
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
7,751
Reaction score
4,718
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, you equated mothers to baby machines, so naturally, I had to ask.

No, the OP did that, I was just pointing out how ridiculous it was.
 

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
46,020
Reaction score
27,379
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/w...nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130814&_r=1&



Very simple fix to this solution. Get women out of the workforce and back to making babies and raising kids.

The workforce is already short-handed.

Force out foreigners who are breeding at a faster rate than native Germans. Ban feminism and make motherhood respectable again. Offer generous tax credits for families who have three or more children. Bring back the Lebensborn.

Germans and other Europeans understand that it's a mistake to increase the population. Especially in places where the population is already sufficient to sustain itself.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,966
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm happy to have a rational conversation about this, and it seems you are too. What I can't respect is an Americentric OP who thinks the war on socialism is global and thinks that feminism and immigration are Germany's or Europe's problem right now.

Europe is suffering from the same economic root problems as the United States, caused by rampant speculation and insolvent fiscal policy. Saying that it's women's fault for not staying at home and being baby machines or immigrants for migrating toward prosperity is just ludacris.

Well, I think population falls firstly under social problems, rather than economic ones.
Mass immigration is a big problem, especially from ME and african countries. Mass, unregulated, illegal immigration has no good outcomes for anyone. And that's what both the US and the EU are dealing it.
The economy is another issue, that's true.
Feminism, as an idea, isn't a problem. Some strains of feminist mentality are socially disruptive and do a lot of harm, just like some strains of anything (religion, politics, etc) are very bad for society. I personally only met 1 feminist in my entire life so I don't have personal experience to discuss this on, and even if I had, I wouldn't use it. I use what is seen on the internet. For example, women like anita sarkeessian or whatever her name is, (the one with the tropes vs women videos that were posted on DP some time ago) are very much, extremist feminists who see sexism everywhere. Because you know, they're fanatics. Only not in the name of a religion, but of a gender.
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
7,751
Reaction score
4,718
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, I think population falls firstly under social problems, rather than economic ones.

It has economic origins, which is why I place it under "economic". Or we can just compromise and call it socioeconomic. People wouldn't be migrating in droves to the western world if it weren't for the inequities being caused by globalization.

Mass immigration is a big problem, especially from ME and african countries. Mass, unregulated, illegal immigration has no good outcomes for anyone. And that's what both the US and the EU are dealing it.

Immigration is a consequence of globalization and neo-liberal policy. Trade treaties and organizations like the IMF are creating circumstances where mass migration is necessary for survival; and now we have climate change as an additional factor.

The economy is another issue, that's true.

The economy is central. It's #1. Everything else expands outward from that.

Feminism, as an idea, isn't a problem. Some strains of feminist mentality are socially disruptive and do a lot of harm, just like some strains of anything (religion, politics, etc) are very bad for society.

Could you give some examples of how it's disruptive and harmful? Your statement is bold but lacks substance.

For example, women like anita sarkeessian or whatever her name is, (the one with the tropes vs women videos that were posted on DP some time ago) are very much, extremist feminists who see sexism everywhere. Because you know, they're fanatics. Only not in the name of a religion, but of a gender.

Anita Sarkeesian is not a radical feminist. If anything, she's a scholarly feminist turned activist. Her contribution to feminism is mostly research and media, she doesn't go out and commit radical acts against the patriarchy. So calling her an extremist is not factually accurate.

I do have some critiques of her, but I do not find her extreme at all. She makes many good points, and a lot of her facts are gathered from ancillary sources; so she's not just spouting diatribe, there is real research behind it.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,966
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It has economic origins, which is why I place it under "economic". Or we can just compromise and call it socioeconomic. People wouldn't be migrating in droves to the western world if it weren't for the inequities being caused by globalization.

Immigration is a consequence of globalization and neo-liberal policy. Trade treaties and organizations like the IMF are creating circumstances where mass migration is necessary for survival; and now we have climate change as an additional factor.

The economy is central. It's #1. Everything else expands outward from that.

Could you give some examples of how it's disruptive and harmful? Your statement is bold but lacks substance.

Anita Sarkeesian is not a radical feminist. If anything, she's a scholarly feminist turned activist. Her contribution to feminism is mostly research and media, she doesn't go out and commit radical acts against the patriarchy. So calling her an extremist is not factually accurate.

I do have some critiques of her, but I do not find her extreme at all. She makes many good points, and a lot of her facts are gathered from ancillary sources; so she's not just spouting diatribe, there is real research behind it.

Fine, socioeconomic it is.
People migrate, mostly illegally, to the western world because the world they live in is horrible. And once they get here, they decide to form enclaves and stick to each other and turn their habitat into a mirror of the place they came from. That's the downside of mass immigration. It's not inclusion, it's division. And I don't think trade treaties have anything to do with mass migration. It's trade treaties of goods and services, not people.

If you have 4 groups of notions that are important to a country you have: social, politics, economy and environment. The economy is no more important than the social aspects of the country, the political ones or the environmental ones. They all work together and they all have to be in a harmonious relationship to get the best outcomes. You can't have a strong economy if you have crime ridden country. You can't have a good environment if you don't have an educated population on the issue, and that's a sociopolitical matter. You can't have a growing economy if the policies of the state are harmful to economic stimulation and growth.

I think Anita is a radical feminist. She has already made up her mind that there is sexism in video games of all things and then went on and jumps through hoops and loops to find evidence of that, regardless of how stretched out or stupid it is. There are countless responses to her videos that poke holes in her commentaries so big that an elephant can pass through. I can link you to them if you wish. Here are 2 of them I found very easy.




Also, these videos, unlike Anita's, are with comments enabled and ratings enabled too. So the people who are interested in this topic have spoken. Anita has banned both these things because she's a cultural terrorist.

As for feminism. It's outlived it's purpose. There is no issue regarding womens' right or equality in the western world that feminism can fix. Feminism has a place in the ME, Russia or China or even Japan. Over there, it has some real work to do regarding equality for women and better treatment. But in most European societies and the USA, feminism has outlived it's usefulness, because as I said, any issues that women have can't be solved by it. So it's become radicalized. It's now a cultural terrorist.
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
7,751
Reaction score
4,718
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Fine, socioeconomic it is.

Yay! :)

People migrate, mostly illegally, to the western world because the world they live in is horrible. And once they get here, they decide to form enclaves and stick to each other and turn their habitat into a mirror of the place they came from. That's the downside of mass immigration. It's not inclusion, it's division. And I don't think trade treaties have anything to do with mass migration. It's trade treaties of goods and services, not people.

The distinction between legal/illegal migration is not really important. It's one planet and our rules about movement are imaginary. So it's more practical to look at this in terms of why migration happens. The #1 reason right now is globalization and population displacement. Countries that receive IMF loans in turn suffer Structual Adjustment Programs. It's a quaint term that means your country's capital and resources become privatized, and foreign corporations get the right to move in and use your work force for incredibly cheap. We are now seeing entire countries who are essentially indentured servants to multinational institutions, ALL of whom are western inventions (i.e. WTO, IMF, etc.)

When the land's natural bounty becomes privatized, entire populations that used to be agricultural then flock to urban centers for work. Then that leads them to immigration, where they can earn money that has higher value to send home, or even etch out a better standard of living in the west.

This is all about the western world's privilege. Our institutions are the reason why we are now suffering mass immigration. It's karmically fitting, actually. We take their resources, and in turn they flock to us because we're the only place they can get resources from. Causal loop complete.

If you have 4 groups of notions that are important to a country you have: social, politics, economy and environment. The economy is no more important than the social aspects of the country, the political ones or the environmental ones. They all work together and they all have to be in a harmonious relationship to get the best outcomes. You can't have a strong economy if you have crime ridden country. You can't have a good environment if you don't have an educated population on the issue, and that's a sociopolitical matter. You can't have a growing economy if the policies of the state are harmful to economic stimulation and growth.

Well I think we are splitting hairs at this point. It's the chicken and the egg, really. Economy brings migration, migration brings social change, social change impacts economy, etc. Marx succinctly pointed out though that economy is the foundation of humanity's social nature in the modern world, not the other way around. Economic conditions determine social order, including civil rights and what not. Scarcity brings more control and oppression, whereas sharing and some degree of collectivity brings harmony. Mass migration is causing social problems which is causing changes to governance, but the root is still economic.

I think Anita is a radical feminist. She has already made up her mind that there is sexism in video games of all things and then went on and jumps through hoops and loops to find evidence of that, regardless of how stretched out or stupid it is. There are countless responses to her videos that poke holes in her commentaries so big that an elephant can pass through. I can link you to them if you wish. Here are 2 of them I found very easy.

I've seen those videos already but thanks for the links.

You're making it seem like she's really stretching to find evidence of poor female representation in video games and poor treatment of female players, when most female gamers have acknowledged the disparity for years. Anita is pretty much the first feminist to ever examine this issue in depth, and you're calling her radical? I guess pioneers are often seen as radical, until people start listening to their perspective. But a true radical feminist? Hell no. Trust me, she isn't. All you need to do is visit a radfem gathering and you'll quickly see that Anita is actually on the moderate, scholastic side of things. lol

As for feminism. It's outlived it's purpose. There is no issue regarding womens' right or equality in the western world that feminism can fix.

I can't really argue against a belief like this. You believe what you believe. My experience, through research and living as a woman of 21st century America, has informed me otherwise. Your statement also reveals that you mistakenly think that women's rights are the only thing feminism cares about. It's actually also about dismantling patriarchy and the ways it affects everyone, including the ways that men are oppressed and expected to conform under it, racism, homophobia and transphobia, etc.

Feminism has a place in the ME, Russia or China or even Japan. Over there, it has some real work to do regarding equality for women and better treatment. But in most European societies and the USA, feminism has outlived it's usefulness, because as I said, any issues that women have can't be solved by it. So it's become radicalized. It's now a cultural terrorist.

Wow... a cultural terrorist? That's really harsh.

You've obviously fallen victim to the straw feminists of the media because the majority of feminists I've ever known are nice, rational people, including the self-labelled radical ones. I think, based on the knowledge limits I'm detecting in what you've said, that you need to spend more time examining the serious research being done, and not just look at the activist or radical sides. The media CONSTANTLY focuses on and blows up straw feminists as radicals. They make it seem like radicalism is all that exists in the world, with feminism and everything else! Not everything is so extreme, you know.

You've also clearly been duped into the fallacy that feminisms problems are "over there" and there's nothing left to do here. Social activism in general never stops. Some of its critiques may be hyper-analytical but as a part of the social framework it serves a purpose. Without those commentators, we have no vanguard to prevent oppression from seeping back in. The elements that allowed sexism and oppression to be culturally dominant still exist right now, which means if feminism were "done" and stopped doing what it did, it could easily takeover again. Just look at all the laws trying to control women's bodies or even women's access to health care and birth control in some red states.

Feminism's job is not only unfinished, it has a lot left to accomplish. Saying that it's redundant is actually part of the recent backlash trying to re-establish traditional values.
 
Last edited:

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,966
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Yay! :)

~snipped for spacial purposes.

Structural adjustments doesn't mean open the flood gates. It means removing an institution that served no purpose or merging multiple state institutions into one for better efficiency. It does mean, at times, privatization of publicly owned companies. Countries in Eastern Europe for instance, where the state maintains a great degree of public services, have been "suggested" to privatize some of them, especially the ones that are a black hole in the public budget. i'm not saying it's all good, but it's got nothing to do with immigration.

The migration from rural to urban happens in the same country, with the same people. Again, it's got nothing to do with immigration.

The western world's privilege is not an unjust privilege. It's earned through hard work and maintained through even harder work. if the western world would stop being the most productive countries in the world, this privilege would be gone, taken over by someone else. And what is karmically fitting? Karma is one of 4 hindu notions that have formed a chain of suppression and enslavement of an entire subcontinent for thousands of years under the hindu religion. It's not a good term.

We aren't the only place they can get resources from. We buy resources and they get money for it. It's a fair exchange. What they spend that money on is their business. I would remind you that if the west would stop paying for resource imports, those countries would descend into anarchy because they would have a lot of resources, no means to work or exploit them, and no money to fund whatever governments they have.

If you are going to quote Marx, I'm outta here. The guy is a dumbo. Anything truthful he said in his life he stole from someone else's idea and everything he made up himself is wrong.

Female representation in game. Look. There are 2 sides to this. Women who play video games and women in video games. For women in video games this is important: balance is irrelevant. Let's move from important issues to this gaming issue.
Say you have 10 people on the constitutional court. Just because you appoint a man doesn't mean you have to appoint a woman. You appoint the people who are most qualified.
When hiring for the police for instance. Just because you hired a man doesn't mean you have to hire a woman. Again, you hire the most qualified people. If the balance happens to be 8/10 women and 2/10 men, or 9/10 men and 1/10 women, that's fine. That's how it is. Balance is irrelevant.
Same for games. Just because you publish 1 game with a male character doesn't mean you need to publish one with a female character. Just because one woman is killed in a video game doesn't mean 1 man has to die too. or just because 1 woman is kidnapped in a video game doesn't mean 1 man has to be too. Balance is irrelevant.

For women gamers, women who play games, it's not the men who are to blame for that. It's a no fault zone. There doesn't have to be a male gamer for every female gamer or whatever. You are confusing gaming with you know, real life "the one" situation where there is someone for everyone. That doesn't apply in video games. each with his own pleasures and hobbies.

And as for the patriarchy, that doesn't exist. It's a boogie man invented by feminists. I don't even know what the patriarchy is. Some assembly of fathers? or what? Or do you mean patriarchy as in, an assembly of patriarchs, as in, leaders of orthodox churches. Because I'm Orthodox and our patriarchs have no issues with women. they are so disconnected from them that you know, they don't marry. So I vouch of on my life, with no reservations, that the patriarchy of orthodox churches don't do whatever you claim that they do.

In short, the feminist patriarchy doesn't exist. It's Nessie from the Loch Ness. There are people who claim that they have evidence of seeing it but the proof they put forward is sketchy at best.

There is nothing wrong with traditional values. Some people blame feminism for the epidemic of gold digging whores and say, high divorce rate and other things, and they make a pretty compelling case. I don't see it that way, I see it as being more of a cultural thing overall. People don't know how to maintain relationships anymore. It's not the fault of the feminists or of traditional values or lack there-of. It's to do with MTV, holywood and you know, such "people". People like kim kardashian, kanye west, martin scorsese, liza minelli, all those holywood/famous people celebrities that get married today and divorce tomorrow, I don't bother remembering their names. they're to blame for making society a more shallow place. And making emotions cheap. Anyway.

Social activism has to stop at some point. It's not a never ending story. You make activism for 1 purpose, once it's completed and safeguards are in place, you stop and move on.
Continuing is basically:
IwK5sDa.gif
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,728
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Germany's citizens should also start brushing up on their Arabic.

They should indeed, its not gonna get them very far which their largely Turkish/Kurdish Muslim minority but its a beautiful language none the less.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
19,844
Reaction score
9,666
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's not European countries that are facing overpopulation. Though they are facing a lot of illegal immigration. It's africa, ME and some asian countries that have too many people and too low standards of living. Tell them to stop having so many kids. So this doesn't apply here --

Can you link any population density statistics that support your claim that European countries do not face overpopulation as compared to Africa and the ME? As for Asian countries - China and India are the obvious standout countries for overpopulation but their population density is not at the top of the statistics table.
 
Top Bottom