55% Of Europeans Agree With Trump: "muslim Immigration Should Be Banned"

[barfacan]

@WhitePolarBear ,

A while back I told you that I think you're on the autism spectrum, I never explained my point well but I think this is a good place.

You're a man who has his own opinions. When you're at work, and everybody is saying that Trump is Hitler, in your mind you're processing information in your own way, and coming up with your own conclusions. Sometimes you have mainstream views, sometimes you have contrarian views, and sometimes you change your mind.

It's often said that "everybody has an opinion," but I've come to reject this. I'm sad to realize but I think that most people never have their own opinions. They have some sort of sensor deep within them that estimates what the general surrounding opinion is, and then they converge to that opinion themselves. They're not aware of the process, they just genuinely believe what the people nearest them are also believing. It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, as conformity can be beneficial and it's important to move forward, even if sometimes we're not going in the best direction.

The best example of this is in professional sports, where fans of both opposing teams will often say that the referee is biased against their team. That's impossible. The referee is not biased against both teams. But lots and lots of intelligent fans believe, they genuinely believe it and they can flood you with "evidence".

So back to this. It is in my opinion, both impressive, and not normal, that you are able to hold your own viewpoints which are sometimes distinct from those of the consensus around you. My impression is most people don't, and are just really mundane.

I do think that this is dangerous though. There's a lot of self-righteous sheepism right now. There's a risk that these people can be mobilized for truly nefarious ends. If it happens they will be absolutely convinced of the righteousness of their cause.

That's because most people are not taught to think for themselves, that's kind of what i alluded to when i said 'uneducated' in my earlier post, it's probably just not the right word. My personal definition of education =/= "formal, modern, cookie cutter education" i guess is what im trying to say....for instance pretty much 99.99% of current youth have little to no grasp of world history and fail to recognize the obvious pitfalls in the behavior that they're engaging in, they are unable to draw conclusions or extrapolate in any meaningful way, at least from a historical context.
They really are 'useful idiots', to use the communist term, focused exclusively on materialism, video games, smoking weed, and jacking off.


I don't think that diverging from the masses is an indicator of autism, otherwise i'm definitely a full blown sperglord, as i generally look to crowds only to know in which direction i should run away. Served me well so far i guess. I will also say, in the interest of honest dialogue, that early onset male pattern baldness (at 16 Y/O) definitely hindered me being accepted by peers, at the very least in my own mind, as i don't yet fully accept it myself. This could have definitely affected my viewpoints regarding these issues from an early age. Definitely possible, the scars are real.

 

[barfacan]

Almost none of them are working.

I remember how hard it was for me to land my first job: master's degree, 4 languages, building websites since the age of 15, driver's license, etc. etc. It was still extremely hard to convince companies to hire me, so there's no way, absolutely no way these refugees (not migrants!) are getting jobs, not happening.

And before you say they're all blue-collar so the process will be different, I've met many of these refugees, I've talked to them, in their countries, they (thought they) were dentists or engineers, and they told me that they hoped they would find a job at a point.

Not, happening.

I've met Belgian engineers who went to one of the top schools in the country who were still struggling to find a job, these people have 0 chance. The only realistic and viable option they have is to go back to their country once it's safe, then they can try to, I don't know, maybe make their own economy grow? Develop themselves?

That won't happen either of course, these middle-east and north African countries are shitholes and will always remain so.

My best friend often tells me when we're travelling in Morocco "here what needs to be changed is people's mentality!" I believe it's hopeless, that mentality is not the product of nurture, the way they think (submit to Islam) and act (often with violence) has a strong genetic component.

That's why importing them here en masse was a horrible idea.

So it really is some kind of legit job shortage crisis, if skilled natives cannot find meanigful work!

Damn, i didn't realize it was that bad in Europe.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Hey, here is a ground breaking idea: Stop manipulating and torturing them via puppets and proxies for your benefit. Stop invading, destroying and devastating their countries. Stop annihilating their people.
Never saw nor heard anyone complain about their government's involvement in those above aspects and stop their governments from contributing to it and yet they suddenly b**ch and moan because oh my god immigration and refugees....
Every action has a reaction. You can't expect to live in a bubble forever and the world, whether you like it or not, is globalising and will continue to do so. It is no longer a world where you can do whatever in someone's playpen few thousand miles away and not expect any kind of reaction.

It's not that novel, I wrote that earlier in the thread.

 

[SmoothSailing]

@WhitePolarBear

It's often said that "everybody has an opinion," but I've come to reject this. I'm sad to realize but I think that most people never have their own opinions. They have some sort of sensor deep within them that estimates what the general surrounding opinion is, and then they converge to that opinion themselves. They're not aware of the process, they just genuinely believe what the people nearest them are also believing. It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, as conformity can be beneficial and it's important to move forward, even if sometimes we're not going in the best direction.

But isn't this true of a lot of anyone's opinions?

I didn't go out and look at fossil records and pour through historic species data in order to come to the conclusion that evolution occurred. My 'sensor' told me to trust my parents and my teachers. As I got older more and more evidence accumulated, but most of that was secondary evidence, meaning I was allowing my 'sensor' decide who's opinion I would converge towards.
But if my parents/teachers had initially converged my opinions on creationism and against evolution, it's possible I would have only surrounded myself in sources that agree with that point of view. Thus backing up that point of view and giving undeserved credibility to those sources. Thus 'breaking' my sensor.

The problem is people's sensors, who do they hold higher in regards to trust. Their friends? Scientists? Religious figures? Some ideology? Their parents? Some internet blog?

In the US it seems political ideology is the most divisive one at the moment. Depending on which side you're on you might read contradictory news on the same incident, phenomenon or issue.

 

[hairblues]

In the US it seems political ideology is the most divisive one at the moment. Depending on which side you're on you might read contradictory news on the same incident, phenomenon or issue.

the problem with 'US" in USA is we have a republic not a real democracy of every actual vote counting as equal.

every vote here we would have had HRC by a very large landslide of popular vote. (and the illegal voting of 3 million people is outright lie, so if you are falling for his tweets i suggest you do a lot of research on the subject)

we have the electoral process which gives greater weight to far less number of votes.


So going by a few of the posters here on HairLossTalk.com who live in Europe, your philosophy of thinking the 'people' by majority should choose the president or the rules..we don't actually have that here...it's the majority of the electoral votes by each state...choose the president which i am sure you are aware of.

Keep in mind the vast difference between the electoral map and the popular vote I dont think has ever been this large, at least not for a hundred years. So this is why you are seeing so much outrage here.

Everyone on this forums seems to mistake that 'anti trump' is equal to being 'leftie liberal and feminist'
This is factually untrue. They are just the loudest ones.

real hyped up pro Trump voters are a minority in this country as a whole. So of course people are unhappy and pushing back--MOSTLY on domestic issues.

what you are seeing in opposition to Trump is a mix that includes a vast majority of people who dont actually vote but woke up to a nightmare scenario since everyone assumed HRC would win and now feel regretful they did not vote, democrats who are either center or left of center, upset republicans and conservatives, libertarians, independents as well as traditional leftie-liberals (who are the loudest so drown out everyone else who is unhappy).

Most of the people HERE who are anti Trump are not one monolithic groups of "pro Muslim" defenders.
you guys are only seeing that one issue because most of you are in Europe and that is the issue that negatively effected your lives the most so it is the most important to you.

I dont mind that Trump wanted to limit or even temporarily stop people from coming into the country.

But he did it in the most stupid and sloppy way--because he surrounds himself with inexperienced people.

Of course the courts shot it down....i said this weeks ago that this would happen ..I dont even think that EO would have passed Scalia the way it was written to be honest as he was an originalist (not really my ideal in a judge to be honest) the EO was written poorly and very un-constitutionally.

someone asked why it matters if Melania makes money from WH?
I personally dont want them blurring this line of making money from the white house..is it the most important issue? NO
but it goes to the fact that they seem to believe they are above our ways and traditions and it is a violation of ethics for ALL Govt employees so can open a can or worms best unopened. .
Is it the biggest deal in past 3 weeks?
No there is a learning curve i dont think its a big deal and i have sense they will stop doing it as they continue getting push back.

 

[SmoothSailing]

When you step on sh*t some is bound to stick to you.

I agree with this completely, but does this mean I can't complain about the sh*t on my shoe?

" is no longer a world where you can do whatever in someone's playpen few thousand miles away and not expect any kind of reaction."

Essentially I'm saying you can expect a reaction without supporting it. Of course we should expect an increase in migration attempts, this doesn't necessarily mean we should support it.

It is entirely possible to support western millitary action in the middle east and be against immigration at the same time.

This is my response to those that try to blame the west for the actions of those in the middle east.

Go to 21m20s

 

[SmoothSailing]

Everyone on this forums seems to mistake that 'anti trump' is equal to being 'leftie liberal and feminist'

Really I was talking about something that existed before Trump. The whole 'left' 'right' thing existed long before Trump.

I'm anti-trump and not left so I've never thought this.

Personally, with all the problems in the US, I think that Islam is far down on the list of issues that the people should be worrying about.

Many Trump supporters seemed to have latched onto the anti-Islam sentiment in Europe, which is based on real problems, in order to further their agenda.

Now I'm not from the US and might be completely ignorant on these issues.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

LOL you are so wright about that! That is why I need to hang on with bikers from timeto time. Academics bullshit is killing me.

Academia is a privileged bubble.

It makes valuable insights as a whole, but there is some contamination from BS, as well as legitimate questions which are underexplored.

 

[hairblues]

Really I was talking about something that existed before Trump. The whole 'left' 'right' thing existed long before Trump.

I'm anti-trump and not left so I've never thought this.

Personally, with all the problems in the US, I think that Islam is far down on the list of issues that the people should be worrying about.

Many Trump supporters seemed to have latched onto the anti-Islam sentiment in Europe, which is based on real problems, in order to further their agenda.

Now I'm not from the US and might be completely ignorant on these issues.

Its definitely been polarized in Congress especially by special interest groups on both sides for sure.
but if you really( in modern history at least) get a sense of where most Americans ideas lay on economy, health care, supreme court, aborition, gun control LBGT rights-- it's mostly been Center Right--to Center left with very little difference. Compromise has always been *possible* to please most of the people. Problem is many of the people don't f*****g vote.

Most people when they would sit down and talk about actual issues at family get togethers or water cooler talk there was not really that much contention among most people on most policies...NOW it seems very intimidating to disagree on either side. There is a bullying effect on both sides.

For myself, socially i am pretty liberal (at least by the old definitions). i have never done anything in my life to warrant being called a 'leftie' not with my voting choices or my behavior or even my views and postings.
Im not going to allow people to shame me from being liberal because all of a sudden people word associate it with being a pussy.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

But isn't this true of a lot of anyone's opinions?

I didn't go out and look at fossil records and pour through historic species data in order to come to the conclusion that evolution occurred. My 'sensor' told me to trust my parents and my teachers. As I got older more and more evidence accumulated, but most of that was secondary evidence, meaning I was allowing my 'sensor' decide who's opinion I would converge towards.
But if my parents/teachers had initially converged my opinions on creationism and against evolution, it's possible I would have only surrounded myself in sources that agree with that point of view. Thus backing up that point of view and giving undeserved credibility to those sources. Thus 'breaking' my sensor.

The problem is people's sensors, who do they hold higher in regards to trust. Their friends? Scientists? Religious figures? Some ideology? Their parents? Some internet blog?

In the US it seems political ideology is the most divisive one at the moment. Depending on which side you're on you might read contradictory news on the same incident, phenomenon or issue.

We can't be experts on everything, but my impression of most people is that they rarely, rarely question the prevailing consensus on any issue. They have a sophisticated radar to perceive the general consensus (which correlates with social skills), and then they genuinely believe this.

There's a reason most people are either left-wing on nearly all issues, or right-wing on nearly all issues, they converge to the consensus. If people were able to think they would lean left in some areas and right in others. That's not the norm though, that's the exception.

I think it's a naturally tendency of most normal people to agree with whatever the leading authorities are saying. It's a fundamental instinct, to follow. People want to follow, to be part of the herd, the winning team.

By the way, if I had never researched evolution my estimate of it would be "agnostic". It's one of the most important scientific theories out there, both in aesthetic beauty and in significance, it's perhaps second to quantum mechanics as a fundamental human insight, I think everybody should learn the basics of evolution.

 

[hairblues]

That's exactly how I feel. Like Fabrice Lucchini said "I am at the left of the right, and at the right of the left"... But also "The king falled on the side where he was leaning"... so one must chose.

in USA the loudest barking dogs on both sides get the most attention

but majority of actual people here identify as independents...44% independents, 29 % republican, 25% democrats.
Majority of people are moderate or conservative, not liberal. I think self-identifying liberals are only 25% of people who identify as one of the 3 choices. 75% conservative or moderate.

i guess in Europe its more split?

 

[SmoothSailing]

Of course you can complain and go right ahead

However, do note that your complaint, taken in conjunction with your statement
"It is entirely possible to support western millitary action in the middle east and be against immigration at the same time."
does imply the unbalanced and impractical, not grounded in reality, mentality and mindset I was talking about.

What would be more practical and logical is to stop supporting tyrants, puppets and proxies inc terrorist groups for your own personal interests and staying out of it. You can then actually help the people if you want and help build them up without resorting to serving your overlords by committing mass murder and causing mayhem and destruction all under the guise of 'freedom' or whatever other bs. You wouldn't be so hated then and you wouldn't have to deal with this massive migrations of late.

Personally I have no say in anything, living in a neutral country. And have no real grounds to be criticizing other countries foreign policy, but I will ask you this.

If there's likely going to be genocide in some backwater country should other countries intervene to stop it?

Most people would say yes. It's human nature to want to help others. If you see someone beating on someone on the street, and you have the means to stop them (calling the police for example), you will likely do it.

Now your point, I take it, is that if other countries intervene it won't help in the long run because it will leave the country in tatters. No one likes foreign military in their country, and the inevitable civilian casualties will lead to a worse situation in the long run and hatred towards whomever intervened.

This is a good point, and definitely should be taken into account. But the counter argument is that things would be worse if we did nothing. Horrible groups like ISIS would spread out of control, making rape, death, destruction, war common place in the middle east. Is this not a possibility in your view? Are you sure that the world would be better off if the west stopped intervening in other countries?

Maybe you are, and in that place fair play, but I'm not. I think it probably should be taken on a case by case basis. Clearly the Iraq war was a stupid decision for example.

Also, I'll add, that I think currently the US should dial it back and focus on domestic issues.

The Rwandan genocide is a time I think people should have intervened.

 

[hairblues]

Maybe you are, and in that place fair play, but I'm not. I think it probably should be taken on a case by case basis. Clearly the Iraq war was a stupid decision for example.

Also, I'll add, that I think currently the US should dial it back and focus on domestic issues.

The Rwandan genocide is a time I think people should have intervened.

i agree with this...and probably in my opinion one of the most insightful posts i have seen on this forum about politics and world affairs.

it's nice to be clean or absolute in our view points but then reality comes into play and it is case by case situations you have to be adaptable.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Personally I have no say in anything, living in a neutral country. And have no real grounds to be criticizing other countries foreign policy, but I will ask you this.

If there's likely going to be genocide in some backwater country should other countries intervene to stop it?

Most people would say yes. It's human nature to want to help others. If you see someone beating on someone on the street, and you have the means to stop them (calling the police for example), you will likely do it.

Now your point, I take it, is that if other countries intervene it won't help in the long run because it will leave the country in tatters. No one likes foreign military in their country, and the inevitable civilian casualties will lead to a worse situation in the long run and hatred towards whomever intervened.

This is a good point, and definitely should be taken into account. But the counter argument is that things would be worse if we did nothing. Horrible groups like ISIS would spread out of control, making rape, death, destruction, war common place in the middle east. Is this not a possibility in your view? Are you sure that the world would be better off if the west stopped intervening in other countries?

Maybe you are, and in that place fair play, but I'm not. I think it probably should be taken on a case by case basis. Clearly the Iraq war was a stupid decision for example.

Also, I'll add, that I think currently the US should dial it back and focus on domestic issues.

The Rwandan genocide is a time I think people should have intervened.

Iraq, and Libya, are the two recent interventions which most destabilized the regions.

There are times (and ways) to intervene, but the western powers have largely promoted instbality in the region for quite a while now.

Neither case is comparable to Rwanda. The case for intervention in Rwanda was humanitarian, which was not part of the actual justification for the interventions in Iraq and Libya, propaganda excluded. The interventions in Iraq and Libya were done on strategic grounds, and poorly implemented as well.

The US should consider dialing it back and focusing on domestic issues, but if they do so, there's a risk of collapse. Here's a book by a former US secretary of state. It's a little dated now, but it reveals a lot of the philosophy in a manner many people find surprising, including myself.

 

[yetti]

Iraq, and Libya, are the two recent interventions which most destabilized the regions.

Well... when the Iraq intervention happened, the country was at peace, and the region was largely at peace. That intervention led to many countries becoming completely destabilized in the region, including Libya. When the west intervened there it was already a full blown chaotic civil war. So I'm certainly not saying that the intervention was a good idea or worked out well (so I mostly agree with your larger point), but I think the two situations can scarcely be compared.

 

[JHCL1990]

Muslim immigrant should be banned.

 

[Saurabhaj]

When leftists forget that they are not on the internet and that they can't insult people (racist! nazi!) without consequences:

Haha people in this gif are f*****g coward.
I

 

[rclark]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...ree-trump-muslim-immigration-should-be-banned



More at the link. Personally I'm surprised by the result -- this is a very strong majority of voters.

Keep in mind it's not 55-45, it's 55-20, as 25% of respondents said they neither agreed nor disagreed.

It's f*****g too shocking for me. I can't watch political news these days.

What's funny is, my partner can!

Politically we are on the same page. It's just the news is such f*****g bullshit.

To be honest, I just want to beat the sh*t out of some these people. That's probably too harsh.

I want to drive them to a bridge, and run a HUGE truck over them, or push them off. A bridge with lots of
sharp rocks below.

So, any volunteers to ride with me?

 

[rclark]

I prefer the term progressive. I don't like most liberals as they are often clueless and hypocritical.

I'm an Independent.

Glad you didn't ask, aren't you?

Now, people who are not in the U.S. get offended, if I talk about a person that rhymes with, ... CONSTIPATED DUMP.

So, I won't say who it is..

To be honest, if he ran as an Independent, didn't hate Muslims, and didn't side for dead fetuses, (forget about complaining
about a "cell phone" being wired...), well if he didn't do that, he would

BE A REALLY COOL GUY!

 

[hairblues]

Haha people in this gif are f*****g coward.
I

whats really upsetting to me as a US citizen is the very far right and very far left are both polar opposite of same intolerant and sometimes violent behavior and meanwhile MOST of us who lean left or lean right or are just democrats or republicans are 'fucked' by these extreme stereotypes on both sides.