|
|
Is soccer the last refuge of free speech in France?
Criticizing minorities in France can get you into a lot of trouble—as even Brigitte Bardot found out. But putting a lid on people mentioning the obvious is not going to last for long. And it seems that when the underlying attitudes do explode to the surface, civilized expression of them is not what happens Many of the fans yelling insults are members of hooligan gangs that prowl the stadium grounds on match day, looking for a rumble with black and Arab members of a multiethnic rival gang. Yet interviews with gang members and repeated visits to PSG games found that racist hooligans operate openly and with almost total impunity at the 43,000-seat ground on the western outskirts of the French capital. Soccer, with its many black stars, ought to be a showcase of multiracial harmony, especially in France, which draws heavily on talent from its former African colonies. Instead, the brawling soccer fans have emerged as the extreme fringe of a deeply troubled France— one that is grappling with stiffening resistance to immigration, protests linked to youth unemployment and the perceived threat of globalization. Now, after the riots that engulfed immigrant-filled French suburbs last fall, beer-fueled racism in soccer has taken on an even more menacing tinge. Unlike soccer hooliganism elsewhere, in which the antagonists are fans of rival teams, the clashes outside Parc des Princes are largely between fans rooting for the same team— PSG. On the bleachers of Parc des Princes, PSG supporters divide along racial lines in two opposing sections of stands— the Kop of Boulogne behind one goal and the Tribune d’Auteuil behind the other. Boulogne is nearly entirely Caucasian; Auteuil is multiracial and includes whites. Two all-white groups— the Independents and the Casual Firm — have fought with increasing ferocity in recent months with multiracial Tigris Mystic. (The English-language names reflect the influence English soccer hooliganism has had over Europe.) The race issue comes out clearly in interviews with gang members on both sides, none of whom agree to be identified by name because they have records and fear more trouble with police. One leading member of the Independents, dressed in a designer overcoat and proudly showing off a finger that got bent out of shape in a fan skirmish, said his gang was out to rid the suburbs of blacks and Arabs. A high-ranking Tigris Mystic man said his group is fighting back against such “fascist” views. More here Posted by jonjayray on Saturday, April 15, 2006 at 10:31 PM in Comments:2
Posted by Mark Richardson on April 16, 2006, 09:10 AM | # Anti, who told you that it’s wrong to have a sense of ancestry? The idea must come from somewhere. It’s not as if it’s written in the sky at night. And it’s not as if it’s an idea that is obvious to most people. Around the world, a sense of ancestry is generally considered to be a positive thing. When I lived in a very modern, up-to-date Japan, my hosts had a shrine to their ancestors displayed prominently in their house. I’m sure that they would be surprised to learn that this was an immorally “racist” act or that the Japanese were somehow a backward people. It’s not enough, Anti, to simply invoke the word “racism” to make your case. This doesn’t clarify anything. We could just as easily accuse you of “racism” in not respecting the right of the different races to survive into the future. 4
Posted by Anti on April 16, 2006, 11:09 AM | #
Same people who told me it’s wrong to kill. In any case, moral values are subjective. A person who grew up in Nazi Germany might disagree with me, but I don’t care about his opinion.
Hey who said anything about “rights”? I am speaking only for the USA. There are plenty of societies that practice sexism but I don’t want to come there and get my hands dirty. I simply see the United States coming out of the dark age of racism and I welcome this development (meaning: I don’t intend to prevent it). If you think I or most of my aquiantances give a #@$% about “genetic interests” or “cultural conservation”, you are dead wrong. I think we might as well abolish both if it keeps us from bigger and better things. That doesn’t mean we should abolish it by force, but that does mean we shouldn’t try to prevent its natural development. The people who DON’T respect rights are the WNs, skinheads, and other racists who go against the majority. 5
Posted by Anti on April 16, 2006, 11:41 AM | #
First of all, I doubt there is a more multicultural place than Queens NY where I live. There are hundreds of nationalities here. And what’s wrong with Brazil? They don’t have skinhead mobs parading all over the place do they? And they are more socialist too, another sign of progressiveness. Going multicultural is like getting pregnant. You might not like it at first, but that doesn’t justify an abortion. Besides, the result might be good! If that analogy is a bit crude, let me specify it a bit to immigration. Saying “illegal” (whatever THAT means) immigrants should be deported because they shouldn’t be here is like saying kids who play on the street should be run over by cars because they shouldn’t be there. The punishment (just like that of abortion) is greater than the “crime”. I mean, multiculturalism is something that is happening. Even if it’s negative, you can’t reverse it except by expelling and/or killing people. 6
Posted by john rackell on April 16, 2006, 12:00 PM | # You may need some sensitivity training, Anti, your views are profoundly ethnocentric, bordering on racist. You talk about other sexist societies as if somehow your non sexist viewpoint should be given primacy in your own country. There are plenty of societies that practice sexism but I don’t want to come there and get my hands dirty. But you won’t be ‘coming there’ - whatever that means - you’re inviting them here, by the millions. Are these newcomers going to give up what you find distasteful just because you disapprove. Clitorectomies aren’t your cup of tea - tell it to the African, or the Egyptian or the Somali - tell it to the new majority displacing us. You are so ethnocentric you don’t see that their culture practices are the warp and woof of their own being - and somehow they are going to just give it all up and become anti-sexist liberals when they get off the plane. And why should they adopt your anti sexist viewpoint, Anti, they get the vote in 5 years, the legal ones anyway. Did the sexism of the societies you racistly disparage arise independently of the people in them? How do you dictate to them what their new values should be here in this country when you despise the self same values so much in their own country? Are you going to provide a Damascene experience for each and every immigrant - or does access to indoor plumbing and Big Macs effect changes in the heart and mind (and genetic predisposition to act certain ways). 7
Posted by Anti on April 16, 2006, 12:02 PM | #
I never understood this. You keep saying “groups” have rights. But if I have a right to something like property, this means I have a claim that other people have an obligation to respect. So to say that ethnic “groups” have a right is to say that we have an obligation to preserve them. How do you square this with individual rights? I have nothing against a multicultural environment. I think its the “next step” in cultural osmosis, since it dissolves ethnic identity into a sort of pan-human one. The fact that it’s happening so successfully here means that the majority is ready for it. I’m against forcing other countries to adopt my system, because this involves killing. Killing is a violation of individual rights. I’m also against forcing my country to reverse or “stop” (which really means reverse) multiculturalism, since this also means killing. 8
Posted by Anon on April 16, 2006, 12:31 PM | # I think its the “next step” in cultural osmosis, since it dissolves ethnic identity into a sort of pan-human one. But if you favor merging all religions, races, etc, together to build a ‘pan-human’ one, doesn’t this amount to thinking that such a culture is superior? Isn’t this ‘racism’ (under your definition) against traditional cultures like Islam? Also, you can’t be discriminatory against one thing like Islam without being discriminatory against another like homosexuality. Surely you understand this. If you are against sexism, then you are also against Islam. If you are against racism, then you are against Nazi culture. Etc. Also, I notice that you support ‘individual rights’. Keep in mind that in a nation-state, individual rights are being violated by the very nature of the democratic political system. In a purely libertarian society, there would be no ‘open borders’ at all because land is privately owned. 9
Posted by Phil Peterson on April 16, 2006, 12:39 PM | # Fred, Zach, You chaps are arguing with someone who has the maturity and learning of a six year old. These fruitcakes are products of time and place and they will become extinct as the West becomes extinct. It is only in the permissive West that such stupidity gains any traction. Once Europe, for example, becomes Islamified, “Anti” and other clowns will find themselves being whipped (or beheadded) for blasphemy. They will have earned it. 10
Posted by Phil Peterson on April 16, 2006, 12:43 PM | # My money says Anti is non-white (and possibly female). No he’s white. And probably Gay. May be we ought to inform him of how Moroccan immigrants in Holland deal with Gay men kissing on the street. 11
Posted by Matra on April 16, 2006, 12:50 PM | # Looks like UEFA (European soccer’s governing body) doesn’t take religion as seriously as race:
http://sport.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=567502006 Meanwhile in Spain the government has announced a crackdown following recent racist chanting, mostly directed at Barcelona’s Samuel Eto’o. I’m sure the French government isn’t far behind. BTW a few years ago during a match between France and Algeria (I think) in Paris the French national anthem was booed by a considerbale portion of the French-Arabs in the crowd. That incident didn’t seem to concern the usual do-gooders as much as occasional monkey chants by a small minority. 12
Posted by Amalek on April 16, 2006, 02:00 PM | # Let’s assume just for the moment that Anti is for real. Why do his kind assume (a) that there are ‘inevitable’, irresistible next steps in human development; (b) that these are always in the direction of convergence, never differentiation (or a different kind of stasis); and (c) that any efforts to defy this inevitability must be too punitive to be contemplated? Such contentions are hardly borne out by the History the fatalists of the beige puddle are so anxious to whip out as their trump card. We know—those of us who are humble enough—that you cannot extrapolate the next five years from a snapshot of the present, far less predict developments on the timescale Anti requires. The historicism which marxoids and their Hegelian predecessors used to apply to economics and politics has been falsified by bitter experience and body counts, but they now think they can tell what the evolutionary future of home sapiens will be—using the same quasi-mystical certainties steeped in let’s-all-get-along piety. We know that the result of two subspecies battling for food and turf is the complete absorption or expulsion of the weaker one. We have reason to think that the widening gaps in phenotype between major races are the prelude, as in other mammals, to their evolution into separate species: conceivably a process we can soon, for the first time, accelerate by modifying the genome. A species is defined by its inability to interbreed. Assortation based on IQ is bringing this about de facto among human subspecies, leading to the isolation of the less intelligent from the gene pool of the brighter specimens. Pandemics such as AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa may accentuate this isolation. The One World propaganda besetting us may be growing more shrill because it is becoming harder and harder for the Earth’s smart fraction to feel it has anything in common with the backward races, compared with the rough assumption of equality that prevailed c. 1492. Worse, we now have the means to save or cull populations more efficiently than ever before, and we are being told that there is no longer enough of some of our most prized resources to go round. Malthus and Peak Oil may join hands in the 21st century. We know that few multiracial societies composed of substantial numbers of two or more major races have been stable, and that usually the government-sponsored acclamation for them is no more than a well-meaning way of trying to halt an impending war between subspecies. However, we know too that repeatedly in history extermination has been avoided by one group shipping the other out, forcibly or by cajoling and incentives. This process, prejoratively called ‘ethnic cleansing’, has been rife since the big European empires began to break up at the end of the Great War: first on the Continent itself, and latterly in its overseas possessions. The result is that there are *more* culturally coherent sovereignties tending to monoracialism in the world than at any time since imperial intercontinental conquest took off about half a millennium ago. There is no evidence at all that huge, mainly one-way population traffic is throwing up happy beige Babels all over the planet; yet the Antis go on pumping out their One World, vintage-1950 UNO propaganda in the teeth of this geopolitical tectonic shift towards isolation. There are ample reasons in the way technologies of food production, land use and information exchange are heading to suppose that bulk movements of people to sustain labour markets (i.e depress wages) or repair alleged deficiencies of fertility will no longer be seen as an optimal fix. Painfully the multiculti experiment is going the way of socialism and imperialism: the establishments which sponsored it, in the teeth of sullen and sporadic resistance from their indigenous subjects, are coming round to the view that the cultural and social tensions engendered by forcing incompatible races to co-exist physically are not worth while. Instead, a ‘virtual’ co-existence based on swapping data will grow up. As an isolationist who has no ill will towards other races but no burning desire that they should either sink or swim, I hope we can avoid the continental-scale triages I have foreseen. Neither Band Aid nor genocide is my cup of tea: a drink we will have to replicate in labs in England. 13
Posted by Ben Tillman on April 16, 2006, 02:18 PM | # I never understood this. You keep saying “groups” have rights. But if I have a right to something like property, this means I have a claim that other people have an obligation to respect. So to say that ethnic “groups” have a right is to say that we have an obligation to preserve them. How do you square this with individual rights? Very easily—a group may be an “individual”. 14
Posted by Stephen Edwards on April 16, 2006, 04:23 PM | # “Apparently the cultural conservatives who run this website are obsessed with the notion of ancestry…” So tell me. Your mother gets sick in her old age. And some random woman, who you have never met, over the other side of town, also gets sick in her old age. Whose well-being are you most likely to favour, underwrite vis-a-vis finding a decent nursing home, and generally support with frequent hospice visits and gifts? (Don’t worry, you don’t need to answer this question, because we already know the answer, and any attempt to recant on what we already know to be your gut reaction will be dismissed as rank sophistry) 15
Posted by Phil Peterson on April 16, 2006, 05:03 PM | # Steve, That’s a good example. This guy is obviously a buffoon. And he has paraded his intelligence (or lack thereof) very well. 16
Posted by Anti on April 16, 2006, 07:46 PM | #
That’s pretty good, though I’ve heard worse from frothing-at-the-mouth WNs. Usually they are totalitarian and racist neo-Nazis, just like you. I hate to break this to you, but the MAJORITY of Americans are not against multiculturalism, and are certainly not for deporting people. So why shouldn’t we respect their wishes?
Hey I never said anything about “building”. You’re just making stuff up. Cultural osmosis is something that happens naturally. If certain cultures come into contact with each other, certain elements will root out other ones. I’m not against this development, but I don’t what I DON’T like: neo-Nazis like Scrooby who think its time to kill. I am for merging because its inevitable, sort of like puberty or death. And btw, it’s only RACISM if you are against someone because you think your background is superior. I don’t think any culture is superior, just some are more convenient for me (and others) personally. Just chill. The USA isn’t Europe. 17
Posted by Mark Richardson on April 16, 2006, 08:02 PM | # I am for merging because it’s inevitable, sort of like puberty or death. Anti, you’re not the heroic type, are you? The type who would fight to the end against the odds. No, for you it’s the soft, aged, death wish of the West which is compelling. Please note though: when other more vigorous peoples scent this kind of weakness there will be no end to the exploitation inflicted on you. 18
Posted by ben tillman on April 16, 2006, 09:03 PM | # I hate to break this to you, but the MAJORITY of Americans are not against multiculturalism, and are certainly not for deporting people. So why shouldn’t we respect their wishes? This is a mere assertion. Perhaps 5% of black Americans support multiculturalism; a larger minority of white Americans support multiculturalism as the concept has been presented to them. But the percentage is irrelevant for two reasons: (1) those who support multiculturalism are laboring under a false consciousness (thank you, Gramsci), and (2) the disposition of a commonly owned good—like a country—requires the consent of ALL co-owners. Thus, if any American wishes the deportation of ANY or ALL immigrants, other Americans are morally obligated to accede to the wishes of even a minority of one. 19
Posted by ben tillman on April 16, 2006, 09:17 PM | # Apparently the cultural conservatives who run this website are obsessed with the notion of ancestry, much like savages who claim common descent from the sun god. The link will take you to a thoughtful essay on the significance of ancestry: http://www.aish.com/torahportion/kolyaakov/-_Cells_of_One_Organism_-.asp Somehow, though, I don’t expect you’ll be taking your inanities to any Jewish discussion forums. 20
Posted by Lurker on April 16, 2006, 10:33 PM | # Anti - “merging because its inevitable” - it seems to be inevitable in NY, OK. But have you noticed the way it doesnt seem to be happening in China or Japan or Korea or Uganda? What happens when weve gone through the process and those others are still as they are now. Its a bit like a suicide pact, they say “no, please I insist, you go first, Ill shoot myself when you drop the gun”. Well what if they dont? Where is your inevitable process then? There is no sign of it happening so far, would you like to put an early date on it? Ill happily accept the process when I see it happening everywhere else at the same time. Or even better when I see China, for example, adopting the multiethnic/multiracial blueprint faster than us. Of course I might be a bit sneaky there. Where would the process be if we persuaded China multiculturalism was best, they did it, and then we didnt! How would your historical inevitibility catch up with us then? Of course you will argue that in some Darwinian sense muliculturalism is better and will sweep all other socieites away. Why is that not happening now? Im sure you will tell us… 21
Posted by Allen on April 20, 2006, 03:10 PM | # To Anti, the self-righteous, anti-American apostate: “Apparently the cultural conservatives who run this website are obsessed with the notion of ancestry, much like savages who claim common descent from the sun god.” I wonder why you so openly and aggressively condemn American, European and Western preservation, but you and your repetitiously self-contradictory ilk praise, promote and expand other forms of preservation, such as environmental preservation. You and your imprudently nihilistic-minded liberal brethren impart the hideous hypocrisy that runs so rampantly in the destructive liberal dogma: You all viciously promote and advocate the importation of third-world barbarians, who cling to their heritage, who are extremely nationalistic (especially their children), and who are openly racist and ethno-centric. I doubt this will get through your mentally ill, liberal-infected skull; but let me make this very clear to you: Rejecting your country; advocating the destruction of our people, heritage and culture; and spewing blatantly anti-white remarks does not make you sophisticated; it doesn’t make you intellectual; it doesn’t make your nihilistic views advanced and modern! Grow up you miserably depraved wretch! Don’t criticize us for liking our people, culture and ancestry; don’t criticize us for opposing the radical New World Order; and don’t you dare try to blatantly connect your anti-American, anti-Western and anti-white opinions with superiority and sophistication! 22
Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 20, 2006, 03:58 PM | # Very well stated, Allen! Gave me a damn good feeling in my gut and in my brain to read that. Good job! Bravo! Next entry: Poetry wars Previous entry: Labour losing white working class to the BNP? |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. zhrcwuwmkq commented in entry 'The end of Mel Gibson's career?' on 05/23/12, 11:46 PM. (go) (view) SEO Services commented in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 05/23/12, 11:11 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:08 PM. (go) (view) xiaolily commented in entry 'Maltese Incident' on 05/23/12, 10:12 PM. (go) (view) Cockouche commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 09:40 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 09:13 PM. (go) (view) assundaGymn commented in entry 'A Line in the Sand' on 05/23/12, 08:41 PM. (go) (view) GlablePax commented in entry 'University official sentenced for child porn, blackmail' on 05/23/12, 08:23 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:47 PM. (go) (view) cuiseur automatique seb commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 07:43 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'Indian beauty' on 05/23/12, 12:52 PM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 12:45 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/23/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:43 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 11:32 AM. (go) (view) Mellaba Pechios commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:55 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 03:51 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:26 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:23 PM. (go) (view) 7 Year BA commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 09:19 PM. (go) (view) DARYL commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 08:57 PM. (go) (view) Thorn commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 08:31 PM. (go) (view) Church of Jed commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 07:40 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 05:56 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 11:37 AM. (go) (view) AnalogMan commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 11:29 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:42 AM. (go) (view) Srakotraqu commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 07:30 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:19 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 06:26 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 02:34 AM. (go) (view) Stephen commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 06:33 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/21/12, 02:02 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime
General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by Anti on April 16, 2006, 08:31 AM | #
It’s amazing what you can run across in the internet.
Apparently the cultural conservatives who run this website are obsessed with the notion of ancestry, much like savages who claim common descent from the sun god.
Where I come from, this attitude (as well as an attitude against homosexuals, Muslims, etc) is called RACISM. It isn’t made any less racist by sugar-coated rhetoric.
Inter-ethnic mixing has always occured, occurs, and will occur. The USA is becoming the world’s first multicultural nation, and I for one welcome this development.
The only difference between this place and Stormfront is…no wait. I see that you have a Forum now. Never mind.