Each and every single one of them, with the lone (and debatable) exception being the Czech Republic.
It can't be completely abscribed to religion cuz Spain (probably the most liberal country on Earth atm) was for centuries fanatically religious.
Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.
Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.
Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.
Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.
Each and every single one of them, with the lone (and debatable) exception being the Czech Republic.
It can't be completely abscribed to religion cuz Spain (probably the most liberal country on Earth atm) was for centuries fanatically religious.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||12 hours ago|
Post-communism poverty and the power of the very fetid churches that hold sway there.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||06/25/2020|
Slovakia is welcome to the gay and Lebanon woman....
|by Anonymous||reply 2||06/25/2020|
Croatia and Slovenia can be ok. The rest of former Yugoslavia not so much.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||06/25/2020|
[quote] exception being the Czech Republic.
AFAIK many of the guys @ Bel Ami were closeted and married to womenfolk.
In terms of race, the Czech Republic is more homogenous and is hardly multi-cultural. They have relatively few Asian or African immigrants there. The Slavic countries more to the east and south have more West Asians and more Muslims. E.g. Bulgaria has more Turkic-ethnic people.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||06/25/2020|
They were behind the Iron Curtain for decades and a lot of areas remain poor and rather cut off from modern progress. It's not that complicated.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||06/25/2020|
Montenegro's tourist sector is moving towards gay-friendly accommodations, even though its society in general is still rather conservative.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||06/25/2020|
They're miserable so you must be also.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||06/25/2020|
[quote] They were behind the Iron Curtain for decades
R5, most were members of the EU for almost two decades.
And what does the “Iron Curtain” have to do with anything? Most of e.g. Africa and India is not very gay-friendly - and they were never behind any “curtain”. Until 2018, gay sex was still formally a felony under Indian law.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||06/25/2020|
Question for OP: Have you been to any Eastern European countries? (I'm guessing you have not.)
|by Anonymous||reply 9||06/25/2020|
I lived in Czech Republic and outside Prague, it’s not all that rosy for us gays.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||06/25/2020|
The collapse of communism opened the floodgates to a resurgence of religiosity after it was officially banned for decades. A conservative combination of Orthodox Christianity, extreme Catholicism, and Islam does not help.
The Czech Republic is not perfect for gays, but compared to other countries in that region it has some laws and protections that the others are sorely lacking -- legalized same-sex domestic partnerships; gays can serve in the military; discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace banned. It still has a ways to go however.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||06/25/2020|
Yes that's why I said "debatable" when referring to the Czech Republic. But still it's like night and day when you compare it to Hungary, which has taken a vile turn to right wing extremism lately. Also I think that the Czech Republic is even better than Austria.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||06/25/2020|
Have you watched the news in the U.S. lately?
|by Anonymous||reply 13||06/25/2020|
[quote] And what does the “Iron Curtain” have to do with anything? Most of e.g. Africa and India is not very gay-friendly - and they were never behind any “curtain”. Until 2018, gay sex was still formally a felony under Indian law.
I mean that they were cut off from the West, with very minimal access to different points of view through media, the arts, etc. and there was not much opportunity to travel outside the bubble of the Soviet Union for most. The majority of Indians and Africans are also rather isolated, if not formally, but due to poverty, lack of education, and the difficulty in traveling abroad.
Even in the US, there are PLENTY of places where people are just as backward as any third world country. And they can't blame it all on religion, either.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||06/25/2020|
One thing I've noticed with those countries is that they can't handle any criticism. Any criticism is quickly deflected with whataboutism.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||06/25/2020|
Such a shame that the Czech Republic fell on Soviet side of the Iron Curtain. Imagine how liberal it would be now if it had been decided for it to fall in the Western side of it?
Probably rivalling Germany or Spain in liberalism.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||06/25/2020|
Tribalism and nationalism run deep over there. The Balkans, always a powder keg, had all-out war and ethnic cleansing in the late '90s...
The fall of communism also brought about a period of transitional economic hardship, and what do many people revert to doing during hard economic times? They often blame some convenient scapegoat for their troubles. They blame the "other."
|by Anonymous||reply 17||06/25/2020|
[quote] And what does the “Iron Curtain” have to do with anything? Most of e.g. Africa and India is not very gay-friendly - and they were never behind any “curtain”.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||06/25/2020|
OP, Czechs are prejudiced against other Slavs who immigrate there. They are hardly welcoming to foreigners, particularly those of other races.
The church has little sway in the Slavic parts of the former Soviet Union.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||06/25/2020|
Estonia. But for its location on the south coast of the Gulf of Finland, Estonia is a Nordic country. Sure, it's a fairly homogeneous, white population; the greatest ethnic tensions exist between Estonians and Russians.
It is LGBTQ friendly. Same-sex couples may register for domestic partnerships and can foster children. However, same-sex marriage is not yet legal, although same-sex marriages among foreigners are recognized in Estonia. Only married couples can adopt, so that leaves out same-sex couples for the time being.
Estonia is relatively prosperous economically, which I believe is a key ingredient for tolerance and acceptance. Low economic status tends to lead people to blame others, especially those who are "different."
|by Anonymous||reply 20||06/25/2020|
R2, wrong country, Melanie. You're from Slovenia, not Slovakia. "Genius visa", indeed.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||06/25/2020|
Weren’t the Baltic countries German at one point?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||06/25/2020|
R22 German, Swedish, Prussian, Polish, Lithuanian, Russian... All of them in the past thousand years.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||06/25/2020|
R16, from my experience, many Czech people are very quick and adamant to make a distinction between themselves and other Eastern European countries. Most seem to believe falling behind the Iron Curtain was a backwards mistake.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||06/25/2020|
Because they were part of the Soviet bloc they experienced little to no immigration at the time other European countries did.
Because coming out of WW2, there was massive ethnic cleansing in that area and what was once a very multicultural region with Germans, Czechs, Poles, Slovaks, Hungarians, Serbs, Croats, Jews and Slovenes all living among and near each other became a series of totalitarian states where everyone was from the same ethnic/national group
Because their standard of living has yet to catch up to western Europe
|by Anonymous||reply 25||06/25/2020|
But they have the best whores.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||06/25/2020|
They produce good twinks and young studs but they hit a brick wall by 30
|by Anonymous||reply 27||06/25/2020|
The Czech Republic is in Central Europe, OP. The Czechs even received a chunk of German-speaking territory after WW2 (Sudetenland, parts of Bohemian Switzerland). The Czechs pushed out most ethnic Germans from Sudetenland (ca. 3 million) and settled there.
[quote] many Czech people are very quick and adamant to make a distinction between themselves and other Eastern European countries.
That's because they're not Eastern European. They're Central European and Slav-ethnic (mixed with Austrian) and were ruled over by their Austrian Imperial Overlords for centuries. It all went tits up when the Germanic Austrians dragged the Czechs into World War 1 to fight on Austria & Germany's side against most of the other Slavs. That actually didn't go down well with some Czechs and they revolted. It was a very convoluted situation: there were some Czech recruits fighting in the Austrian/German army and some rebelling Czechs fighting in the Entente Army (Serbia, Britain, Russia, France).
|by Anonymous||reply 28||06/25/2020|
My husband is from the USSR and was in his thirties when it collapsed. He would say it’s because anyone who could think, and anyone with culture, was executed by the communists. The vast majority in those countries are the former proletarian class. They are boors in everything.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||06/25/2020|
Even within Germany, the Iron Curtain can still be sensed in the differing attitudes toward immigrants in the former East.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||06/25/2020|
[quote] Because coming out of WW2, there was massive ethnic cleansing in that area and what was once a very multicultural region with Germans, Czechs, Poles, Slovaks, Hungarians, Serbs, Croats, Jews and Slovenes
All of these groups are Caucasian / white. The Slavs who were under the Austrians were not multi-racial and they don't particularly want to be. The ones who have more bi-racial people are more Eastern Slavs - because they share a border with Asia. The ones who are Muslim are e.g. the Bosnians, Albanians and some Bulgarians (because of Turkish conquest & influence).
The ex-Austrian region was multi-cultural in the same way the Roman Empire was 'multi-cultural' - because the Austrian Empire kept gobbling up territories and tribes, without any rhyme or reason. Many of the conquered ethnic groups weren't exactly keen on such top-down, forced multi-culturalism - they were uneasy bedfellows. E.g. the Slovaks didn't particularly want to be shoved together with the Hungarians (who aren't even Slavs and speak a totally different language), the Croats weren't keen on being lumped together with the Muslim Bosnians, etc.
[quote] The Balkans, always a powder keg, had all-out war and ethnic cleansing in the late '90s...
The main reason why they were a powder-keg was that every stupid Empire tried to invade them, conquer them, or conglomerate them into nonsensical lumped-together counties, etc. The Balkan region was historically seen as a very strategically important trade-route region - so almost every big country in Europe + Turkey/Ottomans wanted to claim it as its own. The Big Super-Powers constantly used the Balkans as a chess board and even conscripted the groups they conquered to go fight another group (e.g. the Austrians tried to force their subordinated Czech conscripts to fight in Austria's conquest-war against Bosnia-Herzegovina, even though that made little logical sense for the Czechs themselves).
The Balkan mess was in many ways the fault of the Great Powers, just like the Palestine/Israel mess (because some Great Powers thought it was a 'splendid' idea to just shove millions of Jewish people into the middle of the Arab-populated coast - that way they'd be 'safer' from Germany. Gee, what could go wrong...)
|by Anonymous||reply 31||06/25/2020|
East Germany was not a pleasant trip. And everyone smokes.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||06/25/2020|
So grey. Concrete. Ugly and poor. Miserable people.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||06/25/2020|
[quote]But they have the best whores.
We be best!
|by Anonymous||reply 34||06/25/2020|
[quote] He would say it’s because anyone who could think, and anyone with culture, was executed by the communists. The vast majority in those countries are the former proletarian class. They are boors in everything.
R29, proletariat = working class. How can they be "former" working class. The "vast majority" of people who belong to the "working class" will still be working class.
So your husband is from the USSR and thinks that the region 'magically' and 'suddenly' became homophobic because ... of Socialism? Because of the commies? Lol, what. Sorry, but this seems like a total cop out. "Anyone who could think, and anyone with culture" in e.g. Imperial pre-revolutionary, early-capitalist Russia actually passed VERY harsh laws against the homosex. The revolution was in 1917, but all of the following was already legislated by the 'enlightened' pro-Capitalist royalists:
[quote] The Russian Empire introduced punishment for sodomy in the early [1700s], banning same-sex relationships among soldiers and sailors. Under Emperor Nicholas I, sodomy between any men became illegal, and around the [1850s] the Imperial government started exiling perpetrators to Siberia. Beginning in 1900, gay men could be arrested and imprisoned for several years.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||06/25/2020|
No one wants to be "Eastern European" R28
If anything, the Hungarians have the best claim to it as they are not Slavs and Budapest was the second capital of "Austria-Hungary"
|by Anonymous||reply 36||06/25/2020|
[quote] No one wants to be "Eastern European"
R36, that doesn't make sense. Eastern Europe is a location on the continent. If someone doesn't like that - well, they're free to put their buildings on wheels and tow them to another continent.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||06/25/2020|
There are totally Russians on this board. They’re so tiresome.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||06/25/2020|
Very dense, especially if they grew up behind the Iron Curtain... so dense they don't get anything.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||06/25/2020|
Boy whores are us.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||06/25/2020|
Sure r35. But most Western countries at that time also had harsh laws against homosexuality. But among the elites, it was quietly accepted. My husband has several ancestors who were openly gay, and his great great grandfather, who was a famous artist, had relationships with men.
“Proletariat” in a Soviet sense had a particular meaning beyond the working class. You didn’t just belong. You had to earn that right.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||06/25/2020|
[quote]The Balkan mess was in many ways the fault of the Great Powers, just like the Palestine/Israel mess (because some Great Powers thought it was a 'splendid' idea to just shove millions of Jewish people into the middle of the Arab-populated coast - that way they'd be 'safer' from Germany.
The areas of the Balkans and Israel have been under constant conquest and occupation for eons. Blaming the "Great Powers" illustrates simplistic, historical ignorance.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||06/25/2020|
R42 Also, it wasn't the Great Powers that decided the location for Israel. They seem to be forgetting about a little thing called Zionism that wouldn't have accepted a plot of land in the middle of Canada or an island off Africa as their Holy Land.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||Last Friday at 2:36 AM|
Because they kinda are. Are all Eastern Europeans racist homophobes? Of course not, but so very many are. See - most current or recent governments.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||Last Friday at 3:24 AM|
Kinda are country. Country.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||Last Friday at 3:26 AM|
[quote] My husband has several ancestors who were openly gay, and his great great grandfather, who was a famous artist, had relationships with men.
R41, your husband seems to have an over-romantic perception about Imperial-era, pro-Capitalist Russia. Compared to the socialists - the capitalist Imperials were 10 times worse. The Russian Empire during its foray into capitalism was EXTREMELY religious - they were all about “Our Lord and Saviour”. They could give the Fundies in Texas a run for their money. The strict rules of the Orthodox Church (or the Mosques in the Muslim areas, etc) governed everything in people’s lives - from birth to marriage to death.
It’s highly unlikley that your husband’s distant ancestor was “openly gay” in such a hyper-fundie religious society. Closeted & clandestine homosex? Sure. The general policy in Eastern Europe has always been, and still is, similar to what the US Marines had: “Don’t Ask - Don’t Tell”. The Imperial family and the (teeny-tiny) upper class were obviously above (ther own!) laws and could fuck anything with a pulse (mostly on the down-low) - but almost everyone else would risk facing strict social and legal punishment under the Emperor’s laws. Because the Imperial/Royal Family and the “cultured” Capitalist Royalists were ironically pro-Church Fanatics.
Basically, the Imperial Royals & aristos were similar to many old-school US Republicans: their ‘little hypocriticial circle’ could have orgies and twinks, but when it came to passing laws for the rest - they invariably legislated to publicly equate homosex with Biblical Sodomites and send lower-class people engaging in such activities packing to Siberia. (There’s a common misconception that the Socialists started using Siberia for exiles - but actually it was a looong-standing “tradition” in the Empire, even during its capitalist era):
[quote] Leo TOLSTOY's "Resurrection" introduces a Russian artist, convicted for having sex with his students, but given a lenient sentence; and a Russian activist for gay rights as examples of the widespread corruption and immorality in Tsarist Russia.
[quote] In 1832, Emperor Nicholas I added Article 995 which outlawed homosexual activity. Persons convicted under Article 995 were to be stripped of their rights and relocated to Siberian camps (called “Katorga” back in the 19th C) for 4 to 5 years.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Friday at 4:49 AM|
R20, the Baltic countries sound promising. They are also fiercely independent and were the last to enter the USSR and the first to leave.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||Last Friday at 8:14 AM|
R47, and they love NATO. So they are our allies for sure. Estonia also seems to be doing a ton of progress stuff these days.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||Last Friday at 8:37 AM|
Lots of hot guys in Tallinn, Estonia.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||Last Friday at 12:24 PM|
Are Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian cultures very different from each other?
|by Anonymous||reply 50||Last Friday at 12:41 PM|
Eastern Euros stink!
|by Anonymous||reply 51||Last Friday at 4:38 PM|
The rest of Europe wants nothing to do with them.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||Last Friday at 4:41 PM|
Best map of Europe.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||Last Friday at 4:57 PM|
I think of Albania as a vendetta culture. I think Albanians brought that culture to Sicily, but Sicily is small potatoes compared to Albania. Albanians are serious gangsters with a whole Gangster Constitution that was passed down for centuries from their gangster ancestors. I don’t really think of them as Eastern European. To me, they’re more like a combination of really mean Greeks & Turks who haven’t evolved in centuries.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||Last Friday at 5:13 PM|
I love R53's map. Belgians are so negligible, they're still "Belgians." HAHA.
Estonia is culturally and linguistically related to Finland more than to Latvia and Lithuania. During the Estonian SSR era, Estonians could pick up Finnish over the air TV and understand most of it.
Latvian and Lithuanian are linguistically close but with regard to religioun, Latvia and Lithuania are disparate. Lithuania is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic (long association with Catholic Poland), while Latvia is majority Lutheran (long associations with Sweden) with sizeable minorities of Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||Last Friday at 5:48 PM|
R53’s map was made by a Brit.
Because the map’s creator correctly pinpoints all the fave haunts of “drunk Brits” and stamps that all over the map!
(“drunk Brits” instead of Prague/Czechia, “drunk Brits” instead of Budapest/Hungary, “drunk Brits” instead of the Greek islands/Santorini/Mykonos, etc). Ha!
|by Anonymous||reply 56||Last Saturday at 1:39 AM|
[quote] the Baltic countries sound promising.
The Baltics are promising in terms of gay culture. But not in terms of race issues. The Baltics are more racially white homogenous than any other Eastern European region. And they mostly want to stay that way:
[quote] The Guardian, 2019: “A smart immigration policy is “blacks go back”. Nazi Germany wasn’t all bad. None of these statements would be out of place in the darker corners of far-right blogs anywhere in the world. But in Estonia as of last month, they are among the views of government ministers.”
|by Anonymous||reply 57||Last Saturday at 1:50 AM|
R53 RAIN, in the middle of dry Madrid? I don't think
|by Anonymous||reply 58||Last Saturday at 4:16 AM|
On that satire map, all of eastern europe should just say Prostitutes
|by Anonymous||reply 59||Last Saturday at 10:15 AM|
^^^ a pic of Melania would suffice.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||Last Saturday at 10:31 AM|
Why do eastern europeans seem so whorey?
|by Anonymous||reply 61||Last Saturday at 10:54 AM|
R61 It's a way of life for them!
|by Anonymous||reply 62||Last Saturday at 11:19 AM|
Is Finland in Eastern Europe? I know it's part of Russia.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||Last Saturday at 11:20 AM|
[quote] Just like the Palestine/Israel mess (because some Great Powers thought it was a 'splendid' idea to just shove millions of Jewish people into the middle of the Arab-populated coast - that way they'd be 'safer' from Germany.
That's not even remotely what happened. It's amazing how poorly history is taught in the US
But allow me:
1880s: Jews from Russian and Poland began moving to Ottoman Palestine, by WW1 they maybe numbered 60K people.
1917: Because of Messianic Christianity (Jews in Israel = Return of Jesus), and the notion that European Jews who were pro-British would help support British interest in the middle east, the UK issues Balfour Declaration declaring they would establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
1930s: Nazi Germany encourages emigration of Jews but Arabs are not happy with so many Jews coming in to Palestine so Brits put a cap on their numbers. Jewish population now up to around 600K
1946-49: Around 200K Shoah survivors are moved from DP camps in Germany and Cyprus to Israel
1947: UN votes to partition Palestine into Jewish and Arab states
1948: Israel declares independence, is attacked by Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. Manages to win more territory than in partition agreement. Jewish population at 750K
1950-55: Arab countries kick out Jews who have lived there for hundreds of years due to suspected dual loyalties. Close to 1MM arrive in Israel, bringing Jewish population to 1.5MM (lots of Jews are leaving too, heading to US, UK, Canada, Australia)
1967: Israel wins Six-Day War, expands territory to include Golan, West Bank and Sinai
1973: Yom Kippur War results in no land exchange
1979: Israel returns Sinai to Egypt
1990s: Fall of Soviet Union leads to massive emigration of around 1.5MM Soviet Jews to Israel
1991: Operation Solomon covertly bring around 15K Ethiopian Jews to Israel.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||Last Saturday at 11:46 AM|
In fairness, most places have been cesspools of racism and homophobia for centuries. Sadly, it's the norm. It takes a lot of effort and constant reinforcement to get a country to stop that shit. It's rare, and it's very easy to reverse.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||Last Saturday at 11:48 AM|
[quote] So grey. Concrete. Ugly and poor.
The Romanian countryside is very pretty. Green, rolling mountains and hills and castles. But yes, the cities are brutalist nightmares. Particularly Bucharest.
Romania is interesting in that it managed to maintain a Latin language and alphabet while being completely surrounded by Slavic languages and Cyrillic.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||Last Saturday at 11:52 AM|
[quote] I think of Albania as a vendetta culture.
I think Albanians and Serbians hate each other more than any other ethnic/religious group out there--Indian/Pakistani Muslims vs. Hindus, Jews vs. Palestinians, Bosnians vs. Serbs, Turkey vs. Kurds/Armenians, etc. None of it compares to Albanian Serb hatred of one another.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||Last Saturday at 11:52 AM|
How can this be? I was under the impression the only country on Earth that was racist was the USA.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||Last Saturday at 11:57 AM|
Many of the larger cities are anything but grey,
Budapest is a beautiful city with many older buildings.
Ditto Prague, Bratislava, Krakow, and other Austro-Hungarian cities.
Yes they've got some ugly ass suburban/outlying areas, but so do Paris, London and New York.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||Last Saturday at 12:02 PM|
R69, most of those places are Central European. NOT Eastern.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||Last Saturday at 12:03 PM|
Backwards and ignorant since the beginning.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||Last Saturday at 12:29 PM|
How are you defining Eastern Europe then R70?
If Poland, Hungary, Czechia and Slovakia are Central European, what is Eastern Europe? The Baltics and other former Soviet republics?
|by Anonymous||reply 72||Last Saturday at 12:32 PM|
R72, simple--any Euro country to the East of these is Eastern.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||Last Saturday at 12:36 PM|
Half Serb here (never grew up with the culture whatsoever and have never lived there but my dad is an asshole and the textbook version of a Serb) the reason is because they're all hypocritical and judgemental cunts. They use their religion as an excuse despite doing the ABSOLUTE most unorthodox things behind the scenes. They're also full of self hate. Some of the young Serbs aren't like that but they're a small minority. But make no mistake, there's a vibrant underground gay scene there. It's just hidden.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||Last Saturday at 1:03 PM|
R74, doesn't Belgrade have a good gay scene? Admittedly, a lot of the Serbians I know here in Chicago are quite reactionary. They refuse to admit that Serbia did anything wrong or bad against Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, etc. And some of them are Pro-Trump and think he's the greatest leader ever.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||Last Saturday at 1:06 PM|
(75) Yeah, it does. But like I said, it's hidden. However, a lesbian woman became the prime minister of Serbia about 3 years ago, and there are rumors that the president is closeted. It's really weird.
A lot of Serbs think that way. They think Serbia has never done anything wrong. And it's actually quite funny because the other countries you mentioned think the EXACT same way. The constant bitching and pointing fingers at each other between these countries is laughable because ALL OF THEM HAVE DONE TERRIBLE SHIT. And the fact that you mentioned that the Serbs you know are Pro-Trump doesn't surprise me at all.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||Last Saturday at 1:40 PM|
[quote] They think Serbia has never done anything wrong. And it's actually quite funny because the other countries you mentioned think the EXACT same way.
This is a huge issue with developing countries that I"ve noticed. My family is from Sri Lanka. The people there do the same thing. Many of these countries cry about how "awful" America and the western powers are to the rest of the world. What I love is that these countries love to criticize America as being "a horrible country" and "very racist" yet they are completely incapable of self-reflection or self-blame. It's bizarre. They don't even recognize their attitudes are racist . I know one Sri Lanka nationalist woman on facebook. She regularly posts about how Putin is a strong leader, how America is a terrible, racist country that merely bullies and destroys other nations. But the other day, some woman from one of the minority communties' posted something about how a statue in Sri Lanka should be taken down because it was of a racist political figure. The nationalist woman got so furious, that she posted something on facebook saying "if you dare to touch the statues of this country, there will be another war!". She then continued to bitch about how this woman's goal was to wipe the majority population off the planet and she then called her a bitch. Cognitive dissonance seems to rule these types of countries.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||Last Saturday at 1:47 PM|
Yeah, that is some stupid, but all too typical, shit r77. That whole, my people would never... Oh shut the fuck up with that noise bitches. There is no true sentence I can imagine starting with the words "No American would ever ..." But then again, most people are stupid assholes who can't think intelligently about anything, so nationalism just falls into that whole mess.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||Last Saturday at 3:29 PM|
R78, nationalism (vs. patriotism) is always bad. Always. It seems to make all men and women stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||Last Saturday at 3:31 PM|
R79, agreed. Nationalism and patriotism is for people who are too unaccomplished and stupid to feel proud of anything they've ever done themselves.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||Last Saturday at 4:19 PM|
[quote]RAIN, in the middle of dry Madrid? I don't think
True. The rain in Spain stays mainly on the plain.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||Last Saturday at 4:31 PM|
and thank you for upholding gay guy honor r81.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||Last Saturday at 4:53 PM|
R69, Prague is easily one of the top three most beautiful cities in all of Europe -- largely spared from the WWII bombings that destroyed so many other historic cores in other cities.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||Last Saturday at 5:53 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 84||Last Sunday at 2:13 AM|
[quote] these countries love to criticize America as being "a horrible country" and "very racist" yet they are completely incapable of self-reflection or self-blame.
R77, "self-blame"? In terms of Racism, you are equating things which are not even close. Eastern European countries are NOT the ones that invaded entire continents populated by OTHER races (Africa, Australia, the Americas, the Indian sub-continent) - enslaved those continental-wide populations and became rich monarchies thanks to the slave trade and globally plundering 3 continents.
The JAW-DROPPING scale of Western European racist exploitation is not even remotely comparable to anything in Eastern Europe. Are the EEs racist? Yes, everyone is to some extent (which is why e.g. very dark-skinned, racial phenotype wide-nosed full-blood Australian Aboriginals are not regarded as "beauty icon material" by 99% of Europeans - very wide noses & big nostrils are a predominant, traditional phenotype for full-blood Aboriginals, but it's still considered "ugly" in Europe, everyone is secretly a bit bigoted). But the Eastern Europeans never pulled shit like Western Europe did (EEs never plundered entire CONTINENTS on the other side of the planet).
|by Anonymous||reply 85||Last Sunday at 2:35 AM|
R85 is VERY TRIGGERED by criticism of Eastern European Slobs for some reason
|by Anonymous||reply 86||Last Sunday at 2:38 AM|
SLAVS not slobs
|by Anonymous||reply 87||Last Sunday at 2:39 AM|
r86 is very triggered by Western Europe's history of trans-oceanic racist exploitation and carving up other continents. It was on an unprecedented scale.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||Last Sunday at 2:44 AM|
Which eastern european country is the shittiest?
|by Anonymous||reply 89||Last Sunday at 2:50 AM|
[quote]Eastern European countries are NOT the ones that invaded entire continents populated by OTHER races (Africa, Australia, the Americas, the Indian sub-continent) - enslaved those continental-wide populations and became rich monarchies thanks to the slave trade and globally plundering 3 continents.
R85 frantically rushes to defend Eastern Europe and excoriate Western Euorpe, neither of whose history he has a fucking clue in hell about.
Starting in the 8th century both Eastern and Western Europe have a very long history of invasion and occupation by brown and black people. Spain was occupied by brown/black people for 800 years. So were Sicily, Portugal, Malta, parts of Italy and France. Eastern Europe was invaded and occupied by brown, black and yellow people for far longer. Both Western and Eastern Europeans were enslaved by brown and black people, and somewhere around 1.25 million Europeans were sold into slavery all over the brown/black people world. To say nothing of the yellow people, who spent 800 years repeatedly invading and in some cases occupying Eastern Europe.
Perhaps the above will go along way to explain that far from being "racist", both Western and Eastern Europeans have a keen sense of their history and their treatment by brown, black and yellow people.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||Last Sunday at 3:11 AM|
Russia is by far the worst in terms of human rights violations. Then the Ukraine. Poland, Czech Republic, et al.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||Last Sunday at 3:13 AM|
R90, do you even read posts before replying? I wrote: "Eastern European countries are NOT the ones that invaded entire continents populated by OTHER races."
You wrote, as if in protest: "Eastern Europe was invaded and occupied BY brown, black and yellow people for far longer."
Lol, the two statements don't even contradict each other.
[quote] Starting in the 8th century both Eastern and Western Europe have a very long history of invasion and occupation by brown and black people ... Eastern Europe was invaded and occupied by brown, black and yellow people for far longer. Both Western and Eastern Europeans were enslaved by brown and black people,
No, most of Eastern Europe didn't. The vast majority of historical Eastern Europe has never even laid eyes on a black person before the 20th C.
And "Brown" people is not a race. E.g. the Ottoman Turks are Mediterranean Caucasian, just like most Southern Slavs. It's the same race (Caucasians) - just different ethnic groups & cultures. Yes, the Turks and other similar groups enslaved and sold the Southern Slavs - which is why many Southern Slavs look different (more dark-haired and dark-eyed) than Northern Slavs.
"Yellow" people did not generally "enslave" Eastern Europeans. The Mongols were nomadic looters - they would come over to an area, kill/loot a bit, rape a bit, have some 'fun', demand a "taxation payment", say they'll be back in e.g. 1 year's time to "collect the tax" and then piss off back into the steppes. They rarely stayed in any cities or villages - they didn't use the local population as "slaves" - they were like the Mafia that comes to your store and demands you "pay up" part of your profits annually or they'll burn the place down. The Mongols didn't generally pass any local laws, they didn't impose their religion or customs, they didn't control what people did during the year.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||Last Sunday at 3:45 AM|
R92 You do spend an inordinate amount of time rationalizing your own racism so that you can finger-point at the racism of others you are so adamant about. The "Ottoman Turks" are NOT "Caucasian" but descended from Central Asian Turks aka brown people.
[quote]The vast majority of historical Eastern Europe has never even laid eyes on a black person before the 20th C.
Rubbish! Both Ottoman and North African conquerers had Black as well as Slavic slaves in train. Even the Mongols had Black slaves, in addition to their Han slaves.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||Last Sunday at 3:59 AM|
LOL. Epic ownage at r85, r88 and r92. Hit them with the facts.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||Last Sunday at 4:35 AM|
So is St Petersburg in Western Russia Eastern or Central European?
|by Anonymous||reply 95||Last Sunday at 4:37 AM|
[quote] The "Ottoman Turks" are NOT "Caucasian" but descended from Central Asian Turks aka brown people.
Lol, no, the Turks are not generally "descended" from “Central Asians”, R93. The predominant ethnic groups bordering the entire Mediterranean Sea are the same umbrella race (i.e. the same early migration group of pre-historic humans, probably out of Africa, that migrated westwards towards Europe and its borders). They’re called Caucasian (named after the potential Caucasian bottle-neck region, where early pre-historic migrants congregated before spreading out across the Mediterranean & beyond). Spaniards, Italians, Greeks, Bulgarians, Turks, Armenians, the people of the Levant (modern-day Israel, Jordan, Palestine), etc - they're all broadly descendants of the same original migration wave (a.k.a. race).
In terms of the Turks, you're confusing 2 things. "Turkish" and "Turkic". "Turkic" is a LANGUAGE group used by the Mongols and used as a lingua-franca in the rag-tag, loosely-connected empire that they founded (stretching from areas near China to Turkey). The Mongols did intermix a bit with the local populations that they conquered, but the Mongol Empire didn’t actually last that long - so the Turks (native Mediterraneans) are STILL genetically predominantly Caucasian, just like the rest of the Mediterraneans:
[quote] The largest autosomal study of Turkish genetics concluded that the Turkish population form a cluster with SOUTH EUROPEAN populations, and that the East Asian (presumably Central Asian) legacy to the Turkish people is estimated to be ONLY 21.7%.
Also, many Caucasians (Southern Europeans, Arabs, Persians, Turks Levant Jews, Lebanese, etc) are not really ‘brown’. Look at e.g. Erdogan. Most of them are actually naturally white but simply tan very easily. There are of course some with naturally permanently darker skin - but that’s more rare.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||Last Sunday at 4:58 AM|
Ah, yes. The Eastern Europeans should mimic the values of the liberal French and Germans, who have blessed their territories with their virtue time and time again.
No, there’s no reason to ever be suspicious of their policies, foreign or domestic.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||Last Sunday at 5:07 AM|
[quote]They’re called Caucasian (named after the potential Caucasian bottle-neck region, where early pre-historic migrants congregated before spreading out across the Mediterranean & beyond).
More highly selective race 'splain'. Turks from the Central Asia settled in Anatolia in the 11th century, through the conquests of the Seljuk Turks. Broadly speaking Turks from Turkey are mainly a mixture of West-Asian, Central Asian and European. But Turks originate from the Turkic race or some call it the Turanid race. Turks in Turkey are related to Turkic people. We share the same language and culture.
Caucasians are those ethnic groups from the Caucasus region: Georgian, Chechens, Avar, Ossetians, Balkars, Kumyks, Circassians, etc. They are brown people. The word "caucasian" to mean White is a misnomer and highly erroneous. The word was popularized in the 18th century and encompassed Europeans and anyone from the Obi to the Caspian all the way to the Ganges and plus North Africans, a designation today that would indeed be considered both wrong and "racist".
How someone looks is an ignorant way to determine ethnicity and race.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||Last Sunday at 5:20 AM|
[quote] North African conquerers had Black as well as Slavic slaves in train. Even the Mongols had Black slaves
What train, R93? North Africans did not "conquer" Slavic or Eastern European nations. The interaction between Africans and EEs has generally been rather minimal before the modern era.
And Mongols didn't generally keep black slaves. Where are the bi-racial descendants of those black slaves in Central Asia or Eastern Europe?
|by Anonymous||reply 99||Last Sunday at 5:30 AM|
If only Catherine the Great had been allowed to conquer Constantinople and restore a new-Byzantine empire.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||Last Sunday at 5:37 AM|
[quote]Where are the bi-racial descendants of those black slaves in Central Asia or Eastern Europe?
Don't be absurd. That's like asking where are all the bi-racial descendants of the European and Slav slaves in Africa and Asia.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||Last Sunday at 5:42 AM|
north african are white caucasians as proven by the guanches in the canary islands. although most north africans are mixed today with arabs, it is still possible to genetically separate the admixture with dna tests.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||Last Sunday at 5:46 AM|
[quote]Caucasians are those ethnic groups from the Caucasus region: Georgian, Chechens, Avar, Ossetians, Balkars, Kumyks, Circassians, etc. They are brown people. The word "caucasian" to mean White is a misnomer and highly erroneous.
No. They're white. And you forgot Armenians who are also from the Caucuses. Famous Caucasians: The Kardashians, Cher, Dr Kervorkian, the Tsarnaev brothers, Alexis Ohanian, Andre Agassi, Joe Stalin. All white.
Don't get me started on Arabs. Most levant Arabs and North Africans are white.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||Last Sunday at 5:48 AM|
I'm sure those proud BROWN people would strongly disagree with their racial classification as "White".
Under the U.S. Census definition and U.S. federal agency, individuals with ancestry from North Africa are considered white. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations also explicitly define white as "original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East."
|by Anonymous||reply 104||Last Sunday at 5:50 AM|
Racism and homophobia is drummed into their brains day in and day out by their political and religious leaders, and therefore generations of family members. Those countries are still in the era that the US was in during the 50s and 60s. When that's all you hear from the time you're able to understand language it's very difficult for most to figure out how wrong it is.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||Last Sunday at 5:57 AM|
Some famous Arab Americans include Steve Jobs, Casey Kasem, Doug Flutie, the Hadad sisters, Ralph Nader, Tony Shalhoub, Donna Shalala, John Sununu, Paul Jabara, Kathy Najimy, Wendy Malick ... all white.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||Last Sunday at 6:05 AM|
Agassi's father is half-Armenian, his mother was a WASP (Dudley)
Stalin was Georgian, not Armenian
Wendy Malick is one-quarter Coptic (Egyptian) Christian, the other three grandparents were of European origin.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||Last Sunday at 6:35 AM|
[quote] But Turks originate from the Turkic race or some call it the Turanid race. Turks in Turkey are related to Turkic people. We share the same language and culture.
“We” is who? “Turkic” is a language group, not an ethnic or race group, R98. Similar to the “Indo-European” language group - it doesn’t mean that Europeans are Indians, lol. Same with English - lots of conquered groups use English as a result, doesn’t mean they’re all part of the same race.
Central Asians, for the most part, look more similar to East Asians. Look up an ancient picture of Genghis Khan - typical Asian face. And the vast majority of Turks look more similar to Mediterranean Europeans. And DNA tests back this up. Here:
[quote] “Popular DNA tests are troubling Turks and shaking belief in their “Turkishness” as they find that, instead of being direct descendants of the Seljuk and Ottoman hordes who surged into Anatolia from Central Asia a millennium ago, they are instead part of the kaleidoscope of peoples who have lived in what is now modern Turkey and migrated there since time began.”
|by Anonymous||reply 108||Last Sunday at 6:40 AM|
[quote] Caucasians are those ethnic groups from the Caucasus region: Georgian, Chechens, Avar, Ossetians, Balkars, Kumyks, Circassians, etc.
Lol, since when are they “brown”, R98? Circassian females were generally famous for their porcelain skin. Chechens are naturally pale as well. Same goes for Georgians (unless they go out & tan in the summer). There might be some exceptions - but they’re rare.
Just because many of these people love to soak up the sun and therefore look tan often - doesn't mean they're naturally "brown".
[quote] The word "caucasian" to mean White is a misnomer and highly erroneous.
It’s not a misnomer - Caucasians are called that [italic]in homage[/italic] to the Caucasus region - which was an [italic]important[/italic] crossing point used by early humans in order to migrate, probably out of Africa, and settle all around the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea (and later move further into Europe, etc).
I understand what you mean that “Caucasian” is ALSO used to describe the people who decided to stay in the Caucasus region permanently (the current inhabitants of the Caucasus region). But the name (in English at least) is used for both the region’s current inhabitants and the pre-historic ‘migration’-wave that developed by slowly moving via that region and later spreading out around the Sea borders.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||Last Sunday at 6:48 AM|
What you all are forgetting in your racial argument is that the Levant was extremely multicultural prior to WW2.
You had Greeks, Armenians, Jews, Italians, Africans, Russians, Circassians, Georgians, Bulgarians, Albanians and Serbs all living throughout the region, particularly in Turkey, Lebanon and Egypt.
In the period that followed WW2, these areas became much less cosmopolitan, a trend that continues to this day as non-Muslims have left the region.
Similarly, in the Baltic region you had Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Finns, Germans, Ruthenians, Ukrainians, Poles, Russians, Masurians and Jews all living mixed in among each other-- Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Jews, Eastern Orthodox--and again, after WW2, there was an ethnic cleansing of sorts as nation states were established and populations moved stay within the new national boundaries.
The relative newness of their national/ethnic identity is one big reason why these countries are often hostile to outsiders/people of other races. The fact that their only experience with non-white people was the invasion of the Mongol hordes hundreds of years ago also adds to their fears. Unlike Western Europe, they had no colonies and thus no exposure to non-white people.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||Last Sunday at 6:57 AM|
^^to put that in perspective, around 10-12 million Germans who had lived east of the Oder-Nesse line were displaced at the end of WW2 and forcibly evicted from their homes in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia-- West Germany did its best to take them in, but in the period right after WW2, the world had little sympathy for Germans.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||Last Sunday at 6:59 AM|
[quote]Levant was extremely multicultural prior to WW2.
It was "multi-cultural" due to 500 years of Ottoman occupation, they were all Ottoman subjects who ranged throughout the empire for commerce and livelihood. Same with the British and French occupation after WWI, though their influence was neligible in comparison to the Ottomans. Once the Ottomans were defeated, non-Muslims were increasingly driven out both in response to Muslim nationalism and expelling foreigners. Same thing happened in Greece/Turkey after WWI and in the Balkans after the end of the Soviet occupation/dominance.
[quote]The relative newness of their national/ethnic identity is one big reason why these countries are often hostile to outsiders/people of other races. The fact that their only experience with non-white people was the invasion of the Mongol hordes
The relative newness of being independent to decide their fate and identity is but one reason that these countries are hostile to foreigners. Centuries of on-going conquest and occupation is another. The Balkans were occupied by the Ottomans for centuries, then a few years of independence, then the Soviets took over until the fall of the Soviet Empire. Another big reason is that due to centuries of occupation, Serbs, Croats, Slovenians, Slovakians, Czechs, and Muslims were forced by the occupying power to live with people they had no desire to. The brutality and cruelty of the various Balkans wars in the 1990s were the result of people who'd had a gutful of being forced to live with foreigners and had the wherewithal to expel the foreigners so that they could finally live among their own.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||Last Sunday at 7:38 AM|
[quote] "self-blame"? In terms of Racism, you are equating things which are not even close. Eastern European countries are NOT the ones that invaded entire continents populated by OTHER races (Africa, Australia, the Americas, the Indian sub-continent) - enslaved those continental-wide populations and became rich monarchies thanks to the slave trade and globally plundering 3 continents.
I was not strictly referring to Eastern Europe when I made that post actually. I was referrring to developing countries all around the world. And yes, those countries do need to learn what self-blame is. It's true that many Americans deny racism happens. But many white Americans are out there protesting with BLM supporters AGAINST white supremacy. How many Serbians/Russians/Sri Lankans/Turks/etc. do you see protesting against their governments genocidal and/or imperialistic practices? Not very many. And it's because these groups tend to have a victim complex. They see themselves as vitimized peoples who are just fighting "the good fight". They tend to have the view that all people who speak against their governments or the majority population are in bed with NGOs or western governments, traitors, etc. And if that's not even mentioning how these groups all rewrite history to make themselves the victims.The irony of many of these people is that they will support things like BLM, be anti-apartheid, anti-Israel (these are just examples) yet be so fucking racist towards the people near them or surrounding them. And they lack self-reflection so they will never understand the cognitive dissonance of it all.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||Last Sunday at 9:34 AM|
They treat the Romani (gypsies) horribly over there -- despite many having some degree of Romani blood themselves -- and that's been going on for about a thousand years.
|by Anonymous||reply 114||Last Sunday at 10:20 AM|
Yeah, that's what gets me r113. This brain dead refusal to see any fault in ancestors just because they're YOU'RE ancestors. Fuck that noise. At some point you have to grow up. At some point you have to realize that Mommy and Daddy and the Preacherman aren't perfect and don't know everything. And at some point entire nations have to grow up and stop living in some fantasy of noble, flawless ancestors earnestly doing the best for all.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||Last Sunday at 2:09 PM|
R115, yup. It's sad and infuriating at the same time. It's a victim-complex, to the max.
|by Anonymous||reply 116||Last Sunday at 2:21 PM|
R24 I was going to suggest that Roman Catholicism vs. Eastern Orthodoxy was one reason for the distinction ... but Poland and Hungary are Catholic and much more repressive than Czech Republic. However I found that as of 2011, over 54% of Hungarians still identified as Christian, but 12% in Czech Republic.
I think the long history of being part of Bohemia, as so part of a greater Germany, is probably why Czech Republic, culturally, mores, attitudes... is closer to Western Europe than the rest of Eastern Europe. It's why Czechoslovakia split into two countries.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||Last Sunday at 6:29 PM|
[quote]But many white Americans are out there protesting with BLM supporters AGAINST white supremacy. How many Serbians/Russians/Sri Lankans/Turks/etc. do you see protesting against their governments genocidal and/or imperialistic practices? Not very many.
Virtue-signalling is meaningless. The ballot box is what matters and as happened in 2016, a majority of college-educated white women voted for Trump.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||Last Sunday at 8:48 PM|
[quote]I think the long history of being part of Bohemia, as so part of a greater Germany, is probably why Czech Republic, culturally, mores, attitudes... is closer to Western Europe than the rest of Eastern Europe.
Czechia is the most atheist country in the world. More atheist than any Western European countries. So that isn’t a legacy of its proximity to Germany but former communist regimes.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||Last Sunday at 8:52 PM|
They straight up undermined the EU and refused to take their share of refugees, forcing a few countries at the frontiers to bear the burden alone. They're net beneficiaries of EU membership yet refuse to do their share of the lifting.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||Last Monday at 4:25 AM|
R120 - Yes, God forbid they should look at Sweden, France, Britain, and Germany and refuse to surrender their countries and their cultures to the specious joys of multiculturalism and county shoppers forcing their way in because Angela Merkel said so.
The EU isn't exactly the least corrupt and politically cynical entity on the planet, either. They did nothing to help Italy as it bore the brunt of the migrant crisis, failed miserably as a "central leader" in COVID - the EU is also printing money hand over fist like the rest of the world.
I wouldn't worry about the "heavy lifting". The EU will be defunct in less than 20 years. Not least because although they dress themselves up a Nation, they really aren't, but try to force other members to do whatever Germany and Brussels tell them to do.
Sweden is on its way to ruin; Britain likewise; the EU's attempt to shove migrant quotas down 27 other countries' throats resulted in a leg up for the far right; they knew about the VW emissions lies; and they gave Monsanto's carcinogenic "Roundup" pest control product a pass despite hundreds of scientists warning against it.
They aren't angels, they've overshot their reach, they've made bad financial and political decisions that cost them their second biggest net contributor, and countries have a right to shape their cultures as they prefer them. That includes the Danes, who started drawing hard lines when they saw what happened in Sweden.
The Czech Republis has as much right to prefer to remain white and European and Christian, as Nigeria does to remain black and Muslim.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||Last Monday at 4:47 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 122||Last Monday at 4:47 AM|
^ The Czech Republic is anything but Christian, Nigeria is not Muslim. France's multiculturalism is a legacy of their colonial history, not the recent refugee crisis. Most people would rather live in multicultural France and the UK today than homogenously white Czechia or Poland. Most refugees do not want to live in Eastern Europe and once in keep moving towards Germany or the ultimate goal, Britain which remains the dream country for most refugees.
|by Anonymous||reply 123||Last Monday at 5:13 AM|
[quote]Most refugees do not want to live in Eastern Europe and once in keep moving towards Germany or the ultimate goal, Britain which remains the dream country for most refugees.
It's no surprise that Germany, Sweden and England are destination; however, "multiculturalism" does not factor into the decision. It's because those countries have the most generous and accessible refugee requirements and welfare benefits
|by Anonymous||reply 124||Last Monday at 5:20 AM|
R121 Yep, the "Christian" thing betrayed your inherent racism... you didn't even read the whole thread above. Czech Republic is one of the least Christian countries in the Northern Hemisphere. Only 12% of Czech citizens identify as Christian.
And "specious" values of multiculturalism? Again, exposed. You'll likely want to have the calipers ready to determine there's adequate Aryan physiognomy for a person to walk the streets of Prague.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||Last Monday at 5:49 AM|
R123 - Islam is Nigeria;s largest relgion. Muslim populations in Nigeria is currently at 50% - there were Muslim riots there after the fracas over Denmark's Jylland Posten's Allah cartoon (they also made fun of Israel - oddly, there were no Jewish riots over it). Google is your friend. It is 40% Christian, and 10% indigenous beliefs.
Islam is Nigeria's largest single religion.
The Czech Republic: 38.6% of Czech citizens declared to be agnostics/irreligious. Christianity accounted for 31.5% of Czech citizens. Roman Catholics were the largest Christian denomination, making up 27.1% of Czech citizens, while Protestants made up 1.0%, and other types of Christians were 3.4%.
Muslim population of the CR: 0.2%.
Now matter how you slice it, the CR 'sbasic culture, whether people "believe" or not, is rooted in European Christianity. Eat it.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||Last Monday at 5:58 AM|
R125 - Yes, we can see how unsuccessful poor little Denmark was with its monocultural basis.
And we can see how many favours multiculturalism has done for the social fabric of places like Sweden and Britain.
The racism is entirely on the side of people think there is no such thing as a successful white country, and anyway, a successful white country is an offence to the spirit; a successful black country is a wonderful thing to be lauded.
Did I forget to mention the successful monoculturalism of China and Japan?
|by Anonymous||reply 127||Last Monday at 6:01 AM|
2011 surveys - 12.6% of Czech Republic citizens described themselves as Christian.
So, R127, I'm curious... how do you feel about 1) global climate change, 2) women's right to choose, and 3) marriage equality.
The fascist nativist reaction that you are speaking from has grown around the world in the last decade... Bolsonaro in Brazil, Orban in Hungary, Putin of course, others... of course the Bannon/Miller white supremacists who fuel the Trump movement. All of them deny climate change, oppose abortion, and for the most part would criminalize homosexuality. But they are happy with describing "multi-culturalism" as a threat to white purity.
Last question... in your effort to end multi-culturalism, what do you do with native peoples? US, New Zealand, Brazil....
|by Anonymous||reply 128||Last Monday at 6:30 AM|
When Europe pulled out of Africa, they took the money and jobs with them...so no surprise that the refugees are following the money.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||Last Monday at 8:11 AM|
[quote] a successful white country,
R127, I'm not sure how you ended up talking about a [bold]successful[/bold] white country in a thread about Eastern Europe?
|by Anonymous||reply 130||Last Monday at 8:20 AM|
[quote]Yes, we can see how unsuccessful poor little Denmark was with its monocultural basis.
When was Denmark moved to Eastern Europe? 🤔
|by Anonymous||reply 131||Last Monday at 9:20 AM|
Anyone here who doesn’t think Stormfronters came to Datalounge to harass gays & decided to stay in order to harass “Dems” is an idiot. They give themselves away in this thread. Stormfront & various white supremacy sites have threads about whiteness, brownness, blackness & “yellow” ness that go on for years. Literally years, where they get down to the nitty gritty of who came from where and sullied the whiteness of the pure race,
|by Anonymous||reply 132||Last Monday at 9:28 AM|
Most likely repressed closet cases...holes clenched with desire and bitterness.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||Last Monday at 9:32 AM|
don't white people have the highest amount of nearthenthal DNA? so that means that they are not fully humans, right???!!
|by Anonymous||reply 134||Last Monday at 9:38 AM|
The Balkans hate the Muslim Turks. Eastern Europe has seen what’s happened in the west and are damned if it will happen to them (same goes for the Swiss and Danes).
Russia is actually a VERY diverse country and has been diverse for a long, long time. But the Russian Empire and especially Soviets didn’t fuck around with religious fanaticism. Peter I neutered the Old Orthodox Church (melted church bells for cannonballs), and the Soviets are the reason Russians have “New Years Trees” instead of Christmas trees. They also don’t let their Muslims fuck around like they do in the West, though they’ve lightened up considerably since the Soviet era (granted, the Muslim areas are now the independent central Asian states).
|by Anonymous||reply 135||Last Monday at 1:10 PM|
[quote] The Balkans hate the Muslim Turks
But aren't Bosnians and Albanians very much mixed with Turks?
|by Anonymous||reply 136||Last Monday at 1:12 PM|
Well yes, good old fashioned rapin’ and pillagin’ will do that. But that’s what makes the area so complex. And that’s nothing to say of Janisseries.
Another thing to note with the USSR is that the bolsheviks initially encouraged Islam to rise up against the monarchy, promising them religious freedom and autonomy - basically having them as useful idiots. What a fun communist tactic. Everything old is new again.
|by Anonymous||reply 137||Last Monday at 1:16 PM|
R128 - I'm gay, you fucking moron. I support marriage equality, believe my species is doomed due to climate change, and think that the governments of the world are at what Lao Tzu (yes, even people who don't think multiculturalism is the alpha and omega of any society anywhere on earth regardless of circumstance, previous history, etc., read Lau Tzu.) describes as the Fourth Stage of Government: its only function is to keep itself in business and the well-being of the People is the last thing on the agenda - if it still appears on that agenda at all.
As for women: isn't it interesting that although black men got the vote 50 years earlier than women, and the unpaid labour of women over the last 5,000 years built what we understand as "civilisation", enduring mass rape, foot-binding, female infanticide, concubinage, unequal pay, sexual harrassment going back decades just in America in the workplace, lack of legal rights in divorce, property ownership, custody of children (the Married Women's Property Act in Great Britain only came in in the late 19th century for fuck's sake!) - no one ever talks about reparations for women?
In America alone, every woman over 55 who should get a $500,000 tax free cheque for what they've contributed to holding society together whilst not getting paid for it whilst working for lower wages and for decades if not centuries being denied the chances to become doctors, lawyers, etc.
That goes for Britain, too.
|by Anonymous||reply 138||Last Tuesday at 5:06 AM|
R138 Interesting (especially the Lao Tzu part... the Tao that can be posted about on social media is not the Eternal Tao).
But you didn't answer the question(s). The overarching question, you're "anti-multiculturalism" is 1) swimming against the tide of history and 2) connected to movements with extreme political/policy positions.
1) Americans under 18 are already "minority white". Before 2040 the whole country will be "minority white." It's not like anyone is asking to create multi-culturalism, it's what we have, and will have more of. 2) Just the fact that you're "gay" doesn't respond to the observation that the white-dominance, anti-multicultural movements trending in the world are absolutely also aligned to anti-gay "morality"... how do you parse that?
Last, you are against "multi-culturalism".... you would choose genocide now? Or somehow "deport" immigrants and their decedents if not "Christian and white"... ok, that's a plan. Kind of Third Reich-ish, but it's a plan. But what about native peoples (US, Brazil, New Zealand, Canada, Australia). Is it genocide for them too?
|by Anonymous||reply 139||Last Tuesday at 6:30 AM|
I'm against hypocrisy and double standards. If Africans want to maintain their culture it's laudable; if Danes do it's heinous racisim.
I'm not against diversity, either, which is different from multiculturalism, and American isn't for example, Denmark. Why do you think the Danes are drawing such hard lines now - because they saw what happened in Sweden, which also didn't emphasise integration and opted for laissez-faire multiculturalsim and now realises it was wrong. It was all badly handled - in fact, the truth is yit wasn't "handled" at all, with recognition of numbers, speed, and impact on local communities.
The Danes love their culture; why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't they want to avoid the problems Sweden brought on itself and ensure that their culture continues as they like it?
The Swedish government and the British government are aware they failed miserably at this and took the wrong tack and the social fabric suffered. You don't need genocide or repatriation: you need sensible policies.
There hundreds of thousands of people in Britain who don't speak English; women in those areas are at particular risk of domestic abuse and an inability to seek help outside their closed communities. We didn't have a problem with FGM, of which, in the UK, we have had 130,000 cases present without more than one arrest, which resulted in an acquittal. The Rotherham scandal occurred because no one dared to accuse a group of non-English men of such heinous crimes. Sweden, a once unified coherent society now has wholly segregated areas like Gothenburg, one half of which is Swedish and the other half, all non-Swedish.
Take a look at some of Trevor Phillips' comments. He's the former equality "czar" in Britain and he warned the country it was sleepwalking into a segregated and hugely divided country.
America was never like Denmark or pre-WWII Britain.
A bit of common sense would have done wonders.
But, as I said, governments in the West today aren't about common sense: they're about keeping themselves in power and in business, and screw the peasants: all of them, regardless of colour, gender, ancestry, or religion.
|by Anonymous||reply 140||Last Tuesday at 12:38 PM|
I have a few theories, but the most prevelant is related to their historical poverty and the shame that engendered within their 'master race' superiority complex.
The second is one I heard growing up in a poor white neighborhood....'you may be on the lower rungs, but at least you aren't black'
That one is the toughest to deal with. The mentality around it is so twisted you can't make sense of it. Poverty creates a lot of resentment. It's why the GOP can play their base like busted, one string fiddles.
|by Anonymous||reply 141||Last Tuesday at 12:44 PM|
Just stop, r140. Britain's multiculturalism is a relic of its colonial past and has enriched, rather than impoverished, Britain. Stop blaming others for your country's shortcomings. You were not a perfect before Windrush and other migrations. You've complained about black immigrants, South Asian migrants and, most recently, Polish and other Eastern European migrants. Now you currently have a conservative government in power and may be getting ready to take in a few million new citizens from Hong Kong. Whose blame? China? Are they holding a gun to your heads?
|by Anonymous||reply 142||12 hours ago|
Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Don't you just LOVE clicking on these things on every single site you visit? I know we do! You can thank the EU parliament for making everyone in the world click on these pointless things while changing absolutely nothing. If you are interested you can take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT and we'll set a dreaded cookie to make it go away. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.
Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!