WOKE and proud of it....

[Will Bouwman]

Check your news sources' coverage of one of the given cases.

That is not my responsibility. If you have a case, make it.

It is your responsibility. It's entirely yours, in fact.

Oh. You think it is my responsibility to find sources that affirm your interpretation of events? I disagree. In my view, if you have a position you wish to advance, it is not for those you aim to persuade to do the persuading for you.

If you want to know, you will; if you don't, nothing can make you.

It's not about knowing, it is about believing. You are a believer; someone who commits to a narrative and makes it part of their identity. Better, I think, to keep one's sense of self separate from their beliefs. The advantage being that as you learn, new information doesn't challenge who you are.

[Alexis Jacobi]

You could go some way to persuading me otherwise by engaging in a conversation that at least acknowledges that neither you nor I knows whether our interpretation of whatever facts we are presented to us is The Truth.

There is certainly confusion and disagreement about The Truth, but the truth (accurate assessments) about relatively minor incidents — this is what IC brought out as examples — can be known.

It is not always easy, but it can be done. Sometimes it takes an inordinate amount of time though — which dissuades people.

In your case you do not want to know so you do all you can to muddy the waters. It is a typical, common game.

Your partisanship distorts your capabilities of fair discernment.

[Alexis Jacobi]

It's not about knowing, it is about believing.

If you yourself examined each example IC referenced, you yourself could know. And if you did know, you’d have certainty. And you yourself would therefore believe.

Get your head in order, Bro!

[Will Bouwman]

You could go some way to persuading me otherwise by engaging in a conversation that at least acknowledges that neither you nor I knows whether our interpretation of whatever facts we are presented to us is The Truth.

There is certainly confusion and disagreement about The Truth, but the truth (accurate assessments) about relatively minor incidents — this is what IC brought out as examples — can be known.

Really? How?

It is not always easy, but it can be done. Sometimes it takes an inordinate amount of time though — which dissuades people.

In your case you do not want to know so you do all you can to muddy the waters. It is a typical, common game.

Your partisanship distorts your capabilities of fair discernment.

Then waste no more time on me.

[attofishpi]

Why isn't this called out as racism?

Labour Party candidate for Clacton - Jovan Nepaul - stating his favourite drink is "WHITE MAN'S TEARS"

It would be nice to be represented by such a lovely English chap

[Alexis Jacobi]

Really? How?

You are doubling-down on a faux-epistemological problem.

We can know, with a high degree of certainty (for one example) that Smollett staged the attack. You see? If you have no way to decide minor issues like this, God help you with the larger ones …

Disentangle your mixed up reasoning processes, Wilbur.

Then waste no more time on me.

No! You are super-illustrative of the mental confusion that is common today. Because you demonstrate the degree to which your intellectual processes are corrupt, I gain because it helps me to better understand the problems prevalent.

[Consul]

It is correct that there has been a significant increase of the number of violent crimes in Germany during the last three years, which is not mentioned in de Haas' book.

The number of criminal non-Germans in Germany has significantly increased too, but so has the number of non-Germans in Germany. And as you can gather from the following figure, given the nearly parallel increase of the number of non-Germans, the percentage of criminal non-Germans among the non-Germans in Germany has not increased. There even seems to be a small decrease!

WOW. Talk about a way to make the stats look a lot prettier for those that want open borders! So immigrants have eased off slightly on their violence -woopy dooo!

Any increase of the crime rate is a bad thing, and I'm not happy about the current development in Germany. I do see that we have a big problem, and the enormously large and still growing number of immigrants, especially from non-European Muslim countries, is part of it. That said, it also needs to be mentioned that the vast majority of immigrants does not commit any crimes.

I'm not against a more restrictive regulation of immigration into Germany or other European countries, but I'm not going to vote for far-right parties such as the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland/Alternative for Germany), because the alternative society they seek to establish is the reactionary opposite of an open society with a liberal democracy.

Note that de Haas doesn't deny the dark side of mass immigration:

"Myth 12: Immigration sends crime rates soaring
…
This is not a reason to deny, trivialize or soft-pedal real problems that exist. The disproportionate involvement in crime or intimidating behaviour among some marginalized minority youth is a serious problem, not only because it can make neighbourhoods unsafe and unpleasant to live in, but also because it keeps putting these groups at a disadvantage. However, in order to effectively address and avoid such problems, it is important to understand their causes.…"

(de Haas, Hein. How Migration Really Works: A Factful Guide to the Most Divisive Issue in Politics. New York: Viking/Penguin, 2023. pp. 206-8)

[Alexis Jacobi]

…

That post of yours seemed as if it were choking on something and squealing pitifully. I am truly at a loss and can recommend nothing except to get some sleep!

[attofishpi]

It is correct that there has been a significant increase of the number of violent crimes in Germany during the last three years, which is not mentioned in de Haas' book.

The number of criminal non-Germans in Germany has significantly increased too, but so has the number of non-Germans in Germany. And as you can gather from the following figure, given the nearly parallel increase of the number of non-Germans, the percentage of criminal non-Germans among the non-Germans in Germany has not increased. There even seems to be a small decrease!

WOW. Talk about a way to make the stats look a lot prettier for those that want open borders! So immigrants have eased off slightly on their violence -woopy dooo!

Any increase of the crime rate is a bad thing, and I'm not happy about the current development in Germany. I do see that we have a big problem, and the enormously large and still growing number of immigrants, especially from non-European Muslim countries, is part of it. That said, it also needs to be mentioned that the vast majority of immigrants does not commit any crimes.

I'm not against a more restrictive regulation of immigration into Germany or other European countries, but I'm not going to vote for far-right parties such as the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland/Alternative for Germany), because the alternative society they seek to establish is the reactionary opposite of an open society with a liberal democracy.

Now I'm interested. What are the policies specifically that AfD (Alternative für Deutschland/Alternative for Germany) you are concerned with.

I am extremely concerned with the support that Putin & China Xi Ping are giving to destabilise Western democracy. The illegal immigration is doing just that. Islamic people on the whole do NOT have any pride in the countries they enter, to the contrary they despise us "infidels".

It's one thing to be liberal, but intelligent liberal people being stupid is inexcusable. To vote for parties that are not going to control the borders and DEPORT every single one of these illegal immigrants that have no actual reason to be granted asylum, is to allow the eventual destruction of our Western liberal democracies.

These statistics should never be ignored..

Headline:
Germany recorded more than 214,000 criminal acts of violence last year, according to official police statistics.
Germany recorded a large rise in violent crime in 2023, the first year without pandemic restrictions, police statistics published Saturday showed.
Welt am Sonntag, which gained exclusive access to the data, said violent crime climbed 8.6%, to 214,099 cases — a 15-year high.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-violent-c ... m=referral

The number of suspects arrested rose by 7.3% to 2.246 million and 41.3% of them did not have a German passport.

Among the people without German nationality who were charged, 402,514 were described as refugees, asylum seekers and those who entered the country illegally.

[Immanuel Can]

That is not my responsibility. If you have a case, make it.

It is your responsibility. It's entirely yours, in fact.

Oh. You think it is my responsibility to find sources that affirm your interpretation of events?

No, Will; I don't think that. I think it's in the interest of somebody who cares about the truth to find out the truth...and if he doesn't care about it, he has no responsibility at all. Take your pick, I guess.

You seem resistant to all the explanations and evidence others have offered. I feel quite glad now that I was judicious enough not to invest my time in a similar exercise of providing the proof, only to be told that nothing I provided would ever be received. I've saved myself some time, and some very futile activity, apparently.

Find out, or carry on as you are. It's your choice.

[attofishpi]

Denmark: VIOLENT crimes..(RELATIVE to POPULATION)

Well, firstly I do not agree that the graph represents convictions. From what I can gather it represents likelihood of conviction relative to the local Vikings, who of course have a long history of not involving themselves in violent crime. I don't know that it suits me...

Of course it doesn't suit you Will, it must be conflicting with your pre-existing thought that we're all equally violent no matter where or what our ideology is.
The fact that you are likely to waste a vote to go with a party that are quite happy to allow more immigration legal AND otherwise thus allowing more violent crime against us terrible British people, ya know the people who's forefathers fought to protect us and Europe from Nazi Germany, many making the ultimate sacrifice..that means nothing now.

I don't know that it suits me, but howzabout being serious? Look at what the axes say: x - Conviction Rate Relative to Danish Origin. y - Nation of Origin. So, what we can gather from the graph is that the Nation of Origin with highest Conviction Rate Relative to Danish Origin is Kuwait.
Now, I confess that I cannot tell from the graph whether the Nation of Origin with the greatest incidence of violent crime is Kuwait. I can say with no fear of contradiction that I would be surprised if that were the case.

Well, that's what the graph says Will. I admit, I was surprised Afghanistan wasn't further up the list but I guess most of those immigrants truly are fleeing as asylum seeking refugees since the Taliban gained control and are appreciating making it to Europe..?

How might I account for this discrepancy?

Well I did above re Afghanistan, let's see what you have to say re those from Kuwait..

Well, in the absence of further data, I would simply make shit up. One possibility is that this being Denmark with its recent history vis-à-vis Islam, you know, the cartoon episode; the police and judiciary are very careful to make sure the case they have against Kuwaitis,Tunisians, Lebanese, Somali, Jordanian, Moroccan, Iraqi, Algerian and other Muslims is compelling for fear of provoking the accusations of racism and Islamophobia they faced as a result of the cartoons. Maybe Danish lawyers are afraid to get involved. Maybe Danish justice is racist.

There IT is!!

Anything that contradicts the lefty assumption that people coming in from the M.E. and Africa are going to be law-abiding citizens like the majority of us must be a skew of information - racists are screwing the stats!! FFS. Wise Up Will!! WE ARE INFIDEL SCUM TO THESE PEOPLE

Or maybe something about Denmark is peculiarly attractive to violent Muslims.

Nah, it's wherever the Muslims get a large foothold - have a look at the Germany stats below.

I don't know which, if any of the above is true; if you have some further information or deeper insight, I am happy to consider it.

Of course I do Will, anything to assist someone I respect to place their vote where it is needed (Reform UK), the protection of we BRITISH and our
democracy. The way silly voters are going, you'll be having blasphemy laws - very soon..

39% of British Muslims expect wives to obey them.
23% of British Muslims want Sharia Law.

Secondly, I don't agree that Convicted is more potent than "mere committed". And I think if you were to reflect on it, hopefully nor would you.

Reflect on it? How is Convicted - per going through a judicial process, ya know legal scrutiny lesser than "Committed" - which is what the below
German stats are:


Germany recorded more than 214,000 criminal acts of violence last year, according to official police statistics.

Germany recorded a large rise in violent crime in 2023, the first year without pandemic restrictions, police statistics published Saturday showed.
Welt am Sonntag, which gained exclusive access to the data, said violent crime climbed 8.6%, to 214,099 cases — a 15-year high.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-violent-c ... m=referral

The number of suspects arrested rose by 7.3% to 2.246 million and 41.3% of them did not have a German passport.

Among the people without German nationality who were charged, 402,514 were described as refugees, asylum seekers and those who entered the country illegally.

[Will Bouwman]

You are doubling-down on a faux-epistemological problem.

Clearly I need to remind you that I am not disputing any facts.

We can know, with a high degree of certainty (for one example) that Smollett staged the attack. You see?

Well I do now, but it wasn't a story that took up a lot of bandwidth in the UK.

You are super-illustrative of the mental confusion that is common today. Because you demonstrate the degree to which your intellectual processes are corrupt...

Poor me. It shouldn't surprise you by now to appreciate that there are different interpretations. Certainly that my intellectual processes are corrupt is one possibility. It might also be that it is your intellectual processes that are corrupt; who knows Gus?

...I gain because it helps me to better understand the problems prevalent.

Happy to be of service.

[Will Bouwman]

I think it's in the interest of somebody who cares about the truth to find out the truth...and if he doesn't care about it, he has no responsibility at all. Take your pick, I guess.

You still don't get it. As I said to Alexis Jacobi, I am not disputing facts. Again, exactly the same facts can be interpreted differently. You are confusing truth with interpretation.

[Will Bouwman]

I don't know that it suits me, but howzabout being serious? Look at what the axes say: x - Conviction Rate Relative to Danish Origin. y - Nation of Origin. So, what we can gather from the graph is that the Nation of Origin with highest Conviction Rate Relative to Danish Origin is Kuwait.
Now, I confess that I cannot tell from the graph whether the Nation of Origin with the greatest incidence of violent crime is Kuwait. I can say with no fear of contradiction that I would be surprised if that were the case.

Well, that's what the graph says Will.

No it doesn't.

[Immanuel Can]

I think it's in the interest of somebody who cares about the truth to find out the truth...and if he doesn't care about it, he has no responsibility at all. Take your pick, I guess.

You still don't get it. As I said to Alexis Jacobi, I am not disputing facts. Again, exactly the same facts can be interpreted differently. You are confusing truth with interpretation.

No, I'm quite clear on how it is. A fair "interpreter" is going to realize he's being lied to by the major media. An indoctrinated person is going to resist that to the point of total irrationality. One can reason with the first sort, but is only ever wasting time with the second. So I just point you to the facts, and let you draw your own conclusions, because you've got the wits to see it.

When a supposed "journalist" or "media outlet" prints one story one day, and its opposite sometime later, you don't need to be any genius to see exactly what's happened. Either he didn't check his facts in the first place, in which case he was a bad journalist, or he lied in the first place and had to eat his lie when the truth became too evident. Either way, that's not a person or source to be trusted.

Check it for yourself.