Youtube comments of Regis (@Timbo5000).

  1. +bringsik100 Over a million people died under the American regime. They completely failed to keep order and essentially allowed murderers and whatnot to roam Iraq with impugnity. That was the direct cause of the Iraq war, not even counting the deaths in the war itself. So yes, the American leadership was worse than Saddam not because they were evil or something, but because they were criminally incompetent at actually leading Iraq. Maybe British control over Iraq would've been better with their experience ruling over other countries, but America left over a million people for dead and clearly has no idea how to lead a country
    798
  2. I was sexually harassed by a 40-50 year old woman once and I was 18 at the time. I still feel uneasy thinking back at it, though luckily nowhere near traumatised. I CANNOT imagine how a 14 year old boy would feel about literal rape. That shit is mentally scarring.
    757
  3. Ik heb het debat gezien en dit kan echt niet. Beide kanten waren vrij sterk, maar dit is bijna een compilatie van Baudet's meest zwakke momenten én zijn argumenten zijn eruit geknipt. Zeer slechte journalistiek.
    548
  4. If I should ever find myself at an American graduation, I'll sing the lyrics out loud :)
    375
  5. Consumed by his money-hungriness, that father of hers. Doesn't give a damn about his daughter, looks to her as if she were an object to be used to further Dubai's interests. Quite the story
    356
  6. I know right.... nuclear isn't even bad for the environment at all, it emits close to nothing. I will never understand why nuclear gets all this hate, it is clearly the future of emissionless power production. More advanced nuclear plants are extremely safe and highly efficient in terms of power produced per nuclear waste. Things like Germany closing all nuclear plants in favour of brown coal plants "for the environment" is absolute madness. I think Chernobyl left this irrational fear of nuclear power in the minds of many people even though it is one of the safest (and cleanest) means of producing power. Environmentalists should adore nuclear power.
    316
  7. 21:16 Ahhh, my countrymen working hard to reinforce the stereotype of the Dutch being cheap
    285
  8. You keep saying it's ugly, but I absolutely love the looks of this gun!
    274
  9.  @heliwurth7250  Technically almost all of us descend from some royal line as they had a lot more children than peasants. Statistically, a huge amount of Europeans descend from Charlemagne in one way or another, to name one example. But yeah, aside from the few monarchies that are left here in Europe I doubt anyone actually identifies with "their" royal house that has been dead for centuries. Not gonna lie though, as a Dutchman I kinda came here for the house of Nassau.
    273
  10. 1:40 Ahahaha give this man a medal!
    257
  11. This is why he deserved that arrow. He risked this just to go and get them to convert... Which I find disgusting enough to begin with because he should leave their culture alone.
    201
  12. This reminds me of that congressman that once took a snowball into the US congress as "proof" that global warming isn't real. The level of stupidity you find in American politics is astounding. London has a knife attack problem, therefore guns are good? Those Americans must have some supernatural train of thought that we mortals can't possibly follow
    192
  13. Pfff, people talk about Nazism all the time without knowing a thing about it. Invading other countries is German culture, not Nazism. And Hitler loved dogs, how can you be against loving dogs? Some people....
    189
  14. It's similar in Amsterdam. It's incredibly expensive to live there due to properties being bought just to be rented out for tourists. It's always crowded as all hell, to the point of there being instances of people calling the police because a shopping street was so filled with people that they couldn't exit the shop anymore (actually happened!). Excessive tourism is cancerous, it destroys otherwise beautiful venues. If I live in Venice I'd rather be poor as dirt and living in that 1965 portrayal of Venice than rich and living in that touristic mess. It just has no substance anymore. I will never go to Venice out of respect for the people living there
    185
  15.  @You-pk6jh  They're pretty fun to joke about, that's why. Within Europe there are also a lot of countries that like to joke about eachother. For example we have lots of Belgium jokes here in the Netherlands and of course the infamous UK-France relationship in terms of jokes... There's also such a thing between Europe and the US. It's very typical of North Americans to get all salty about banter and start talking about "eurocucks". You can't handle a damn thing. It's BANTER, deal with it and don't get butthurt. Quite ironic that you're the ones calling others cucks when you're so fragile.
    174
  16. Wat is multiculturalisme toch fijn. Wat was het toch een fantastisch idee. Wat kunnen we toch goed door één deur met z'n allen. De ene kant zeurt over een figuur uit een kinderfeest dat compleet niet racistisch is bedoeld en juist positief hoort te zijn en de andere kant verziekt het kinderfeest net zo erg als de zeurpieten door de confrontatie aan te gaan. Kan iemand mij uitleggen waarom wij überhaupt ooit dachten dat multiculturalisme iets goeds voort zou brengen? Het enige wat ik zie is een en al gezeur, over de meest onbenullige dingen.
    165
  17. Göteborg, een stad in Zweden met een grote immigrantenbevolking. Iets vertelt me dat dit geen toeval is, maar dat valt nog te bezien
    147
  18. Ach, arme kindertjes zijn gekwetst. De grote boze Wilders gaat zo'n 6000 km van hun huizen vandaan in een land waar ze niks te zoeken hebben een tekeningwedstrijd organiseren over hun profeetje. Wat doet zoiets toch pijn. Zo veel pijn dat kennelijk doodsbedreigingen volkomen gepast en proportioneel zijn als reactie... Wat een ongelooflijke idioten. Geloven ze zichzelf nog als ze de islam de religie van vrede noemen?
    141
  19.  @spinoza3673  They do and they are, but when they start claiming heritage of Zulus it becomes strange...
    132
  20. I've already seen proximity fuses, radar and some other things from the Allies (mainly British inventions though), but British anti-submarine technology is also a very worthy mention. By '43-'44 they started making German subs just about obsolete. Very impressive feat in the Atlantic.
    122
  21. No, making conversation is mutual and never one-sided. If the other side cuts you off with extremely short answers, you have to stop or else it becomes awkward
    119
  22. I always thought he was just a failed artist with minimal cultural knowledge, but apparently he was a true man of culture. I wonder if he ever lamented how many historical buildings he's responsible for destroying, or his decision to refuse to surrender even when defeat was inevitable, which caused unnecessary destruction of German historical buildings. To think that a man with such admiration for art would order the destruction of Paris...
    119
  23. Prachtige uitslag. Winst voor alle partijen waar ik winst voor hoopte en geen zetel voor Denk. Zeer tevreden met hoe Nederland gestemd heeft
    114
  24. Die kampen zijn vreselijk maar om een compleet beeld te schetsen van wat er gaande is was het goed geweest om te verwijzen naar een aantal terreuraanslagen in China door Oeigoeren. Die kampen zijn een zeer extreme reactie op terrorisme in China.
    112
  25. And she cried within a week of things getting bad. I think she's probably an outlier though, the Italian health workers seemed more composed even if they acknowledge the incredible stress.
    101
  26. Meh... Third time's a charm!
    98
  27. Het is zo verleidelijk om dit soort idioten gewoon uit de Tweede Kamer te verbannen, maar ja dat moeten we niet willen in een democratie.
    92
  28. Highly interesting, TIK! You're one of the few youtubers to dive so deeply into the the thought process of the Nazis. You're doing highly important work here, as only by understanding their ideology can we effectively oppose it today.
    91
  29.  @demilembias2527  Because we allow it to, yes. We've let areas flood or dried areas based on the amount of land we wanted in the past. Last big one was us turning a sea into a lake and creating an entirely new province in the 1950s and now there is talk of perhaps building a big airport somewhere out at sea (unsure whether that will be done). And there is the Waddenzee, which is an area in the north that periodically totally floods. But if the climate change predictions are correct, pretty much all of our biggest city area (including Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam and more) will turn into the lost city of Atlantis unless we seriously step up our water management game. There is only so much we can do against the sea, even if we are great at battling the flooding. Guess we'll go live in Germany or something
    90
  30. About the two swords thing, that is purely in the games, not the books. In the books he carries one sword, and another on his horse for specific monsters. This series follows the books, which is of course the original source material.
    87
  31.  @flopsinator5817  A Tsar and the Soviet Union cannot be combined. They are mortal enemies
    86
  32. Damn that second part was difficult to watch, yet simultaneously so beautifully done. I deeply hope you're okay and will find a way out of this. That was a powerful watch. Please do everything you can to make part 2 about rising up out of this place and being in a great position in life. I wish you the best on your journey through this. That you've made a video again, and a great one at that, gives me hope that you've already started this journey to a better place. Stay strong, Natalie, and remember there are many people who deeply care about you. Even if we can only do so from a distance, I speak for many when I say we feel with you and care for your wellbeing. I hope that can soothe you and give you extra strength.
    75
  33. Ik hoop van harte dat de trein wint. Vliegtuigen zijn erg vervuilend en het gebruik stijgt alleen maar, zowel in Europa als in derde wereld landen waar mensen sinds kort genoeg geld hebben om te reizen (dus tel daar maar een biljoen of twee reizigers bij op...). Daarnaast schudt Schiphol op zijn grondvesten en moet het altijd maar meer meer en meer zijn, zelfs als er geen ruimte meer is. Groeien, groeien en nog eens groeien, dat is kapitalisme. Elk jaar weer "de economie is 3% gegroeid, hoera", maar dan moet het wel verantwoorde groei zijn.
    74
  34.  @timothylyons5686  Got any more of those senseless stereotypes for me? I find them amusing. Because you are joking, right?
    72
  35. Imagine Hillary as VP and then Biden backing down soon after he got the presidency lmao. Riots
    72
  36. - The crew of Captain Cook deeply regretted killing the Maori, which indicates that upon contact there was probably something that sparked a conflict that neither side really wanted. Merely stating that Cook killed Maori seems a bit one-sided as they didn't go there with the intention to do so and the specific reasons for the killings are not known as far as I'm aware. It could be the Maori reacting overly hostile to newcomers, forcing Cook to defend himself. It could be Cook being hostile himself and his crew regretting following his orders. It could be a misunderstanding that led to a conflict neither side wanted. All we know is that some of Cook's crew wrote in their diaries that they regretted what happened. A common theory among historians is that the Maori presented a ceremonial challenge to the Europeans, which was misunderstood as an attack after which Cook proceeded to defend himself. So that would be the third category. - It's ridiculous to blame high suicide rates and child deaths on colonisation when it is exactly that colonisation that brought civilisation and advanced healthcare etc. to New Zealand. If NZ had not been colonised, the Maori would likely still be hunter-gatherers with an even higher rate of child deaths and whatever more comes with a more traditional and less advanced life like that. I would definitely respect it if she'd say that is the way her people want to live and that colonisation ruined that tradition and severely damaged their culture, but I can't get behind blaming all present-day problems on colonisation as if it is the cause of their high child birth and whatnot. - I find it strange how colonisation is viewed as this particular evil even in that era. No culture existed without war over land and resources and those wars almost exclusively resulted in the other tribes/cultures being wiped out (either culturally or literally) and all they had in the way of resources taken. That is what every culture did. Colonisation is a milder form of that, whereby you do invade land you desire and steal resources, but don't murder out or chase away the local population. Later forms of colonisation even had as one of their main goals to teach the local population the ways of civilisation. This was based on the idea that western civilisation was superior to other ways of life, something we today consider as wrong (not to mention that taking away the right to self determination of a people is very wrong too, coupled with stealing their resources), but it was still intended to be help. Colonisation was very much grey, not black/white as most people today want to paint it. In short it's very divisive language that paints Europeans as some kind of ultimate evil amongst other peoples. It's like a strange form of counter-racism. History is almost never black and white, it is grey. There's many scruples to be had with colonialism, but when you start blaming high child deaths on the civilisation that brought you highly advanced healthcare you're off the rails. I respect criticisms on historical actions as long as they're reasonable and well-informed.
    72
  37. Krijg nou wat, het werkt gewoon om je grenzen te sluiten. De meest simpele oplossing en het werkt gewoon.
    71
  38. Terrorists, you see. But even that is not an excuse, tbh. Here in the Netherlands, the prime minister goes to work by bike...
    71
  39. "What's the final solution to the bourgeoisie question?" Hahaha, great
    70
  40. Wat Baudet heeft gezegd over vrouwen is gewoon een feit. Doordat we zo hard inzetten op de carrière voor vrouwen, krijgen gezinnen minder kinderen. Dat is geen mening, dat is gewoon zo. Wat je je daarna kan afvragen is hoe gaan we daarmee om? Er wordt hier gedaan alsof Baudet heeft gezegd dat vrouwen maar weer geforceerd thuis moeten blijven of zo ten faveure van populatiegroei, maar goed dat is natuurlijk weer goedkoop politieke puntjes scoren door het zo te interpreteren. Het is immers campagnetijd en makkelijkere inkoppertjes dan dit zijn er niet. Ja, hoe meer vrouwen werken, hoe minder kinderen. Feit. Ja, hoe vrijer wij omgaan met abortus, hoe minder kinderen. Feit. En ja, onze geboortecijfers zijn erg laag. Feit. Maar deze feiten benoemen is niet hetzelfde als zeggen: vrouwen moeten thuis blijven en mogen niet werken, of abortus is slecht laten we wetten invoeren zoals in Alabama. Maar er wordt wel gedaan alsof hij die uitspraken heeft gedaan. De enige uitspraak die ik vreemd vond was dat hij euthanasie zelfmoord noemde en het ontvluchten van je verantwoordelijkheid voor je ouders te zorgen. Dat slaat nergens op, euthanasie wordt in een geheel andere context gebruikt en is ook verre van doorgeslagen. Maar goed, ik heb zijn hele essay niet gelezen en hij zei dat hij slechts de zienswijze van een andere auteur heeft willen vertolken. Zal ik eens naar moeten lezen om te checken. Maar wees dan ook duidelijk wat je eigen mening is, neem er afstand van en/of nuanceer wat je hebt opgeschreven en hoe je er zelf over denkt. Dat mis ik bij Baudet.
    69
  41.  @positroll7870  That's right. Either we succesfully protect the Baltics and prove that the EU is a worthwhile project or we lose the Baltics and it is proven that the EU needs deeper cooperation to be able to defend itself more effectively. It's a lose-lose situation for Russia, it makes no geopolitical sense to do this.
    68
  42. By 1944 they decided to extract food from occupied territory in the west too. My grandparents survived the Hunger Winter in the Netherlands
    68
  43. Tijd om te stoppen, ze heeft het lang genoeg gedaan. Meestal is het na drie termijnen zo ongeveer wel tijd om van leider te wisselen
    65
  44. Wat een onzin... de Zweedse migratiedienst heeft na goed naar de situatie te kijken bepaald dat het veilig is om die man terug naar Afghanistan te sturen en dan komt er een of andere vrouw die na 5 seconden meteen het oordeel klaar heeft en roept dat de man "dood gaat in Afghanistan" alsof ze een expert is en alles weet....
    62
  45. Sjonge jonge... ik zal eens iemand's huis binnenvallen en "maar ik heb een klein kind" zeggen als ze me vertellen dat het niet mijn huis is. Wat een idioten. En ik zeg maar niks over die vrouw die het allemaal niet radicaal genoeg vond... Compleet absurde situatie daar
    61
  46. America disgusts me. Either the democrats are purposefully slandering this man's name or a renowned judge is lying about sexual harrassment to save his own skin. Whichever one of these is true, US politics are a complete hellhole. What Kavanaugh said about a politician rewarding 1 million dollars for a political scandal of an opponent says it all; the political climate in the US is rotten to the core. I don't even care what is true anymore, it's just his word against hers and no way of knowing. And if an investigation is launched, the voting will be delayed until after the elections and Kavanaugh could get screwed over regardless of the outcone. What a mess, what a disgrace...
    61
  47. Volgende keer ver weg van de intocht plaatsen. Laat ze maar lekker schreeuwen, dat recht hebben ze maar het verpesten van de intocht hoort daar zeker niet bij. Dit waait allemaal wel over, bijna elke Nederlander is voor zwarte piet. Het is een kleine groep extremisten die daar staat te demonstreren en ook een kleine groep die daar gaat staan voor zwarte piet. Het gros van de mensen zit in de stille middenmoot en vind helemaal niet dat ZP weg moet. En zelfs als ZP wordt aangepast, zal dat alleen in de randstad zijn.
    59
  48. I feel for you, having to live in a society obsessed over race and identity... when will they learn that skin colour is utterly and absolutely meaningless?
    58
  49. Yes, that'd be very interesting
    57
  50.  @mickeymegabyte  Actually, Dutch = Deutsch. Deutsch/Dutch is old Germanic for "folk". All Germanic peoples used to refer to themselves as "Dutch" a long time ago. In the Netherlands, we referred to ourselves as Diets or Duits up until the 17th/18th century. In fact, the sentence "of Duits/Dutch blood" is still in our national anthem, though that also refers to how our king at the time came from Germany. The English simply called the Germanic people closest to them, "Dutch", which is 100% correct (and/or we introduced ourselves as "Duyts" during trade relations). After thousands of years of calling ourselves "Diets/Duits" and many older forms of that term, we stopped using it but the English never stopped. Germany didn't stop and named their nation Deutschland. Even though at the time all German-speaking peoples would call themselves "Deutsch". Nowadays the original use of the term "Duits" is largely forgotten and we only call the Germans "Duits".
    57
  51. ANything is better than the US at this point. I hope we will see a world in which China, the EU and the US are independent (super)powers that hold eachother in check, perhaps Russia as a smaller power as well. This US hegemony we've had for some time just doesn't work. There has been too much meddling and too many invasions. We need stability and balance, not an all-powerful bully that does what it wants and creates chaos
    57
  52. Now is the time to threaten China with fierce economic sanctions if they choose to meddle violently in Hong Kong. We in the west can try to do what we can in order to protect Hong Kong. As popular support grows, HK might be able to push for more democracy and they need us to back them up.
    56
  53.  @carlnebrin  Then black people living in Europe are not European and will be expelled from our land. Be fair, you racist.
    55
  54. Trump changed US politics for sure, but the guy is a walking swamp himself
    54
  55. What a horrible move by Trump. Using almost a million workers as a means of blackmailing Congress into paying for his wall. No matter what you think of the wall, part of being a politician is accepting that you can't always get what you want and Trump doesn't seem to be capable of that. So many workers are suffering because of this, not to mention countless businesses that are currently stacking losses due to their inability to apply for permits and such... This is seriously damaging. Trump, take your loss and either try another day or come up with a better policy on immigration that Congress might approve. It's your job to keep the US running, not to push your own ideas through no matter the cost. Sometimes you need to sacrifice some of your agenda for the greater good of the country you run, it's a central part of being a politician.
    54
  56. You're forgetting that we were all similar Germanic tribes before that, for thousands of years, which also contributes to this sense of a shared identity. Ethnically, we are related to the Germans and are Germanic ourselves. My guess is that this genetic element is the main reason the Nazis were fond of the Netherlands, coupled with some cultural and historic factors that link us as well. Being as obsessed with eugenics as they were, that seems the probable main factor.
    54
  57. He wasn't white, he was an Asian guy living in America. Blame Christianity, not skin colour.
    52
  58. Not to mention Russia watching as one of their allies is taken out? Or perhaps even China would do something? Iran is geopolitically too complex to cover like this imo. A lot of things could happen and it's probably a bad idea for the US to see what will.
    50
  59. "WW2 was a defensive war against communist aggression"
    49
  60. Actually, there were a couple hundred of thousand USSR female soldiers and pilots, as well as female British SOE operatives behind enemy lines sabotaging things. Fun part is that EA/Dice ignored these REAL women and deliberately chose to take stories about men and rewrite the men as women. They're real idiots and they insult the people that they wrote out of their own stories and replaced with women
    49
  61. +Konrad Ford It's not "catering to the will", it's picking the best rifle. This is the exact kind of mindset that creates these toxic political dick measuring contests that stand in the way of tangible progress and results. It was very simple: the EM-2 and FN FAL were objectively better than the M14, both when firing the .308 round and the .280 round. And you profited from both world wars by selling arms and entering late. You milked the UK dry to the point of near bankruptcy. You turned the richest country of the world into a bankrupt state in the scope of 5 years. "Coincidentally" you turned into the richest state somewhere around the same time. What a sacrifice, they owed you so much back then for your noble service... Truth is, you almost bankrupted the British after WW2 and kicked them when they were down with shenanigans like the .308 and M14 rifle that just had to be American, even though the round and rifle were the worst candidates for standardisation. There was no need for that and it was certainly not justified. They owed you nothing apart from money. This would be the equivalent of the UK refusing to adopt the FN FAL on the sole grounds of it not being British and the fact that they co-freed Belgium during both WW1 and WW2 so "shouldn't be catering to the will of Belgium", but no they went for the best rifle instead. Sounds crazy, right?
    48
  62. What an embarrassment...
    48
  63. 1945: massale uitzetting van Duitsers vanwege de Tweede Wereldoorlog en de Nazi-ideologie, alleen al omdat ze dezelfde nationaliteit hadden als onze vijand. 2019: verheerlijking van IS-vrouwen als "slachtoffer", wie het IS-gedachtegoed zo aanspraken dat ze duizenden kilometers afreisden naar IS-gebied om die genocidale cultus actief te ondersteunen. Hoe zijn we zo drastisch veranderd? Vroeger was een indirecte verbinding met onze vijand al genoeg om je het land uit te zetten, ook als je alle recht had hier te wonen. Nu wordt je als je een directe verbinding met onze vijand hebt en hebt laten zien dat je bereid bent je hele leven in NL op te geven om je bij de vijand aan te sluiten, met open armen ontvangen en wordt je de gelegenheid gegeven je "trieste verhaal" te doen. Het vermogen van die linkse idioten om weg te kijken is werkelijk fenomenaal. Als mensen als M in 1945 bestonden had ze figuren als Mengele nog joviaal ontvangen met een warme, vriendelijke "Hee, hoe gaat het?" om zijn verhaal te doen. HALLO, daar heeft een verdomde genocide plaatsgevonden en zij is er vrijwillig heengegaan omdat ze het met die ideologie eens was! Die mensen verdienen geen vriendelijk onthaal met medelijden. Iedereen die daar vrijwillig heen is gegaan en lange tijd is gebleven verdient nul komma nul medelijden. Alleen maar dedain.
    47
  64.  ihds6yg dtghjh  You think there is no difference between white people? Germany could right now cite things that were done hundreds of years ago and say they want Poland back because it was taken from Germans (something they did in WW2...). Greeks could cite things that happened hundreds of years ago and take at least half of Turkey back because it used to belong to the Greeks. But the thing is, those things happened hundreds of years ago and it is done. You have no right to take things "back" that have belonged to others for centuries now. We cannot kick the Polish out of Poland, it is their land now. We cannot kick the Turks out of Turkey, it is theirs now. And we cannot kick the Europeans out of South Africa because they became African themselves, living there for hundreds of years. If you want to take some land to improve equality between white/black I say sure fair enough, but with compensation
    46
  65. @Manannan anam Yeah... either they're arrogant to think that they are the only "real" black people and the rest is "fake" (whatever "real/fake" is supposed to mean to begin with), or stupid enough to think all ethnic groups with black skin colour are the same and have the exact same identity (just the thought of Australian Aboriginals and Nigerians being considered the exact same group makes me cringe). Either way it's absurd
    46
  66. En waarom was dit ook al weer? Omdat iemand dacht dat het individualisme zou symboliseren.... Ik heb zelf nooit waarde gehecht aan die letters, maar als toeristen dat zo leuk vinden waarom dan weg halen om zo'n onbenullige reden? Volgens mij maken we van een mug een olifant, zoals we dezer dagen met zoveel dingen doen. Dit mag niet meer, dat moet weg, etc. etc. Kunnen we gewoon rustig aan doen???
    45
  67.  @thomasbessis2809  The EU is also a military alliance with the attack one attack all principle. And there is in fact military cooperation between EU nations and even shared divisions and active EU military operations as we speak. That's deeper cooperation than NATO has, even if NATO does have a longer history of military cooperation that really makes it a bit more steady than EU cooperation at the moment.
    44
  68. UK: joins political and economic union, leaves it again UK: I'll fucken do it again
    43
  69. I disagree with how you selected which countries would participate in the coalition. Firstly, the EU has the exact same legal obligations when one of its member states is attacked as NATO does (an attack on one is an attack on all). Russian activity in the Baltic states would immediately pull every single EU member state into the war. Secondly, what the population of those countries think of a single EU army has absolutely nothing to do with the decision to aid the EU in a war against Russia. Most countries are against a unified EU army, even some that you've included in the coalition. Realistically, in case of a war of such importance, all member states would want to be certain of victory. If the war takes a bad turn for the EU coalition, this would mean even those that weren't directly involved would economically be hit hard, because an attack on any member (especially more prominent members like Germany and France) is an attack on the single market they are also part of and will directly affect their economy. This war should be supported by (almost) every member state, plus probably the UK (in or out, the UK has already stated it will continue the defence and intelligence cooperation with other EU member states). Only members with exceptional reasons to not participate (for example, Finland to prevent a war on their soil and keep a buffer zone between Russia and Sweden) should be left out of the coalition.
    42
  70. Dit wordt waarschijnlijk levenslang met die instelling. Hij maakt duidelijk dat hij een gevaar blijft voor de samenleving en dit niet binnen afzienbare tijd zal veranderen.
    40
  71. Yes, what a strange world we live in that this has to be said at all.... it should be self-evident
    39
  72.  @ArunKumar-xh8vp  Unfortunately, yes.... that fool missionary may get a lot of people killed just because of his arrogance. He thought his religion is the one and only truth and that all other belief systems and cultures must be eradicated in favour of his "truth". That is why he went there. It is pure arrogance and he was even willing to risk their lives. After all, "god would keep them from getting infected", he probably thought........ What an ignorant fool
    39
  73. The problems people have with migrants have little to do with crime. It's about bringing in people with vastly different cultures, which has a negative effect on your own native culture. Mixing culture waters both cultures down.
    39
  74. If Shapiro has said "yes I've said dumb things in the past and in a sense I have been part of the mutual anger in American politics, but now I believe we should address that polarising discourse" it'd all be over in one sentence. He already admitted that he had made some dumb tweets in the past, it would be so simple to say that yes, he was part of the polarisation back then. And there is nothing wrong with admitting to that either, nobody is perfect. But he acts all offended....
    39
  75.  @potmki6601  Poor areas are predominantly inhabited by black people because they were put there during the racist era and afterwards they were told they were free now but never actually helped out of the poverty America placed them in in the past. So trying to use statistics to justify equating skin colour with poverty is redundant. Their skin colour is not the cause, the racist past of America of which the consequences have up until today not yet been fully corrected is the cause of modern inequalities. And having said that, I don't see why we shouldn't be helping white people out of ghettos as well. To me it seems ghettos and overall poverty that creates unequal chances in life should be battled and all Americans ought to have equal chances to chase their dreams, regardless of skin colour. So too much focus on black people is also misplaced.
    38
  76. +SpadesCGU I don't see why that would be a shame. We have protected ourselves by building a government that can be trusted and is resilient to undemocratic influences (like Hitler in the 1930's). If I was living in the US I'd want to arm myself against the government too. It clearly can't be trusted. Here, things are a lot different. The way I see it, you can arm yourselfes against a hypothetical tyrannic government or you can build a system and governmental culture that prevents it from becoming tyrannic in the first place. We chose the last option and it works well. And just to be clear, we can have guns, there is just very little want for them. Only those that actually have some use for them tend to own them. Farmers usually do (one close to me needs one to chase rabbits away from his crops, for example), hunters have them for obvious reasons and a small number of gun enthusiasts also have guns just because they like to. That's it, gun ownership is pretty rare. As for the Muslim immigrants, they're mostly just regular people so it's going fine. Don't see why it wouldn't be. And btw, the migrant stream you're probably referring to has been stopped by the EU a few years ago. They're not coming and refugee camps in the Netherlands are actually mostly empty. A lot of them have been sent back, too.
    37
  77. I think it refers to how mass shooters come out of nowhere. He just enters inconspicuously, easily attains a gun and gets to shoot them dead. I think he's trying to specifically target the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" saying. You can't track down mass shooters accurately. They radicalise in solitude and ultimately carry out their act. But what enables to carry out the act is primarily the weapon they can so easily attain.
    37
  78.  @defendkebab797  Dit waren geen kritische vragen, dit waren domme en oppervlakkige vragen. Baudet heeft het over een ongelooflijk ingewikkeld filosofisch thema en zij vraagt "wat is de oplossing" alsof filosofie een rekensom is. In plaats van de boodschap ergens achter te zien en alle uitspraken in die context te plaatsen pakt ze een willekeurige zin eruit die gebruikt kan worden om Baudet woorden in de mond te leggen en zet haar tanden daarin. Dit is slechte journalistiek.
    36
  79. Het is hoogstwaarschijnlijk geen smaad (in de politiek mogen zulke dingen over het algemeen gezegd worden), maar Ollongren mag wel eens rustiger aan doen. Met dergelijke uitspraken moet je voorzichtig zijn. Reserveer dat soort uitspraken maar voor échte racisten, etc. en niet iemand als Thierry Baudet. Hij heeft wel eens twijfelachtige uitspraken gedaan, maar nooit iets wat zo'n reactie rechtvaardigt. We moeten niet willen dat iedereen gelijk gebrandmerkt wordt als racist, daar heeft niemand wat aan en het vervuilt alleen maar het politieke debat. Inhoud en geen lege beschuldigingen, alsjeblieft.
    36
  80. It actually is. I'm a European law student and I've picked a course about our prison systems. The US system was also compared to ours. Essentially, we believe in rehabilitation. A prisoner has deviated from our social norms and values, so in prison we attempt to bring them back into society to get recidivism down and make them normal again. The US doesn't use prison as a means of rehabilitation, but rather management . Criminality is seen as a problem, so they suppress that problem by locking up people as long as possible. This can be best explained with the example of parole. If a former prisoner violates his parole in Europe and returns to prison, we see it as a failure: we failed to rehabilitate them, so we try again in prison. If a former prisoner violates his parole in the US and returns to prison, it is viewed as a success: the parole officer has shown that he succesfully monitored the subject and caught him. So parole is a good tool for management. It is a system revolving around keeping the deviants (criminals) out of society as long as possible, thereby keeping criminality to a minimum. So yes, you are correct it is a well-oiled machine.
    36
  81. You think there's similar poverty in the UK to the warzone ghettos in the US? And even if there was similar poverty, does this mean the poverty in the US must be forgotten and never reported on?
    35
  82. Why is there even codeine in... cough syrup? It seems wholly unnecessary
    34
  83. It depicts vikings and only vikings. Regular scandinavians were no vikings. Vikings were the warriors, as you say a smaller amount of all scandinavians. I don;t think the show tries to imply all of scandinavia was a warrior/viking
    33
  84. +Lechu Ahaha siding with the bastards who occupied and destroyed your country for decades over the ones that want to help you rebuild by sending lots of money. Your judgement is not the best. Anyway, I think we should all be friends with Russia
    33
  85. +bac nguyen And now Poland is rebuilding after Communist rule, with our aid! Even Nazi Germany would have rebuilt Poland after WW2 if it had won, simply because nobody would leave a country under its dominion in absolute ruin like that. Now Poland is free and still poor from Communist rule, but it's heavily improving and in the future will be on the same level as the West is now. There really is no excuse for what the Soviets did to Eastern Europe.
    33
  86. Yeah, I think this might be a great part of their futuristic dystopia theme. A fourth wall breaking satire, if you will. It definitely fits the game imo. We already had references to SJW stuff
    33
  87. B... but... etiquette is not silly at all
    33
  88. Agreed, I've noticed a lot of fake smiles and friendliness in the US, as a European. It's so strange and feels so wrong, like someone is lying to your face. Just act like you genuinely want to!
    32
  89. Some migrants "take our jobs" and others are "lazy and live off welfare", yes. It's important to make a distinction between certain types of immigration. You have uncontrolled immigration wherein unwanted amounts of cheap workers can cross the border and outcompete the local workers, pushing wages and working conditions down for everyone and chasing locals away from that type of job (the "take our jobs" type). You also have controlled immigration in which only wanted migrants are let in that will fulfill jobs just as locals do on equal grounds or fill jobs that locals don't want to do anymore (wanted expats/migrant workers). And you have migrants that come here in good faith and end up in welfare honestly, but also migrants that come here with the express intent of benefitting from our welfare. An example of the latter is the illegal migrants that come to Europe amongst refugees. They burn their passports and say they're from a country we accept refugees from. Once we deny them asylum they just roam to the next country to try again. Usually this goes paired with crime wherever they go. They're just here for money. Then there are groups that consistently end up in welfare, making them suspicious. Here in the Netherlands, 60% of Syrians are in welfare (2015 numbers, prob. lower now). Because they're new refugees that need to find their place in our society, this is perfectly normal and reasonable; not suspicious at all. But you also have more suspect groups: 70% of Somalians are in welfare (yes, I didn't believe this ridiculously high percentage either, but they are actual government figures from 2015). This group has been here for several generations now, so this is not reasonable at all; something is wrong with this group. What exactly is wrong can only be speculated on, but we can at least conclude they're living off welfare at an unacceptable rate and something needs to be done about this (research is needed as to why this is the case, then policy needs to be created to help them get out of this position or depending on the outcome of the research just be more strict in accepting migrants from Somalia). So yes, there is such a thing as negative types of migration that damages the job market severely or types of migrants that are parasitical on welfare. But there are also positive types of migration that fills jobs in a good manner or migrants that end up in welfare because they really need it. It's not one or the other and "take our jobs" complaints can actually be justified.
    32
  90. Dat komt door framing. Dat soort mensen is het niet alleen niet eens met politici als Farage, maar ze geloven ook oprecht dat het letterlijk nazi's zijn. Dat ze de wereld een deugd doen om zo iemand te belagen en uiteindelijk om te leggen. En helaas doen veel elementen van de media daar gewoon aan mee, aan die framing. De media bestaat om de democratie te versterken en de uitwisseling van informatie te bevorderen, maar soms vervullen ze juist een rol in het ondermijnen van de democratie. Ook echokamers op sociale media versterken die framing van vooral rechtse politici. Extremisten spreken alleen andere extremisten en krijgen door media als facebook alleen berichten voorgeschoteld die ze precies laat horen wat willen horen. Het medialandschap is sterk achteruit aan het gaan, zelfs de journalistiek doet er regelmatig aan mee. En de politiek, die demonisering als goedkope truc gebruikt om stemmen te werven maar in de tussentijd letterlijk speelt met levens. En als het uitmondt in haat en geweld dan halen ze hun schouders op; "hoe kan dit nou?!"
    32
  91. The US itself is a large human rights abuser with its interventions and torturing
    31
  92. Die vrachtwagenchauffeur reageerde ontzettend snel. Goed werk aan zijn kant, anders had dit heel anders verlopen...
    31
  93. They should ban the ships. Plenty of tourists will keep coming despite that
    31
  94.  @zachthehun3531  Some dudes who were angry about Northern Ireland being British caused major issues. I don't think you want to know what happens when a completely foreign force invades a part of Ireland.
    31
  95.  @dunklerKurfurstDesDeepstat  What America gave to all of Western Europe throughout the Marshall Plan is less than what the EU have given to Eastern Europe in the past 15 or so years. Don't overstate it as this huge contribution that is solely responsible for Europe's recovery. Especially considering that most of it went to the UK, yet other nations like Germany recovered even better.
    31
  96. +Konrad Ford In WW1 the triple entente was beating the central powers hard. The last chance at success and last major offensive of the Germans happened before the US joined and was held off by British and French forces. After that, it was just a clean up job of a practically beat opponent. The US joined just in time to take part in that clean up job. Besides, I'm not British so "we" weren't losing. I'm Dutch, we were neutral during that war (the only sensible thing to do in that unnecessary war). We were strong allies with both the UK and Germany, so it wouldn't make sense for us to join. Besides, IF we joined there would've probably been a slight preferrence for joining Germany, so we dodged a bullet there (a lot of bullets, in fact). Anyway, back to the point. I don't blame America for doing what it did in especially WW2. It's how imperialism works and you had the perfect opportunity to stick it to the world superpower of that time. You did a fine job taking advantage of the situation and built a nice superpower of your own. You beat Great Britain at their own game, hell, you beat all of western Europe in a way. We screwed eachother over all the time, just like that or worse and to this day we laugh about our victories and defeats over one another. I don't have a problem with what you did, just that you afterwards have the guts to claim you "helped" the UK and even worse: that they "owe" you. You played your cards very nicely during WW2, but being a dick afterwards is just uncalled for. You should always stay respectable, my point is. About the .280 and the British screwing up the L85, it could never be worse than being dumb enough to adopt .308 in an era where everyone and their mother knows intermediary is the winner. Hell, today you want to move to 6.5, which is very close to .280 British. If you hadn't have been a dick about it and chose the objectively better round/gun, we'd have had the perfect round from the 50's straight up until today and the foreseeable future.
    30
  97.  Joe Maleski  *violent crime happens* > "We're going to need the police over here" > "hOw ArE wE gOiNg To PaY fOr ThAt?"
    30
  98. +James J. Hobart It's true that a civilian used a firearm to attack the killer, but unfortunately that was after he had shot 26 other people in the church. The way I see it, firearms killed 26 innocents and 1 murderer in the Texas church shooting. Not a good balance. But I'm sure there are many more examples of firearms saving lives. The question is, does that outweigh the innocent deaths that firearms also cause? In the church shooting it most certainly didn't. I don't think the answer is to take guns away, but rather to make sure that every gun owner is also a responsible gun owner. Why is it that you need a licence in order to drive a car, but can easily purchase a firearm without? We need a licence for driving so the roads are kept safe from inept drivers. Aren't weapons dangerous as well in the hands of inept and/or mentally ill people? There should be some form of licence and mental checks to make sure that whoever owns a gun is mentally stable and knows how to responsibly handle a firearm.
    30
  99. It's interesting how opulence in most of Europe is viewed almost as the exact opposite of how you describe the US approach to it. Particularly here in the Netherlands the rich are downright hated and the cultural norm is to hide your riches to prevent looking snobby. Any flaunting of wealth is seen as inherently tacky, as unnecessary and condescending self-aggrandising. Taste is seen as subtle and refined markers of cultural knowledge, not too lavish, not too ordinary, something that shows you know the conventions of style (as you stated, preconceived notions of style/beauty within your culture). There is nothing comparable to the "American dream" here. Instead of idolising the flaunting rich, we seem to idolise and emulate the upper class itself as "the epitome of class", if you will. But instead of emulating their wealth, we emulate their style and behaviourisms. Style is a lot more important across Europe than actual wealth, though naturally you need a certain degree of wealth to fund proper style (and a lot of wealth to attain the height of style) but in that sense wealth is viewed as more functional than a goal as such.
    30
  100. C´mon, you have to admit Americans are generally pretty loud-talking people. It´s culture differences, nothing wrong with it
    30
  101. We have different cards in Europe, usually. Credit cards charge afterwards at the end of the month and the most used kind of card here just charges directly so you know how much you have left. I never understood the added value of credit cards. You have no idea how much you spent until the end of the month, it just makes no sense and is asking for trouble.
    29
  102. They could have at least had the DIGNITY to make her 006 or 008 or whatever and make the film a spin-off of James Bond, but no they just had to remove James Bond, they just had to ruin the franchise. James Bond IS the franchise.
    28
  103. Het is gewoon een kutvraag
    28
  104. Na de Tweede Wereldoorlog vond massale deportatie van Duitsers plaats en werden degenen van wie bewezen kon worden deel te hebben genomen aan oorlogsmisdaden gewoon opgehangen. Vandaag halen we vergelijkbare oorlogsmisdadigers terug naar huis en hebben we nog empathie ook. En de meeste linkse mensen, of in ieder geval extreem links zoals Antifa lopen altijd "punch a nazi" te schreeuwen. Maar terroristen ho maar, terwijl zij qua misdaden die ze plegen hetzelfde zijn. Genocide, discriminatie (een land voor moslims, de rest moet dood of tot slaaf gemaakt worden), de meest barbaarse praktijken met gevangenen (van levend verbranden tot aan herhaalde verkrachtingen, noem het maar op). Als je "punch a nazi" roept en vervolgens deze mensen actief wil terughalen ben je gewoon hypocriet. In het beste geval worden ze door Irak of Syrië berecht. Gerechtigheid voor de lokale populatie én wij zijn niet opgescheept met loslopende tijdbommen in onze samenleving. Wij kunnen ze niet effectief vervolgen omdat het zeer moeilijk is bewijs te vergaren. Het beste wat er hier in Europa in zit is veroordeling voor lidmaatschap van een terroristische organisatie, wat maximaal 6 jaar of iets dergelijks kan opleveren.
    27
  105. Overall I think this is a good view, but I have one criticism: the simple practice of acting on your innate feelings is also a form of morality according to your view. For example, if a man rapes a woman out of pure lust, you could say he implicitly thought this: P1 I ought to reproduce P2 I can create offspring by raping a woman C I ought to rape a woman Therefore he acted on his morals. But what he truly did was connect a fact to his innate sexual urge and act on that urge. He never considered his acts to be either good or bad, he only acted without thinking . If both acting on axiomatic oughts and contingent oughts is a form of morality, then everyone, at all times, acts from their own sense of morality and there is no such thing as complete lack of principles or complete lack of morality: only others acting in their own moral context. In short, every single act or belief (as long as the second fact-based premise is correct) is a form of morality. Since the definition of morality is "Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour." (as per the Oxford dictionary), your views would regard the behaviour of not adhering to any principles, but acting purely on instinct without ever distinguishing good or bad, as a principle itself. Lack of principles would be classified as a principle, lack of morality (note: not to be confused with immorality) would be classified as morality, not distinguishing good from bad would be classified as implicitly distinguishing good from bad, which is contradictory.
    27
  106. Dit is eerder het "belachelijk lage opkomst-effect", maar goed. Er moet echt meer aandacht komen voor de EU
    26
  107. That isn't the point of free speech at all. Free speech exists to ensure that the free exchange of ideas that underpins democracy stays healthy. If there's a huge social current that represses free speech that is equally destructive to democracy and its premise of free exchange of ideas as a repressive government is. Free speech is not about the government, it is about ensuring the functioning of democracy, which can't function without free speech. This also means that absolute free speech doesn't really make sense. It's useless to protect speech that isn't allowed in democracy to begin with, like spreading nazi ideology. Unfortunately America just doesn't understand what freedom of speech is and why it exists so I often see viewpoints like freedom of speech has to be absolute or freedom of speech is only for the government. Both wrong.
    26
  108. It's awkward translation. In Dutch, "achterlijke cultuur" can be said, but retarded culture in English sounds strange. It's even worse with Rutte's "act normal". "Doe normaal" is a normal expression here, but in English it sounds very strange to say the least.
    25
  109. +Adam Bell Planning to invade a country, failing to do so and then seeing that country burn down the White House as a reprisal is not a "tie". It's a pure loss. That's like saying WW2 would have been a tie if after being invaded, the Soviets steamrolled Germany back to Berlin, burned the Reichstag and then left again because the knew Germany wouldn't be invading again. No, one side planned an invasion and occupation and that strategic objective failed miserably. The other side's strategic objective was to defend itself and push invading forces back, which was a resounding success. America lost, the British Commonwealth/Canada clearly won. The invader was put in his place by the defender, that's no "tie".
    25
  110. Maar... maar... er mag nergens meer "I" staan want dat is te individualistisch!!!!
    25
  111. In plaats van ervoor te zorgen dat de eigen zaken op orde zijn, in de slachtofferrol kruipen en anderen aanvallen. Heel typisch weer... Ik hoop van harte dat deze schandelijke school sluit.
    25
  112. Wat voor een idiote trend is dit... ?
    25
  113. +Jonathan Xavier The West isn't a place in which we make migrants as comfortable as we possibly can. It's a place in which we respect eachother's rights and freedoms. Migrants, too, have a responsibility under the law to condone certain things. Nobody has the right to have their eyes shielded from someone else's way of clothing or to be separated from others. If so, I would also have the right to say I feel uncomfortable by people wearing Hijabs, therefore I go to a court to order them to take them off in my presence or stay out of my sight. It makes no sense. A free society means that you yourself are free to be what you want, but also that you must accept others that do what they want.
    25
  114. The main lesson of the early 20th century is that with one wrong ideological turn, you can make perfectly normal, intelligent people do unspeakable things. You can make a perfectly normal person think that the utopic future requires that dissidents today are killed. You can make a perfectly normal person believe that to save his people, he has to invade foreign lands and even massacre Jews for being Jews. All it takes is ideology, no stupidity, no evil, just a different ideological world view. Scary....
    25
  115. Meer samenwerking? Fantastisch. Meer van dit ipv een EU leger. Dat hebben wij helemaal niet nodig als we de samenwerking goed regelen. We moeten een soort Europese NAVO hebben om ons te verdedigen, da's genoeg en dan houden we de controle over onze eigen troepen.
    24
  116.  @123Sander1231  Are you insane? The US can't launch a ground offensive into the EU, they just aren't capable enough for that as the EU combined military is too large. The only way D-day was possible in WW2 was because Germany's army was busy fighting an extremely bloody war int he East. If the EU can fully focus on defending its borders and has huge force concentration there, a land invasion is not possible by a long shot. Especially not if the US has to deal with an EU war industry that pumps out thousands of Leopard tanks per month, all coming to suppress any US land force that may have landed. Can the US land tanks to match this? Not even half, or a quarter for that matter. The EU is going to mass produce the most nasty AA systems they can design to deny the US air force air superiority the best they can, they will mass produce tanks to overwhelm any enemy land force, they will mass produce fighter aircraft to at least try to gain air superiority over EU land and they will conscript millions upon millions into the military. And you can possibly land a few thousand troops and a few hundred tanks to "match" this. Not gonna happen by a long shot. And "pro-US rebels"? Bold of you to assume these people will exist in the first place, considering the US attacks Europe in this scenario. This is about as stupid as assuming there will be "pro-Europe rebels" in the US and merely funding them can win the EU the war. In no stable country on earth will there be pro-enemy rebels if their country is invaded. Maybe in some dictatorships the people will happily see the government defeated, but that's it. Obviously there won't be any pro-US rebels to speak of in the EU. What the actual hell are you thinking?
    23
  117. Ah... we on the continent would support the Scots just to annoy the English, just like old times
    23
  118. +lindamonroe Don't forget they crossed a dozen safe countries, wilfully put themselves in the hands of heartless human traffickers and crossed a highly dangerous sea on a shoddy raft before they got her. These aren't refugees, they are economic migrants. Illegal economic migrants.
    23
  119. Wat een rotgeneratie. Dom en respectloos. Ik zou bijna zeggen haal maar een paar straffen van de vorige eeuw terug, speciaal voor deze kinderen
    23
  120. Dus... ze zitten niet alleen zwerfkatten, maar ook wilde Europese katten (onderdeel van de natuur) te steriliseren?
    23
  121. Waarom is de reactie van SJWs altijd om de geschiedenis uit proberen te wissen? Zet een bord bij dat "België schenkt beschaving aan Congo" beeld en leg uit wat de mindset wat toendertijd. Breid het museum uit en besteed aandacht aan wat Leopold en z'n vriendjes allemaal voor wrede dingen hebben gedaan in Congo. Dán heb je een mooi museum dat het verleden weergeeft zoals het is. Ik ben het met haar eens dat de huidige vorm van het museum geen recht doet aan wat er in Congo is gebeurd, maar het weghalen van kunst en wegpoetsen van het verleden is niet de manier om daarmee om te gaan. Als we haar haar gang laten gaan wordt dat museum één grote guilt-trip voor Belgen "kijk eens hoe wreed jullie waren, schaam je". Beide kanten moeten belicht worden, niet alleen de Belgische of alleen de Congolese. En beide kanten moeten in historische context geplaatst worden. Ik ben laatst naar het museum van volkenkunde in Leiden geweest en daar doen ze het heel mooi. Gewoon de geschiedenis zoals het was, inclusief onze eigen wreedheden in Indonesië maar zonder er een guilt-trip van te maken. Zo hoort een museum te zijn, objectief.
    23
  122.  @myname604  European ethnicities have been mixing for thousands of years now, you're a bit too late mate. And most European ethnicities originate from one common indo-European people so it's pretty dumb to consider ethnicities that came from that coming back together again miscegenation. It's pointless, we largely have the same genetic history and only drifted apart a bit not too long ago. And landborders have nothing to do with genetic differences either so it's arbitrary to use that as a rule to stop mixing.
    22
  123. Because they're poor. We don't like including poor and violence-ridden countries in our club, it taints how vain we can be about the West. Some people are even starting to say Mediterranean countries like Italy and Greece are not European. We do what we need to justify our ideas about the West being somehow inherently superior, so we can't have inferior economies/civilisations as part of it. We'd probably sooner accept a country like Japan in the club than Brazil. And it's not race, because a country like Argentina is basically white and they still are not considered European/Western and America is of course not that white (plus I doubt we'd disavow America as part of the west when white people become the minority. We will do so if they ever become poor or violence-ridden however, can't have any country tainting our image of the West).
    22
  124.  @alecpitts6843  Amber doesn't know how to pick up a phone and call TMZ about a scoop
    22
  125. No more ferrying across the mediterranean. Crossing it is dangerous and these people ought to be smarter than to come here. We've been facilitating it (or rather; the charity organisations have). We must take away all reason for them to come here. So I say well done Italy. It's sad that there are people on that ship, but they chose to undertake a dangerous journey... with children. It's like blackmail; you purposefully place yourself in a dangerous situation and force European countries to take you in. They wouldn't place themselves in the situation in the first place if they knew it'd be futile, so we have to show them it is futile.
    22
  126. The last part is true for most countries. I think the reason is the difference in culture between US and European countries. In Europe, people generally looked up to nobles, royalty and such and because of this, etiquette is a fairly important part of culture in most European countries (and etiquette differs greatly within Europe, but in principle every country does have similar ones). In America, the middle class is more like "the thing to be", if you will, and I guess that´s why American culture is more centered around the normal individual rather than following posh rules. You never idolised kings and queens, you idolised the normal people, which is respectable. But as a European I still think etiquette and manners are important in societies. I think that the fact that Americans generally think of etiquette as less important and tend to follow it less created all this mocking of "rude" Americans
    22
  127. Criticising anything remotely relating to transgenders is "transphobic" to them. Another respectable institution that has fallen to the SJW ideology.
    22
  128. They can't fight, both cities are already warzones themselves
    21
  129. +JOHN BROWN Dude the first guy said he lives in the banlieues, the neighbourhoods of Paris that are mostly inhabited by migrants.
    21
  130. Dan moeten ze gewoon ff wachten op de maandelijkse periode
    21
  131.  @CurrerBellHooks  I honestly don't understand how the US government does this. We pay for a shit ton of social policies in western Europe and meanwhile you're equally rich, if not richer, and struggle with just one element of that. And in the past we had even more social policies than today, plus much higher investment in the military. I just don't get it
    21
  132. You know... we live in such crazy times that I actually don't know whether what you said is a joke or the truth...
    21
  133.  @slantedyee5621  When far right sympathisers defaced a mosque and left a pig's head there to frighten the muslims, we called it an attack and prosecuted them even as terrorists (= committing a crime attempting to instill fear in the population, spreading a political message). This was here in the Netherlands. Why on earth would setting a church ON FIRE not be an attack in the same sense? Or defacing it in an equally serious manner as the previously described case? You just have a double standard going on.
    21
  134. It is even more fake than soap operas, tbh
    21
  135. Do you really think Merkel wanted the migration crisis to happen? She said she wanted to welcome some refugees from Syria (why not?) and then all hell broke loose. Economic migrants came, way too many Syrian refugees came too... She made a terrible mistake and you can hold her accountable for it, but don't act like she wilfully brought this on Europe.
    21
  136. Because for decades on end, people in America have been conditioned to believe these two things: - Socialism is literally evil and will always end up wiht gulags and mass starvation. - Anything proposing a bigger government is automatically Socialism. Bernie isn't even a Socialist, he's a Social Democrat like the countries in Western Europe. I.e. a capitalist with broad social security ideas.
    20
  137. Dan doen ze ook bij Trump. Claimen dat hij mentaal niet in orde is en naar de psycholoog moet. En ook die Rusland onzin. Dat is de toestand van de hypergepolariseerde Amerikaanse politiek. Over en weer persoonlijke aanvallen en geen inhoud.
    20
  138. +Marta Mortevassal Sorry to burst your bubble but Russia has about the biggest population of muslims of any European country
    20
  139. +Hybrid Theory I'll stay in Europe, thank you very much. You know, that place that is even more developed than you and with zero neighbourhoods you're likely to die in. That you have to compare to Africa says it all, really. I think it's funny how you never see a European say something as ignorant as "my country is full of glory" in a dead-serious way. It's obnoxious and is more telling of a superiority complex than anything. You're offended by not being in the top 20 so you start yelling about being superior. Typical.
    20
  140. The Swastika is probably the most interesting symbol out there. It's used by so many different cultures and is one of the oldest symbols known to man. Besides the examples in this video, I've also seen African artifacts in museums with the swastika on it. Very interesting how widespread it is. Probably my favourite symbol. Such a shame that it's today mostly associated with Nazism.
    20
  141.  @jonwilko6305  Remember when the Dutch installed a king in GB and you guys loved it so much you called it the Glorious Revolution? I remember
    20
  142. Ehh, it's their country and if alcohol is against their culture and law, they're fully in the right for banning its sale. What is not okay is the modern slavery and terrible working conditions/safety for migrant workers.
    20
  143. +Marius Vorster When BBC reports pro-Israel news they're Isreali puppet propaganda spreaders, when the BBC reports anti-Israel news they're biased too? BBC reports both sides and whenever a report is good for one side, the other blames the BBC for being biased/propaganda... You're a joke
    20
  144. +Lapis Lazuli Americans speak English differently to the way it is normally spoken, so they have an accent. And technically everything is an accent.
    19
  145. The EU has a bigger army than Russia with a lot higher spending and a much higher population. Complete naval superiority and probably air superiority. The EU has the edge here, but it would be an interesting fight to see.
    19
  146. Met radicale moslims kunnen wij onze vrijheden niet eens meer veroorloven... We moeten nu serieus de vrijheid van onderwijs gaan indammen omdat we anders dit soort radicale scholen niet eens kunnen sluiten. Het zou me niet verbazen als uiteindelijk de bescherming van religieus onderwijs ook uit de grondwet wordt gehaald. Tja, dat soort luxes kunnen we niet meer hebben als wij mensen binnenhalen die wij dat soort vrijheden niet kunnen toevertrouwen. Te gek voor woorden.
    19
  147. That's like saying "at this rate English is going to be the official language of Germany" because they teach English is school there... English has huge influence in many countries, yet those local languages are still going strong. I agree it's a bit of a useless class (seriously, what kind of nonsense is "Hinglish" and why would anyone want to learn it?), but it has no actual impact on English. In fact, you should see Hinglish as an instance of English heavily influencing a foreign language to the point of modifying it into something new entirely. This is a "victory" for English as a highly influential language, not something that negatively influences it.
    19
  148. Two wrongs don't make a right. If land is taken, compensation must be given.
    19
  149. +Hybrid Theory Hmm, I think the one that says "my country and all of its glory..." is the one that has a nerve hit. Got a bit of a superiority complex there with that overcompensation.
    19
  150. Still waiting for a report on fundamental christians saying some people will go to hell or are morally decrepit due to their lack of religion. Indeed, people of both sides will always be hateful of one another, especially on the internet. It's no use making a big deal out of it unless you know it'll actually have some effect
    19
  151. Als ik burgemeester was zou ik die demonstranten lekker een paar straten verder zetten, zonder ook maar één kind in zicht. Belachelijk dat ze er gewoon naast mogen staan, schreeuwend tegen kinderen die gewoon van het feest willen genieten. Ik heb die video ook gezien en ze gingen gewoon door, kijkend naar dat huilende kind. Geen druppel schaamte of medelijden. Walgelijk
    19
  152. +AKA Likeaforest A P O L O G I S T What Israel does is horrible, what Palestinians do can be horrible too. No horrors of one side can justify the horrors of the other. And what we see in this video is yet another horrid act among so many. Don't be an apologist for one side
    19
  153. Sue on what grounds? Sue in which court? Try to achieve what exactly by this in the first place? Stop talking about things you know nothing about. This is advice both to you and Trump. Taking the EU to some court (if you even can in the first place.....) makes no sense whatsoever.
    19
  154. Finally someone takes action. TheEU needed someone to step forward and call everyone together
    19
  155. The F-22 was basically pushing too hard in terms of technology. It's the kind of plane a country would research if in the middle of a war or intense arms race. I still don't know why the US ever thought it was a good idea to make such an overly expensive fighter that in a few years would be behind in technology compared to other, more adaptable designs. They seem to have completely ignored longevity with this design and that makes it a waste of money. The gen 6 better be able to take upgrades, or else it'll be the same story all over again. It's not like the US needs that, because nobody in their right mind is going to join in on this arms race.
    19
  156. @tom donoughue It's necessary in a society to bear children and families are at the very important centre of our civilisation, but it's not the "main" thing we look in for partners. We look at companions we wish to spend the rest of our lives with, then the children come naturally. And for some they might not come at all, even though those are outliers (not sure if they are still outliers in the modern west, but eh). For some an infertile partner is a dealbreaker, for others it's not. Procreation is extremely important to any civilisation, but at this point we shouldn't be as breed-obsessed as we have been in the past. We shouldn't be pumping out 5 kids per family anymore. 2 max, with our current population. In any case we need to keep it steady. In the future we'll have massive issues with overpopulation because while here in the west our birth rates are fine, in especially Africa they're breeding like rabbits. At some point it becomes destructive and we're already past that point. I see it as every family's duty to contribute to at least the upkeep of the population, lest it collapse, but there is also a duty not to make it explode. A relationship is primarily about companionship, which naturally also leads to family-shaping in the long run. But the offspring should not be the main goal.
    19
  157. Jason Beard  You are the gullible moron here. There is at this moment no possible way of deciding who is right. It is really just his word against hers. He provided a bit more argumentation but nothing that could lead to a conclusion without further investigation
    19
  158. Germany attempts to invade France and dies, the end
    19
  159. That is rude... ironic
    19
  160. +Jason Bone Dutch subs used to do that with Russian ships during the Cold War. The subs were known to be one fo the most silent of the western world and they used to pop out the periscope mere metres next to Soviet warships to spy on them. Subs are pretty damn sneaky if operated right
    18
  161.  @strogarth6752  Yes, European culture should be left alone. I agree.
    18
  162. +Meri Arzo Muhammad Meri Justeju Madina "ISLAM IS PEACE" "We ARE GOING TO TRY BEST TO KILL HIM" Islam is poison to the mind and turns you into a violent schizofrenic
    18
  163. Stupid missionary risked the lives of the entire tribe just to take a shot at making them forget about their culture and convert to Christianity. I will not shed a single tear over his death. There is even a chance that he already spread a disease amongst the tribespeople, let's hope not. Arrogant fool.
    18
  164. "It might be a system of oppression but my ancestors put effort into building it, dammit. Can't just take that away from me"
    18
  165. Great to see Austria in the EU presidency soon. When we Dutch had the presidency we pushed for the Turkey deal and dried up the Middle Eastern migrant stream, now Austria can push to close the African stream.
    18
  166. Dat is het trieste inderdaad. Alleen winnen omdat je "the other guy" bent. Biden heeft een achterban van nul
    18
  167. He sure made peace in Ukraine
    18
  168. Well, looks like we're going to have a bit of a civil war soon
    18
  169. Nah, lock him up
    18
  170.  @Hanoverauto  The BBC is a very broad network with many different channels and shows. He means that generally BBC News is trustworthy, but some other shows/channels within the BBC can be more sensationalist in nature.
    17
  171. +bouc cazzo De immigratiedienst bepaalt na lang onderzoek of het voor iemand veilig is om terug te keren naar hun land. Zij hebben bepaald dat het voor deze specifieke man veilig is en dan komt er opeens een of ander meisje in het vliegtuig dat zonder überhaupt na te denken gelijk roept "hij gaat dood". Dit is geen heldin, ze is gewoon kortzichtig en doet alles om haar gelijk af te dwingen.
    17
  172. Wat een ziek beleid zeg, en dat tot 2014?! Die excuses lijkt mij wel op z'n plaats...
    17
  173. Fascisme heeft enkele raakvlakken met extreem linkse stromingen (o.a. geplande economie, collectivisme en enkele andere dingen), maar ik zou het niet links noemen. Het is eigenlijk zijn eigen ding, links noch rechts (of eerder een combinatie van beiden). Ook fascisten zelf, zoals Mussolini, noemden het een derde optie ten opzichte van kapitalisme en communisme. Het pakt elementen van beide. En ja, het is belachelijk om FvD fascistisch te noemen als je naar de standpunten kijkt, daar heeft hij wel gelijk in.
    17
  174. Now we wait for the "BBC is fake news" crowd to see what they think is fake in this one...
    17
  175. It's the natural result of the crazed policies we have had for the past decades. We've been extremely careless with our countries. First we brought foreign workers here to help rebuild Germany, then we completely ignored them and guess what? They grouped together and didn't integrate. We failed in our policies. Then we brought in even more and again, lacklustre integration policies. We are stuck with ghettos full of unintegrated poor foreigners that have little hope for their future, so a lot end up in crime. And to top it off, our cultures clash, hard. We just can't get along because our principles aren't the same. And now it has gotten to a point where some parties literally have said that Germans will become a minority in their own country and "das ist gut so".... It's absolutely crazy. And the opposite reaction to this crazed ideas is the now rising far right. I'm not a fan of the far right, but these stupid policies created them. The establishment needs to see that it was their ridiculous policies creating problems that really didn't need to be created, all because of their naive ideas on immigration and ignorance of any problems. The more crazy those immigration ideas have gotten, the more extreme the reaction has been, the further to the right people will go. The far right is not the problem, they are a symptom of the horrible policies and the problems they have created. If you continue these policies you can bet that eventually the far right will take power. It's only a matter of time, unless the establishment gets out of its bubble of naivety and ignorance of the state of their countries. What we really need is a moderate right party (or left for that matter) that has sane ideas on migration and more, but right now it's either extreme left ideas that are borderline self-destructive or far right ideas that might lead to exclusion of migrants. We need moderate parties. But if we don't have them, I'm rooting for the far right to stop this madness.
    17
  176. Ik ben een neanderlander?
    17
  177. This is different. This man was part of a prisoner exchange. Russia got theirs, we got ours. It's rather unsporting to go and kill the spies afterwards
    17
  178.  @mickeymegabyte  And another detail I forgot is this: technically the term "diets" is still alive. The term for a united Greater Netherlands (Netherlands + Flanders or Belgium + perhaps Luxembourg, the Low Countries united) still is Dietsland. When High and Low German started to part, High German kept using the term Duits/Deutsch but in Low German that slowly evolved into Diets/Dietsch. So the term for the united High German peoples is (Groß) Deutschland and the term for a united Low German people is Dietsland. I looked up the translation for Dietsland and in English it's Dutchland! There were some Dutch Fascists who wanted to establish Dietsland/Dutchland in the 1930's/40's, like Hitler wanted Groß Deutchland. In German it's Dietschland by the way. Man, it'd be confusing to see Dietschland and Deutschland as neighbouring countries. That's worse than Slovakia and Slovenia haha
    17
  179. Maybe in your country...
    16
  180. +SansAuthoritas Wrong. The US government is one of the, if not the most tyrannical government in the West and has been since probably the early 1900's. Americans themselves are to blame for their government. Representation is terrible, as each politician is heavily dependent on corporations to pay for their next campaign. Those campaigns, even for small politicians, cost millions of dollars. As much as one third of their time, politicians spend lobbying for the next elections to gather this money. They defend the interests of corporations above the interests of regular American citizens. You are NOT represented. You respond by distrusting the government and clamping to your guns like a child would clamp to its teddy bear in fear of the monster under his bed. No matter how many guns you have, that government will still be there, binding you by law while improperly representing you. Someone who doesn't care about you can bind you by law. There is no self determination in America as long as this government exists. On top of that, this government does all kinds of questionable things. If an American citizen is suspected of being involved in terrorism, he can legally be abducted and tortured without trial . The NSA spies on US citizens en masse without their consent. In the past the US government has even fully banned alcoholic beverages! Clamping to your guns is equal to ignoring the corrupt nature of the US government and ACCEPTING their corrupt rule over you. What Americans need to do is face their government, not hide from it. You essentially clamp to your guns and pretend that the government can't touch you but it can. It rules you every day, guns or not. You need to confront your government and reshape it until it serves YOU. You can't just sit idly with your guns as the government is under control of corporations and constantly infringes on your rights. There's a good reason you have the second oldest constitution in the world: you never challenged the American government. Zero revolutions since 1776. In Europe we had about three since then, all with new ideas about how the government should serve us . You need to constantly and actively keep your government in check until it is exactly what you desire. Because government exists for its citizens. Our government is exactly what we want it to be, but is yours? You've sat back and did nothing for too long
    16
  181. "Who should own Europe's land?" Not Black people. Next question. "Who should own America's land?" Not White people nor Black people. Next question.
    16
  182.  @benjibanks7894  Nope, here in the Netherlands we already have developed succesful medicine that seems to neutralise Corona. We're currently starting safety trials for humans. This medicine will enter the market probably a year before the vaccine (which will take approx. 18 months). For the medicine testing will take a few months before it's deemed safe.
    16
  183.  @artman7780  The more of you come, the more radical Europeans get in defending their culture/land. At some point Europeans are going to get seriously radical and you know how radical we can get by looking at the past.... Look at how extreme some Europeans already are about barely 5% muslims in their countries.... Don't push people, they will get unreasonable and violent in the end and that is something you do not want to experience.
    16
  184. If we'd do that we'd have enough to fund medicare for all and corporate journalists would finally understand this new, strange concept of "taxes".
    16
  185. Beetje laat en ongeloofwaardig. CDA is één van de voornaamste bijdragers geweest van juist de problemen die hij nu benoemt
    16
  186.  @EEYore-py1bf  I will tell you why non-white kingdoms aren't enough for SJWs: the entire point of their race switching is not mere inclusion, but to push down our throats that multiculturalism is good and has always existed. It is not about including a non-white character in a story. It is about portraying non-white characters as an equal member of a white society, projecting modern multiculturalism on the past. Therefore you can't have non-white characters portrayed as being from a foreign land, it doesn't fit their agenda.
    16
  187. +Brother Ares And who says that territory belongs to Israel? The torah? It DOESN'T and the only way is a two-state solution. There is despicable aggression from both the Palestinian and Israeli side and both sides need to compromise. Israel has no actual claim to Palestine, it is all based on religion and not facts.
    16
  188. This wasn't really everything I needed to know, but good enough as a summary
    16
  189. +The Badman There are two kinds of Britons; ethnic Britons and cultural Britons. Yes, you're the most British when you are both, but that doesn't mean a cultural Briton isn't British either. If a black person is culturally indistinguishable from a native Briton, then he too is a Brit. By your logic some American with British ancestors is more British than a cultural Brit living in Britain, even though that American has lost all contact with the UK and wouldn't even fit in if he tried. The cultural aspect is very important. I agree a passport doesn't make you British, but your culture does. If a white couple from the Netherlands (ethnically different people) would move to the UK, their children will grow up in Britain and be culturally indistinguishable from Britons. Those children will ethnically NOT be British either, but they would be accepted as Brits by everybody. I don't see why any other ethnically different people should be treated differently, as it's the same concept. The only difference between the white Dutch child and a black child would be that for the latter you can see much more easily that they're of a different ethnicity. But BOTH are in essence the exact same case; not ethnically British, but culturally British. Why would you accept the first but not the second?
    16
  190. Ja, laagste prijs, oftewel "wij melken onze boeren het meest effectief uit"
    16
  191.  @arjunmalhotra8561  You mean social democracies?
    16
  192. Britain is still fairly relevant, but in the future their relevance will only go down. As the economies of larger countries such as India improve, Britain drops lower and lower on the list of economic power. Not because its economy is lacking, but only due to its size. It's why we have the EU; together we'll always be at the top of the world. Its a means of staying relevant. Let's be honest, divided we in Europe are a collection of small rich countries with little to no power. Together we are an economy equal to that of the US and a military equal or maybe slightly superior to that of Russia. Now that is something you can call relevant. Shame they're leaving. They'll be fine, but destined to become irrelevant, which is extra painful for a proud country like Britain with such a beautiful history.
    16
  193. +Thr Badman Sure buddy... I bet you get your information from a very reliable youtube channel run by some idiot in his mother's basement. If you choose not to trust BBC, fine, I respect that opinion. But if you start acting as if you know the truth you're nothing more than a gullible idiot to me. There is no way of properly getting information on your own. You either get it from shady YT channels, shady websites or some other highly unreliable "source". Wake up.
    16
  194. Lees het essay hier: https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2019/05/houellebecqs-unfinished-critique-of-liberal-modernity/#.XOJe0g0yP_c.twitter Het is een boekreview.... Baudet doet geen uitspraak over wat vrouwen zouden moeten doen qua werk. Wel doet hij één uitspraak die ik zelf onzinnig zou noemen: "In the Netherlands (where I live), suicide is facilitated to ensure that here, too, no constraints—such as the duty to care for your parents—are placed on the indi­vidual." Hiermee trekt hij euthanasie volledig uit verband en mist hij de reden waarom het wordt toegepast en hoe voorzichtig wij hiermee omgaan (het is echt moeilijk toestemming te krijgen van een arts). En dit schrijft hij ook niet vanuit het perspectief van het boek. Dus ja, dit is de enige uitspraak waar ik zo mijn vraagtekens bij heb. De rest is óf het benoemen van feiten, óf het beschrijven van de visies die uit het boek komen. Dus die ophef is grotendeels onzinnig en waarschijnlijk gewoon vanwege de campagne die gaande is.
    16
  195.  @theoneandonlyhere  Wat een absurde vergelijking...
    16
  196.  @iancampbell6925  That's a fair point against nuclear warships. I'm unsure what exactly would happen and the extent to which the nuclear reactor would be exposed.
    15
  197. Die verplichte verhuizing klinkt eigenlijk best goed. Doei salafisten, de gematigden mogen lekker blijven
    15
  198. +Khadidje koko Allah doesn't exist
    15
  199. Nah, the open borders are great, the common economy and international leverage is great. Outer border protection and speed at which they solve issues.... horrible. No need to be overdramatic, the EU needs some work but overall it's a good thing
    15
  200. Doet me denken aan die video's van Hitler die aan het einde van de oorlog trilde door Parkinson
    15
  201.  @jamiealexandermiller  It's critical of several aspects of the modern world and presents a futuristic dystopia in which these elements spiralled out of control. I agree that corporations' power is at the top of the criticisms, but there are also cultural criticisms which include some SJW stuff. We already saw some of this in those oversexualised ladyboy posters that another shitstorm was created over. That is why these options actually fit the theme of the game nicely.
    15
  202. +Daniel Bostock Idiot... the BBC can't report a damn thing anymore without your decrepit comments below it. Shows how you completely have no point, instead you spurt out nonsense under every video
    15
  203.  @Brand131  Het gaat er niet om waar het is uitgevonden, het gaat erom dat een vrouw zelfs op een uitreiking/gala als deze als lustobject wordt neergezet. Dit hoort een nette aangelegenheid te zijn waar het gaat om de sportprestaties van de winnaars en dan begint een of andere lul over twerken. Dat geloof je toch niet
    15
  204. Is he not correct? The Brexit campaign was full of lies, it was in fact one big lie. The remainers yelled about leaving being an instant economic disaster (the truth is that there will be less economic growth, but the UK will manage, albeit not as rich as they could be in the EU). The brexiteers yelled about the EU being anti-democratic (a blatant lie looking at how the institutions are designed and the leading role that the member states have within them) and costing heaploads of money that could be spent otherwise (again a lie, as while you pay money to uphold the EU, you receive a lot of money too from the beneficial conditions of the single market. In the end you earn money). Both sides bloated up their arguments to the extreme and very little truth was to be found in the campaign. That campaign patronised the voters, not sir Patrick Stewart. The lies in that campaign was the most disrespectful to democracy as one could be; misinforming the voters and thinking they're fools that want to hear a bogus story. In the end, no proper decision could have been made on the basis of any debate in that campaign. You should inquire as to who is your real enemy before attacking sir Patrick Stewart, try to understand what he says
    15
  205. I'm pretty sure the Ciri we see is the 16 year old post-Thanedd Ciri that Geralt tries to track down in the books. The post came with a comment that says something like "I'm looking for Geralt", so this is after they meet and after her training at Kaer Morhen.
    15
  206. Ze blijven ook echt achter Rutte staan, die VVD'ers. In dit stadium doen ze me bijna denken aan kamerleden in het buitenland die vierkant achter bijvoorbeeld Poetin of Orbán staan. Echt ontluisterend hoe blind Rutte wordt gesteund door sommigen, ook al veroordeelt de rest van de Kamer hem sterk.
    15
  207.  @AlanWattResistance  All they know is their social contract. The only reason we believe killing foreigners is wrong nowadays is because we have had bloody wars and needed to stop that. They never went though that. They're at the very first stage: a social contract in which they don't kill eachother. But if everyone is annoyed by some foreigner who comes to attempt to get people to leave their culture behind, why would they not kill him? To them there is no reason not to. All they know is how to defend their culture. And knowing the history of Christianity I have to say they definitely did protect their culture this way...
    15
  208. @slovene ball Oh lord, even worse
    15
  209.  Devilslayer101  Joke's on us, they'll fill the room with moderates for sure. Maybe make the seats cost 2000 dollars like last time, the bastards...
    15
  210. The planet belongs to all, but the civilisations we've built belong to us and our ancestors. As do our cultures and traditions. Mixing people up will only destroy cultures, mix them up until there is nothing distinguishable left. I want a world in which as many beautiful cultures as possible exist and that means no excessive migration and no intervening in other people's countries. That is true diversity, not importing people and mixing cultures with multi-culturalism
    14
  211. At some point the money is not worth the degeneration of your home anymore. That point has been reached long ago for many in Venice.
    14
  212.  @StoutProper  I agree. Growth should either not exist or be more steady than it is now. The economy exists to serve the people's interests and growth must be dealt with accordingly. The ideal situation would probably be an economy that is tailored to what the consumers want, while growing only a little.
    14
  213. The "liberals" you talk of are not actual liberals. Real liberalism is actually not bad at all
    14
  214.  @DevinPoli  Many countries enjoy an objectively higher standard of living than the US. These are facts. There is no one "best" country to begin with, only a cluster of countries that excell. And America is in the lower end of that group, if part of it at all.
    14
  215. Ze heeft een heel agressieve toon, maar ze heeft wel gelijk! De 15 grootste zeeschepen stoten meer CO2 uit dan alle auto's op de aarde samen. Maar denken we over het verminderen van de wereldhandel? Natuurlijk niet, we laten de gewone burger betalen voor zijn niet-elektrische auto. Bedrijven gebruiken verreweg de meeste energie in onze samenlevingen maar we zijn bang om ze aan te pakken. Bang dat ze dan maar naar elders in de wereld gaan om net zo veel uit te stoten als voorheen, en dat hun vertrek onze economie benadeelt. We zitten vast in de giftige mindset van "hoe kunnen we zo veel mogelijk uitstoot verminderen zonder onze economische groei in gevaar te brengen ?". Alles draait ons momenteel om de economie, om rijkdom. En daarom laten we de bedrijven overal mee weg komen. De realiteit is dat wij ons huidige streven naar maximale economische groei en constant groeiende internationale handel misschien niet meer voort kunnen zetten. De realiteit is dat wij niet oneindig lang kunnen groeien. Kijk naar Schiphol en hoe wanhopig de overheid is om de groei van vliegverkeer in NL door te zetten. Schiphol heeft zowat het maximum bereikt, dus kijken we naar uitbreiding in Lelystad. Maar wat blijkt, het luchtverkeer in NL is zo druk dat er nauwelijks meer wat bij kan. En tóch ziet de overheid niet in dat we misschien niet meer door kúnnen. We weigeren de realiteit te zien: we moeten en zullen groeien, of het nu kan of niet. We moeten af van deze ziekelijke instelling en op zoek naar een nieuw economisch systeem dat niet alleen maar om groei draait. Een systeem dat om balans draait.
    14
  216. China wouldn't join Russia. Their relationship is quite bad (or at least by far not as good as people like to think) and on top of that, China's economy is deeply intertwined with those of the EU and US, and not so much with Russia's. I wouldn't go as far as saying China would join the fight against Russia, but that's more realistic than them fighting NATO. And if the EU can take Russia by itself in an all out war scenario, imagine what the EU and the US, let alone NATO, could do. Russia would have no chance whatsoever, they'd be better off capitulating right off the bat. In the modern world, economies are linked in such a way that war is an unintelligent option. Russia is one of the few countries that could go to war with just about anyone without significant repercussions. China can't (EU or US), EU can't (with China or US, probably Japan too), US can't (China or EU, probably Japan too).
    14
  217. ​ @dankmemes7423  If we live in an economy in which you must work or else you starve, that is coercion. We are all born into that coercion. You only get to choose which business you forcibly work in. Even in ancapistan, coercion cannot be escaped. In a socialist state, the coercion of working or dying is replaced with the coercion of those that work forcibly having the fruits of their labour distributed to all in need of these resources. Coercion is a fact of nature. Trying to create a society free of coercion is attempting to erase consequences of our (in)actions. It's pointless. All we get to do is shift the consequences around, not eradicate them.
    14
  218. Western countries have had to endure things that were much worse than just looting resources, yet we always rebuilt our countries and always remained one of the best countries to live in. How does looting some resources compare to two world wars within half a century destroying entire cities, infrastructure and killing a substantial amount of your population having to rebuild almost from scratch afterwards, all while the next enemy is already ready to invade (Cold War)? How does it compare to the black death almost wiping your population out in full? Or in case of Spain and Portugal, how does it compare to an invasion force not only looting your resources but also removing a lot of the locals from their country, only to return years later to retake the land? Going even further back, how does it compare to the Romans committing genocide of Gauls and looting all their resources? You can either sit in a corner and mope, maybe point fingers too, or rebuild your country to be the best it can be. It is up to them, not us. And despite that, we (EU) still give them billions of euros in aid, three times as much as the entire US foreign aid budget. There really is no excuse for them.
    14
  219. They just have big business interests in mind. And they are probably the kind of people that think that if big business is doing well, everyone is doing well but that isn't necessarily the case. One of the biggest economic issues of our time is the fact that big business often doesn't pay taxes or at least pays minimal taxes, but you'll never hear them about that. Even though big business properly paying taxes as everyone else does (not even a raise in taxes, just paying the same as everyone else!) will have a similarly huge effect as a "great reset". It'd open up so much more funding opportunities.
    14
  220. What do you expect from modern architects that erect buildings with no substance or soul to them at all? They can't take meaning, it's foreign to them
    14
  221. Dat het BBP groeit betekent niet dat ook alle sectoren het goed doen.... Voor hetzelfde geld is bijvoorbeeld de horeca totaal verpest terwijl de grote bedrijven er prima doorheen zijn gekomen en alsnog een hoog BBP creëren. Beetje dom om dan te stoppen met steun.
    14
  222. Good, European nations shouldn't be in conflict.
    14
  223. It's truly a tragedy. At least they have a past they can be very proud of.
    14
  224.  @lilmizzije  Christianisation definitely makes more sense. It is the "my beliefs are the only truth, other beliefs are idols/satanic and I can only save people by destroying their satanic cultures" kind of mindset that caused a lot of damage. We in Europe know it more than anything, as christianity spread here and made us kill eachother, destroy European art, burn classical literature, destroy European traditions and replace it all with christianity. I'm sorry we poisoned you too
    14
  225. @John Smith Actually there are a lot of black people from America that "return" to their African ancestral lands. It's a relatively new trend and it concerns many migrants. Africa is much better than the ghettos in the US, but I imagine there's also plenty that come from better places in the US. For them it's a significant downgrade, depending on where they go. But a lot still do.
    14
  226. Money money money... sometimes I wonder if we should start thinking of a better substitution for capitalism. It has its good sides but bloody hell it also destroys so much.
    14
  227. Er is vooral geen draagvlak vanwege de harde realiteit van niet-westerse migratie en integratieproblematiek. Kennismigranten vallen daar niet onder, dat zijn niet de straatschoffies waar iedereen zich aan irriteert. En wat westerse arbeidsmigratie betreft, er zijn allerlei problemen als het gaat om sociale zekerheid en concurrentie die nog moeten worden opgelost maar daarnaast vind ik het wel oké. Wat wij NOOIT meer moeten doen is niet-westerse arbeidsmigratie. Dat is uitgelopen tot een regelrechte catastrofe. En we moeten sowieso terughoudend zijn met migratie. Als het met de Nederlandse bevolking kan worden opgelost (subsidie voor meer kinderen bijvoorbeeld?) dan heeft dat voorrang. Kan dat niet, dan westerse arbeidsmigranten. Kan dat ook niet dan zie ik liever economische krimp dan dat wij onze samenleving nog verder laten verloederen met niet-westerse migratie... We zijn er gewoon veel te makkelijk mee om gegaan. Het klinkt allemaal leuk, we hebben arbeiders nodig dus halen we ze lekker makkelijk uit het buitenland. Maar de realiteit is dat dat soort beleid serieuze sociale gevolgen heeft waar men meestal niet naar kijkt. Het is allemaal economie, economie, economie. En ondertussen hebben we een zeer gepolariseerde samenleving waarin we amper meer door één door kunnen. Maar ja, die groei hebben we... jippie. En zelfs dat is niet zeker, omdat bepaalde groepen onevenredig in de bijstand zitten en misschien wel netto verlies zijn. Ik heb liever een slechtere economie met een sterke samenleving dan een goede economie met een zwakke, gepolariseerde samenleving
    14
  228. +michji2 What makes it even worse is that swastikas are ancient European symbols too, not only Asian. They exist for thousands of years now and represent good luck and a sun wheel. People should learn to differentiate between what the Nazis did and the symbols they used, because their symbols don't have anything to do with it and have a rich history of their own. It's about as stupid as banning Christian crosses because the KKK in America uses them too.
    13
  229. She should have never come to the border and the US should never have taken her children away like that. A lot of things in this story should never have been done...
    13
  230. What has the world come to? On every BBC report on negative news about Trump, the BBC is blamed for being biased or even spreading propaganda and on every BBC report with positive news about Trump the comment section is filled with insults towards him and all kinds of political comments. It's become so polarised, only the extremes seem to exist
    13
  231. Ah, D66... de partij die pal achter immigratie van netto 100.000+ mensen per jaar staat (inwonersaantal van bijvoorbeeld Delft, elk jaar) en om ze te huisvesten natuurlijk ongelooflijk veel zullen moeten bijbouwen ten koste van natuur en met grote stikstofuitstoot, maar vervolgens tegen de boeren zegt dat "iedereen moet bijdragen". Sommigen meer dan anderen, aldus de D66, want de immigratie inperken om minder te hoeven bouwen daar is absoluut geen sprake van natuurlijk. Het is een in en in hypocriete partij. Ze bekritiseren ook Brazilië en hun boskappen terwijl hier in NL percentueel net zo veel bos verdwijnt als daar, onder meer vanwege D66 beleid om zo veel bij te bouwen. Rob Jetten heeft al eerder te kennen gegeven dat Nederland een "Berlijn aan de Rijn" moet worden, oftewel één grote randstad. En dat is ook waar we heen gaan met het huidige beleid als je kijkt hoeveel we al hebben bijgebouwd de laatste 20 jaar en hoe we daarmee alsnog niet de populatiegroei (lees: immigratie, want ons geboortecijfer staat op krimp en migratie is de enige reden dat we groeien) kunnen bijbenen. Boeren moeten volgens de D66 niet "zoals iedereen bijdragen", ze moeten gewoonweg plek maken voor het D66 plan om Nederland in steeds hogere mate te verstedelijken om de alsmaar groeiende Nederlandse populatie te huisvesten. Populatiegroei die niet natuurlijk gebeurt, maar door ons is aangestuurd nav hoeveel mensen wij jaarlijks toelaten. En de natuur moet daar ook maar plek voor maken. Dat is wat er nu gebeurt. Als je voor het behoud of uitbreiding van de natuur bent, kun je niet voor de D66 zijn. Als je voor de boeren bent, kun je ook niet voor D66 zijn. De D66 staat voor megastad Nederland met een vooral door immigratie aangewakkerde populatiegroei, allemaal om de economie een beetje beter te laten draaien. Consequenties: hevige overpopulatie, landschapspijn 2.0 (vogels weg uit de natuur was nog niet pijnlijk genoeg? Wat dacht je van een zeer verstedelijkt NL met steeds minder groen?), mogelijke integratieproblematiek en polarisatie die nog verder uit de hand loopt naarmate er meer migranten zijn en meer. Maar ja, economische groei, geld! Joehoe! Dat is het verpesten van onze natuur, wegpesten van de boeren en mogelijk hevig beschadigen van onze cultuur en saamhorigheid totaal waard, toch? Ik ben dit soort economie-centrale denken totaal zat...
    13
  232. Let's give everybody guns and then train the police very poorly on how to deal with dangerous people! That is the current state of America. What could possibly go wrong? What you have now is hardly a good thing either
    13
  233. Keep thinking that, keep polluting your own land while blaming foreigners. You'll soon reap the what you sow.
    13
  234.  @Catloves997  You made it about race, don't know why.... This is about ethnicity and ancestry. The majority in London is not English, white or black does not matter.
    13
  235. And a church for almost 1000 years
    13
  236. Ja ik schaam me hier diep voor. Zo walgelijk dat alles weer geseksualiseerd moet worden. Wat er bij die DJ in de club gebeurt zal me een worst wezen, maar een uitreiking als deze is een zeer ongepaste plek om zoiets te flikken. "Kun je twerken?" wat een rotvraag, donder toch op.
    13
  237. This quote makes a lot more sense than the standard "if you don't study history it'll repeat itself" I see way too often. Nice
    13
  238. Hij heeft geen schijn van kans om het land samen te brengen. Amerika is in trieste staat
    13
  239. 24 en nog wonend bij de ouders, bedankt regeringspartijen! En dan ben ik nog niet eens in de minderheid, wat mijn leeftijdsgroep betreft. Gewoon lekker doorgaan jongens, misschien halen we 100.000 nettomigratie volgend jaar, superfijn voor de huizenmarkt.
    13
  240. De EU aanklagen... wat een idioot. Op welke gronden? Bij welke rechtbank? Wat wil je er überhaupt mee bereiken? Die man begrijpt helemaal niets van zijn eigen staatsrechtelijke stelsel, laat staan hoe het in Europa in elkaar zit. Hij moet leren z'n mond dicht te houden als hij ergens niets over weet. Het is niet erg om eens een keer stil te zijn.
    13
  241. There are multiple articles about Dutch, Swedish and German subs having managed to sink almost entire Carrier Strike Groups (sinking the super carrier itself plus several escort ships all while being actively hunted) in such training and getting away, all with just one sub. Those are easy to just google. And if those navies can, I'm sure the Royal Navy can too. As for the radar being better, the UK has had a significantly better radar than any other country since it was invented (radar for military use was invented by the UK) and it could be that they quite simply never lost their advantage. I believe that the new F35 II's electronics, including radar systems, are British made so that implies the Americans had a reason to outsource that to Britain. Especially since it's not something America likes to do without reason. While I don't know whether these specific stories about the UK always detecting the subs are true, it does sound plausible
    13
  242. Yeah.... her casting is very annoying
    13
  243. Just bring back the firing line. Or better yet, stop executing inmates and just lock them up for life.
    13
  244. What the hell... You "fail" your family for not illegally migrating to another country???
    13
  245. Heroïne godverdomme, heroïne godverdomme, heroïne is een vloek, heroïne godverdomme, wie verdient dat?
    13
  246.  Austin Cox  And conservatives like you ignore the current costs. The US pays literally twice as much in healthcare as nations with public healthcare. The US spends 17% of its GDP on healthcare, a country like the UK 8%, the Netherlands 10%. Both have vastly superior systems to boot. And I'm not cherrypicking either, nobody comes even close. Public healthcare provides superior care and is cheaper at the same time. Y'know, unless you structurally underfund it like in Canada because they don't want to pay a dime more than they did in the 1970s, but if they want waiting lines that's their issue. The money you spend now on healthcare is used insanely inefficiently. You could fund an NHS equivalent two times over just by redirecting the money you spend today. The status quo is unacceptable. Being a Trump supporter means you have at least some sense of the corporate swamp that US politics is and you may want to do something about it. For that you have my respect, even if we disagree on how to change things. And I don't see where this "patient influx" argument comes from. That's going to happen, but is not at all an issue if it's perfectly foreseeable how much medicine and capacity is needed to deal with it. Do you think that happened in any of the many nations with public healthcare today? A public healthcare system is a huge project, it's not going to be there overnight. It takes proper organisation and proper preparation. Maybe a long transition period. Perhaps you'll end up spending more than the rest of the world is because of your argument that Americans are unhealthy, but no matter how you spin it, public is cheaper than private. Let's say you're TWICE as unhealthy as the UK (you're not), you'd still be able to pay a twice as expensive NHS with the money you pay NOW. The Germans have had nationalised Medicare for All since fucking 1883, under hyperconservative "Iron Chancellor" Otto von Bismarck. And here you are in 2020 thinking you can't deal with the change. The excuses are just jarring at this point. Your conservatives don't care for America, they care for corporations. A true nationalist would have provided public healthcare for Americans long ago, because it's simply the better option. Anyone that cares either for America from a nationalist point of view or cares for the American people from a leftist/socialist point of view should come to the same logical conclusion. This isn't even about left versus right, conservative versus socialist, it is about the interests of the American people versus corporate interests. It's good that you don't fear socialism, because sometimes nationalists and socialists alike simply have to admit it's best for the nation. In many other subjects one could argue whether socialism is a good thing or not, but I don't even see how a good faith argument is possible on public healthcare. It's at this point such a proven system abroad and the current system has gotten out of hand so badly that I don't see how anyone in their right mind can still support the status quo. The only obstacle left are people that don't care for the interests of the American people to begin with and would rather see corporations rake in massive profits at their expense. That and people who have a sickly aversion to any kind of change and fear public healthcare for that reason. Again, 1883 Otto von Bismarck...... same guy who passed anti-socialist laws that banned social democrats (not even actual socialists!) from spreading their ideology to "thwart the socialist menace". Now why would a hyperconservative man like that introduce government-imposed public healthcare... ? Because even he thought it was best for his nation. He even said it was one of the easiest laws to pass through parliament... lmao. Just goes to show how toxic this public debate about "muh communism" has become in the US. Americans are being mass brainwashed by corporate media and American politicians bought en masse by corporate "donations". Wake up. You need to turn conservatism into a nation-loving ideology again, rather than the corporate shilling it is now. And since you're a Trump supporter I suspect you agree.
    12
  247. If China starts waging wars, etc. you should not start worrying. By that time you should realise you should have started worrying a long time ago . That "long time ago" is today. And I do care about the West doing heinous things, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be worried about another entity doing the same thing in even more countries (potentially leading to conflict between the two in the style of a new cold war)
    12
  248. Great to see you back, Natalie! Hope you're having a wonderful day, as you certainly made mine by uploading again 🙂
    12
  249.  @sonergulal2005  Als je Denk stemt komt er meer haat. Zelfs deugdelijke politieke partijen hebben haat aan Denk. Ik zou me niet verbazen dat hun gedrag in de Kamer sommige mensen zo boos hebben gemaakt dat ze radicaliseren en extreem rechts zijn geworden. Echt de meest walgelijke partij die ik ooit heb gezien, een schande. Ze polariseren de samenleving alleen maar meer. En dat zal vreselijke consequenties hebben
    12
  250. Zo grappig... Baudet en FvD hebben letterlijk boeken vol geschreven met hun opvattingen, maar dat gooien ze uit het raam om één woord. Oh hij zei boreaal..... dus al zijn gedetailleerde opvattingen over waar hij voor staat zijn nu irrelevant omdat ik dat woord op een bepaalde manier interpreteer. Dit is inderdaad claimen beter te weten waar iemand voor staat dan hijzelf. En dat is gevaarlijk. Hoe kun je een debat met iemand hebben wanneer je er op basis van één dubieus woord in het verleden er standaard vanuit gaat dat die persoon één of andere verborgen agenda heeft en geen van de argumenten die hij presenteert gemeend zijn? Er is genoeg kritiek te hebben op Baudet, maar dit soort verdachtmakingen zijn gewoon walgelijk. Hiermee sluit je iemand vanaf het begin uit van een debat omdat je denkt te weten waar die "echt" voor staat. Op basis van dubieuze woorden en vermoedens natuurlijk, geen gegronde argumenten. Stel je voor dat rechts tegen links zou zeggen "ja, je zegt voor een democratische samenleving te zijn, maar eigenlijk zijn jullie gewoon dictatoriale communisten!" en vice versa "ja, je zegt voor een democratische samenleving te zijn, maar eigenlijk zijn jullie gewoon dictatoriale fascisten!". En zodoende luistert niemand naar de eigenlijke argumenten van de tegenpartij en heeft iedereen zijn eigen stropop opgezet om tegen te redeneren. Dit soort denken, mocht het uit de bocht vliegen, betekent het einde van inhoudelijk argumenteren en daarmee het einde van een functionerende democratie. Dit is niet alleen dom, het is gevaarlijk.
    12
  251. This crisis needs to be resolved quickly, but Trump is the absolute last person that has any right to speak about battling migration. The USA has over 11 million illegal migrants as we speak, and that's just the ones they know about. We have 2-3 million illegals on a population of 510 million. And if you look at legal migration "affecting our cultures", Europe is still 95% European. The crime spike is not true either, and even if it would be we'd still have 5-10 times lower murder rate than the US, depending on the country you look at. Trump should shut up and look to his own problems before he starts shouting at others.
    12
  252.  @maxstirner8717  Sometimes I equally want to laugh and cry at how people like Bernie Sanders are treated just for proposing basic healthcare systems like we have in most of Europe. Some Americans literally think that's communism.
    12
  253. Van mij mag het een nucleaire zijn ook
    12
  254.  @thetecno5800  Lol alright there buddy, keep thinking that. Human civilisation will continue without the US, sorry to burst your bubble
    12
  255. Engaging a frigate with small arms fire... and it was moderately effective at that
    12
  256. Wist niet dat ze op Halsema hadden gestemd, hebben ze in de republiek Amsterdam al gekozen burgemeesters?
    12
  257. +Chris Brown Or you can just admit you're wrong and that Trump lied on this occasion. BBC is not always wrong and Trump is not always right, and of course vice versa. Trumptards and extreme lefties don't seem to get that the world isn't black and white "evil Trump" or "evil fake news BBC".
    12
  258. Ja, laten we behandelen hoe Nederland een grote rol speelde in het eindigen van de Barbarijse slavernij en hoe andere Europese landen de slavernij in Afrika en het Midden-Oosten eindigden ;)
    12
  259.  @TheImperatorKnight  Thank you, your videos on this so far have been very insightful
    12
  260.  @V-D.  Dat meer dan de HELFT van vrouwen wordt mishandeld is best wel achterlijk te noemen ja....
    12
  261. Trump is echt een lul, maar wat heel veel mensen niet zien is dat achter zijn vreselijke persoonlijkheid hij misschien wel een goede president is. Maar veel mensen kijken niet verder dan zijn persoonlijkheid.
    12
  262. @Snatcher Claus Yup, and; "I refuse to adapt to your way of life, so water down your culture and make place for mine. I come here, you adapt to me."
    12
  263. Kernenergie is de toekomst. Enige angst ervoor is irrationeel omdat het één van de veiligste vormen van energiewinning is.
    12
  264. Europeans know about important things happening all over the world, though. We know what happens in America just like we know what happens in our neighbouring countries. You can even see it in US vs European world news channels. On CNN they talk almost exclusively about things happening in America, with sometimes something international and call it "world news". When I watch something like BBC world news they actually talk about a range of things happening all over the world
    12
  265.  @r-pupz7032  Sitting here in the Netherlands I didn't understand statements like this, always thought they were exaggerated. But then I saw this clip of Bernie comforting some guy who literally wanted to commit suicide because of extreme medical bills and saw commenters stating that they're letting their tumours grow because they're scared of the medical bills and it hit me like a truck. This truly is a life or death situation... I wish you luck over there, I deeply hope Bernie will make it
    12
  266. +European Patriot De politiek hoort de samenleving te representeren en je kan er gif op innemen dat als hier een referendum over wordt gehouden de uitslag keihard tegen is. De samenleving wil dit niet en als de samenleving dit niet wil dan moeten we maar de kosten dekken van dat besluit. De politiek is niet een of andere koning die over de samenleving regeert, de politiek is de samenleving en luistert naar de samenleving
    11
  267.  @artman7780  I don't want secularism for the world, I want the world to have their own culture and beliefs. I think seeing many different cultures is beautiful, which is why I hate missionaries that try to convert everyone to christianity. They are arrogant about their own culture/beliefs being better and want to wipe every other belief system off the earth. We invaded countries in the past for money and I dislike that. I want people to be left alone and respected. Trying to be hostile to Europe now will only lead to more hostility in return, which is something neither of us should want. Let's stop doing damage to eachother and start respecting eachother. That means we don't interfere with you and you don't flood Europe. I hope we will find a way to fix all of this soon
    11
  268. A war time economy is not the same thing as ideology-backed state control of the economy. For a capitalist country, a war economy is done purely out of necessity and truly an exception to the rule. In a fascist state, that state-controlled economy is the goal and the norm. That's an important difference. I agree fascism is about a duty to the nation/people (in national socialism there is a strong emphasis on the people element of that), but creating a state-controlled economy that services the people instead of some business interests is an inherent part of that ideology. I don't think you can be fascist and have a capitalist economy that is mainly in the interest of businesses and maximum profit. It goes directly against their ideas about how a strong central government should provide for its nation.
    11
  269. What do you mean? This is peak entertainment
    11
  270. +thegreatonecometh200 It's not a racial thing. Unless you believe that 95% of the convictions are black people, that is... It's a general culture issue and issues with the system as well. In the US system, prosecutors are raised to be biased for conviction and defence attorneys are raised to be biased against it. The belief is that when two complete opposites make up their pro or anti-conviction story, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. A fundamentally flawed idea, as the truth is difficult to find through a veil of lies and bias. This same mindset of bias towards conviction means that the prosecutor in America uses his powerful position to shift the balance towards him: with plea bargains. If the suspect pleads guilty, the defence has little to no chance to actually win. In Europe, such bargains are illegal because what matters is truth and nothing else. The prosecutor searches for truth, not conviction. Plea bargains serve no purpose other than to distort truth and pressure a suspect into giving in. Even pleading guilty doesn't serve as sufficient evidence in our courts. Even if a suspect pleads guilty, the judge must look at all the evidence and decide.
    11
  271. Ah, het genot van de multiculturele samenleving; culturen die botsen en compleet langs elkaar heen leven. Wat was het toch een goed idee om Nederland in een soort Amerika proberen te veranderen terwijl we dat niet zijn, hè? We plukken de vruchten ervan elke dag.
    11
  272. The GQ woman definitely had more underlying animosity, I would say. Kathy was more like arrogance and downplaying of Jordan's ideas than it was pure aggression and animosity.
    11
  273. Dit meen je niet... Die man heeft een serieus probleem, dit kan zo niet langer. Een drankprobleem thuis is één ding, maar als je te veel drinkt voor een bijeenkomst als dit dan moet je linea recta weg. Dit gaat echt niet, stuur 'm naar een kliniek. Het ziet er in ieder geval uit als een drankprobleem. Als het iets anders is waardoor hij onwel is geworden dan zou ik ook zeggen stuur 'm naar huis tenzij het tijdelijk is.
    11
  274.  @jaabaadaabaaadoo  Jesus did exist, he is mentioned by Roman historians. But his miracles and resurrection....... that is up to faith (aka never happened)
    11
  275. This is why we have started the EU project. United we are very strong. If the European project works out and eastern Europe develops, we'd be even richer and stronger than the US. China will also overtake the US in due course
    11
  276.  @xCorvus7x  This nuance is important because pretty much only the far right uses the "all migrants are welfare-suckers" talking points and everyone knows that's nonsense. The grand, grand majority of complaints about migrants speak of certain types of migrants being unwanted and propose a strict immigration policy comparable to Australia (which still takes in wanted expats). Usually they say "group X and Y is disproportionately in welfare and/or crime, therefore they haven't or can't integrate into our society properly, therefore immigration from that country needs to be more strict or completely stopped". The right isn't this caricature you're presenting that literally wants zero immigration because they think somehow all migrants are bad or even that all coloured migrants are bad. In fact, usually it's the left that relies on fallacious arguments like "yes, but not all so let's continue the mass immigration policy". Not all of the left, though, as there are several parties that at least do see the problem of large amounts of economic migrants from safe countries coming along with real refugees. The problem with your comment is that you set up a strawman argument wherein you reduce anti-immigration arguments into a caricature that's dead easy to debunk. Arguments you're going to need to be debunking are statements like "70% of Somalians are in welfare, therefore this group can't properly integrate into our society, therefore it's a massive risk and money sink to allow more Somalians to immigrate, therefore immigration from Somalia needs to be stopped". Just for context, Dutch citizens are 4% in welfare and EU migrants 2-3%. They also use this argument for crime stats: "20% of Moroccans are in welfare and despite being only 2% of the population they make up over 10% of prison inmates (making them overrepresented by a factor of 5 both in terms of welfare and crime), therefore importing Moroccans is costly and bad for safety, therefore immigration from that country needs to stop". These are the types of arguments used in the anti-migration camp.
    11
  277. Thank you for the extra manufacturing jobs that Harley Davidson will bring here. Oh and if you think EU car makers will go to America and compensate for the loss... they are already there and have been for decades. Perhaps they'll have to fire some Americans due to increased costs though, haha. You should look up what happened last time the US thought tariffs were a good idea...
    11
  278. +GuitarZombie Our own shitholes are not impressive enough to warrant news coverage. I can go wherever I please without fear of being mugged and/or shot. Do you? "Shitholes" in European countries are poorer areas with higher crime rates, while still perfectly safe and without inhumane circumstances. In the US the shitholes are pretty much warzones in which gangs kill eachother by the dozens each day and where people starve. It's no contest. What we call a "shithole" here is comparable to the moderately poor areas of the US and your ghettos are a completely different league of shithole than that. And you can yell all you like about the BBC not knowing about American life, but it's a plain fact that this is part of it. They never claimed this to be the life of all Americans. You can't deny that a lot of Americans do live like this and are left to die by the rest. America is the country where veterans are met with an overzealous "thank you for your service", yet when they end up on the streets and need actual help are left to literally starve to death. You're shameful people.
    11
  279. +Elron It's way too early to tell the effects of Trump's policy. It might work, it might destroy the economy after all
    11
  280.  @BRDrivingSim  Finland is in the EU and has elaborate cooperation with, though no membership of, NATO. The EU has an attack on one is an attack on all principle in its treaty and would lose all its credibility as a union if it allows Russia to invade Finland unchallenged. Once the majority of the EU is involved, chances are the USA will get directly involved as well. The defence situation of Finland is simply too solid for Russia to attempt an invasion. War with the EU alone is suicide for Russia, considering the disparity in industrial capability, let alone war with both the EU and the US. Russia would have to be insane to even attempt an invasion of Finland. Chances are they would initially struggle intensely against Finland alone. It simply is not going to happen.
    11
  281.  @arty5876  You are right that the war is economically and ideologically motivated mostly. But you are mistaken that NATO is only a military alliance. Part of a NATO membership action plan (you can f.e. look up Ukraine's MAP!) is also to push through economic reforms that benefit western economies, promote trade with NATO members and to ensure economic security. Economic security means not being dependent on "enemy" states for trade, i.e. not being dependent on trade with Russia. NATO itself is directly threatening Russia economic security. This is why they have decided to violently oppose NATO, more and more violently as they came closer to their borders. Now we see the most violent actions of Russia yet. Yes, the things you named play a role, but so does NATO and its economic demands for new members. NATO is not a neutral defence organisation, it is the sphere of influence of the US. Political, economic and militarily as well.
    11
  282. Tell me why Europeans would wish to be American? We have: higher quality of life, much better governance, more money, a larger economy, better education (except universities, the USA has the best) and much more. You have... ? A big military?
    11
  283. +TIH YDP Europe has like 5% foreigners and 95% white Europeans so why don't you just shut it? You're from a country with little over 60% white people, if anyone is "diverse" it is the USA. Europe is not being destroyed, we faced much worse and we are strong.
    11
  284. +Raoul Duke Sheep? We're not the ones being ruled by a government that has no connection with its citizens, commonly chooses corporate interests over its citizens' interests, commonly spies on its own citizens, etc. and worst of all: accept that as our government. From the European perspective Americans are already being oppressed as we speak. They talk of having weapons to protect them against a tyrannic government, but I don't understand why they haven't taken up arms yet. Give Europeans the American government and they'd have revolted against it 10 times over, weapons or not. Allowing that corporate-controlled hypocrite government to exist is what I would call being a sheep.
    11
  285. +Jim Troy I'm sorry but the EU is economically more healthy than even the US right now. Less debt and growing faster, not to mention bigger. And Russia's economy is barely worth mentioning in comparison to the US or EU economy.
    11
  286. +michael kilo The gun is not blamed for anything. The gun is but a tool in the madman's hands.... but you have to be an idiot to not admit that the fact that the madman has a gun is a very important part of the problem
    11
  287.  @2222cream  There is more to life than that, a lot more. We find enjoyment and meaning in life (and because of this we wish the same on our children). If there was no enjoyment and meaning, our civilisation would die out very quickly. If there is no point to life, then putting more life on the planet is pointless too. We humans need a value system to give our lives meaning, the biological/genetic imperative to procreate/exist is just not enough.
    11
  288. +Andrew C Yeah, loud nuclear subs that silent diesel subs can detect with ease. Diesel subs are built around defence, they can only stay submerged for like 2 weeks and are very vulnerable when caught up top (running the diesel engine to recharge electricity and such). When submerged, however, they are simply the most powerful and dangerous machines in the sea. Nuclear subs have the benefit for extreme range and very long submersion times. This makes them viable for attacking from very long range (want to send a sub from the US to North Korea? No prob. With a diesel, though... more problematic, requires planning). They don't have the vulnerability of the diesel sub of having relatively short range and submersion times, but in exchange for that they are pretty loud and completely outclassed by diesels in actual combat. But diesels are really best used defensively, relatively close to base.
    11
  289. I hope they stop coming. They expect to be taken in and taken care of and wilfully put themselves in a vast desert in dire circumstances or on the mediterranean in shoddy boats. It's horrible what happens to them but they wilfully put themselves in this situation as a means of forcing others to take them in on humanitarian grounds. I don't feel much for helping people that are essentially blackmailing us and exploiting our humanitarian values... yet I also don't feel much for leaving them in the desert or to drown at sea. I just hope they stop coming, stop taking these stupid risks. Travelling the desert with child.... just don't. This is such a mess, we have to stop them from undertaking this perilous journey. Perhaps this stern message will deter more from coming and in the end prevent more deaths.... but this is a classic ends justify the means kind of situation
    11
  290. Probably time to upgrade hull armour too. And new optics never hurt either
    11
  291. Man, man, man, er zijn naamsveranderingen geweest op ministeries die meer geld hebben gekost dan het organiseren van het Songfestival.... Sterker nog: het DUBBELE van het bedrag dat Rutte noemt https://www.rtlz.nl/algemeen/politiek/artikel/4662991/naamsverandering-miljoenen-veiligheid-justitie-waterstaat-milieu En tenminste brengt het Songfestival nog meer geld binnen dan je eraan verliest met al die extra toeristen. Maar 15 miljoen is te veel hoor. In de tussentijd 31 miljoen uitgeven aan "Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie" veranderen in "Justitie en Veiligheid" want ja, we zijn een rechtsstaat en dat klinkt toch beter... 15 miljoen is wisselgeld voor de overheid en je krijgt er toerisme voor terug. Gewoon niet zo hypocriet doen.
    11
  292. +Zlatan Ibrahimovic Actually I don't think so. If you are indebted in the US you are less rich than a random Indian person who makes a few euros an hour. However, in the US it's easier to live a comfortable life. If you look at how a lot of Americans have to work even two jobs just to make ends meet, I wouldn't be surprised to see that Indians are actually pretty rich even when compared to Americans.
    10
  293. Quality of life, lower. Western Europe is better. Like, objectively better, as shown in quality of life research and more. We're happier and have higher standards of life here and that's a stone cold fact. Sorry to burst you bubble, but it's true
    10
  294. I'm pretty sure he cherry picked the worst weight stats from the EU and several other things too. Also he mentioned plenty of things that the US does better than Europe, so don't get your knickers in a twist.
    10
  295. Fun fact: even after the taxes and usually lower income (US income is huge), most EU countries' citizens are richer than Americans at the end of the day. In income stats the US is the highest, but in wealth stats (as in how much money you keep after the bills. How much you own) the US is one of the lowest in the western world. This could be because of very high bills in the US but also due to something as simple as Americans liking to spend all their money.
    10
  296. Dat wordt een korte docu, want dat bedrag zou zo ongeveer op €0 komen. Bovendien staan alle cadeautjes en wat dan ook die politici krijgen gewoon geregistreerd. Dit is niet Amerika of zo.
    10
  297. Hopla nieuwe koude oorlog tegen Saoedi Arabië. We moeten de verspreiding van deze ideologie actief bestrijden zodat moslims niet radicaliseren.
    10
  298.  @itsame2271  It's not about what happened in history. It's what you do today that decides whether you can criticise others without being a hypocrite. And today, that puts Europe in a pretty good position. Certainly better than you.
    10
  299. +Max Mustermann I like our countries the way they are too. What I don't want is for our countries to turn into the US. More immigration will turn us into the mess that the US is. I want a society that lives together, not a bunch of communities that live separately from one another like in the US, no rampant individualism and zero care for your countrymen like in the US. Multi-culturalism does not work. We must welcome the people that are already here and embrace them into our culture, but we shouldn't allow uncontrolled immigration.
    10
  300. Dat klopt, we betalen een zeer hoge prijs voor de status van koploper. Het eigenlijke effect is laag: de EU stoot 10% van de CO2 uit wereldwijd, Nederland stoot 4.7% van het totaal van de EU uit. Wij zitten dus op 0.47% van de wereldwijde uitstoot (dit zijn statistieken van 2018, sindsdien is de uitstoot van de EU en Nederland beiden gedaald). China alleen al verwachtte in 2018 nog eens 4.7% wereldwijde uitstoot toe te nemen, dus tien keer de totale uitstoot van Nederland erbij. Dat heet dweilen met de kraan open. De transitie moet geleidelijk en goedkoop gaan, gebaseerd op kwaliteit voor geld. De transitie dreigt nu een soort koploper strijd te worden waarin we miljarden euro's tegen windmolens en dergelijke aangooien, puur om de eerste te zijn en zo snel mogelijk de doelstellingen te halen. Wat krijg je daar voor terug? Duurdere, minder kwalitatieve energiebronnen en natuurlijk een klop op de schouder van andere landen, waar het voor het kabinet om draait.... Massaal windmolen en dergelijke neerzetten is geen goed beleid, het kijkt niet goed genoeg naar de toekomst. Het gaat om nu, nu, nu, snel, snel, snel. Het is duur, het is niet duurzaam (elke 20 jaar vervangen) en het is maar weinig rendabel. We moeten hier niet halsoverkop in mee gaan, maar SLIM aan onze toekomst bouwen. Dat betekent investeren in technologie die veel duurzamere en rendabelere oplossingen biedt, waar we zelfs winst aan kunnen overhouden vanwege dalende olie-uitgaven. Maar ja, dat duurt wat langer! En hoe langer we dat uitstellen met tussenoplossingen als windmolens, hoe langer het duurt voordat de écht duurzame oplossingen er zijn. 0.47% van de werelduitstoot is NIET honderden miljarden waard terwijl China in één jaar tijd tien keer groeit wat wij in 30 jaar tijd willen krimpen, tenzij dat geld zeer goed besteed is voor de langere termijn en ons in de toekomst geld bespaart. Er wordt niet verantwoord met ons geld omgesprongen met dit koplopersgepraat. Het gaat niet om de nietsbetekenende status van koploper, het gaat om een deugdelijke toekomst. En die twee sluiten elkaar soms uit.
    10
  301. Dat krijg je met een regering zonder visie. Er is geen beleid rondom immigratie, dus komt er elk jaar gewoon wat er komt, wat doorgaans zo'n 100-150k behelst. Dit is het merendeel van onze bevolkingsgroei. Sterker nog, zonder immigratie zou onze bevolking krimpen. Tegelijkertijd wordt niet nagedacht over woningen. Men denkt niet na "ok er komt X aantal mensen erbij, dus hebben we Y aantal woningen nodig. Halen we dat en zo niet, kunnen we dan de immigratie voorlopig beperken tot aantal Z zodat we iedereen normaal kunnen huisvesten?". Dat gebeurt gewoon niet. De grenzen staan min of meer open, zonder enige gedachtegang over de gevolgen daarvan. Men ziet alleen de voordelen van economische groei en bestrijding van vergrijzing, maar is blind voor de mogelijkheid van huisvesting en als dat überhaupt mogelijk is, ook de gevolgen van uit de hand lopende verstedelijking/industrialisatie (ivm natuurbescherming, wat óók nog speelt), de vraag of wij zo'n grote groep wel aan kunnen qua integratie of dat er weer meer culturele problemen bij komen kijken. En dan nog de vraag wanneer Nederland vol is, wanneer wij een populatie hebben bereikt waarvan we zeggen als dit nog verder groeit dan wordt het steeds minder fijn om in Nederland te wonen omdat het simpelweg te druk is. Wat kan onze infrastructuur aan qua reizigers, of wachten we maar af tot onze snelwegen dichtslibben met files en je niet eens de trein meer in past tijdens spitsuur (hier zijn we deels al!)? Hoe dichtbevolkt kunnen we zijn zonder dat dat echt onplezierig wordt? Hoeveel natuur willen wij nog gaan vernietigen om alsmaar meer gebouwen neer te zetten voor de groeiende bevolking en mag dit überhaupt ivm milieuwetten waar wij aan zijn gebonden? Wordt ook volledig genegeerd. Wanbestuur is het. Wanbestuur tot op het punt dat Nederland bijna een jaar economisch op slot heeft gezeten omdat de regering stikstofregels zelfs na uitdrukkelijke waarschuwingen volledig negeerde. Dit kan niet. We hebben visie nodig. Ik ben 24 en ik heb in mijn korte leven al kunnen zien hoe mijn "dorp" ruim is verdubbeld en inmiddels een kleine stad is. Mijn ouders hebben kunnen zien hoe het dorp waarschijnlijk is vertienvoudigd. En van mijn grootouders wil ik het niet eens weten want dat komen we dichtbij de honderd. Dit is NIET duurzaam, dit houden we niet lang vol. En als je er over nadenkt, wat is het eindresultaat van deze praktijk? Randstad Nederland, waarin alles van west tot oost is volgebouwd en het onderscheid tussen randstad en provincies eigenlijk niet meer relevant is? Nederland als één grote overbevolkte stad? Waar stopt dit? Wat is het doel? Is er een doel of wordt er gewoon niet nagedacht over de toekomst? Tegen iedereen wil ik zeggen dat het uiterst belangrijk is op een politieke partij te stemmen die dit begrijpt en hierover nadenkt. Stem GEEN VVD omdat zij hebben laten zien dit land compleet niet te kunnen besturen met lange termijn visie, stem ook in hemelsnaam niet op de D66 of GroenLinks want hoewel ze zeggen "groen" te zijn, staan zij meer dan welke partij dan ook voor massa immigratie van nog grotere schaal dan nu. GL vond de Turkijedeal, waarmee 3-4 miljoen vluchtelingen zijn weerhouden om naar Europa te komen (dat is twee keer wat wij in de gehele crisis moesten opvangen!) "onder hun morele ondergrens". D66 vindt 200.000 mensen per jaar een redelijk immigratiesaldo (hopla, 1 miljoen mensen erbij in 5 jaar terwijl we volgens Rutte nu 75.000 huizen per jaar kunnen bouwen, een demografische catastrofe waar je u tegen zegt...). En dat is alles behalve groen. Massa immigratie = massa verstedelijking/industrialisatie = ANTI natuur en ANTI klimaat/milieu.
    10
  302. Ja best dom, maar welke debiel haalt dat bord weg alleen omdat er "I am" staat en dat kennelijk te individualistisch is? Ik heb nooit wat met dat bord gehad maar ik vind dat ook erg dom
    10
  303.  @JANHENDRIKSS  PvdA vind ik ten minste nog beter dan nóg linksere partijen als GL.
    10
  304. There were women in WW1 and BF1 portrayed them relatively well. Russian female snipers existed in both WW1 and WW2. BFV is the one that is ruining everything, BF1 was at least decent (but the black German thing was problematic)
    10
  305. True. Believing in god is one thing, but limiting science because of god is another.... Like the separation of church and state, science should also be able to go about its business freely without religious interference. The only thing governing science should be ethics, not a "higher power".
    10
  306. Democratic socialists are not socialists. Socialism is a revolutionary, anti-capitalist system. Socialism and capitalism can't co-exist under the same system. Democratic socialists are essentially just called socialists, but really they are capitalists in favour of more leftist policies and not full-on socialists. Socialism is the collective control of the means of production so that the use of the means of production in theory benefits everyone. Capitalism is the individual/private control of the menas of production and the use of it to generate personal profit. Socialism as a system is fundamentally against capitalism, it was literally created to stop the owners of the means of production from using the labour of the working class to generate free money. They see that as exploitation because the workers get less money than their work is worth and the owner of f.e. a factory walks away with the leftover money. Capitalistic socialists are only socialist in name, in truth they are just more left leaning capitalists.
    10
  307. Amerika: je kan geen restricties hebben op het recht wapens te dragen omdat dat een belangrijk principe binnen onze systeem is, zelfs geen systeem waarmee criminelen en/of verstandelijk gehandicapten het recht verliezen wapens te kopen. Ook Amerika: we nemen het stemrecht, één van de belangrijkste zo niet het belangrijkste recht binnen een democratische rechtsstaat, van miljoenen mensen af om arbitraire redenen.
    10
  308.  @xCorvus7x  Well, the 'no human is illegal' crowd usually denies that any problems exist or claims that insofar a problem exists not all members of those groups can be blamed for it (fair point) and go on to say therefore mass immigration is fine and should continue (fallacy). Other leftist politicians do recognise the problems and actually propose solutions. There is discussion possible in that reasonable middle (not trying to say reason can only be found in the middle of the political spectrum, just the middle between "immigration is undeniably good" and "immigration is undeniably bad"), but not in the fringes. Luckily the fringe right has already been ostrasised: nobody accepts arguments that portray immigrants as absolutely bad anymore. But the fringe 'no human is illegal' crowd on the other side still seems publicly acceptable. Probably because their message is a lot more positive than the hateful rhetoric of the far right. But it is equally in denial about the reality and nuance in immigration. I hope in the future, only the reasonable parties that recognise all the (possible) issues and benefits of immigration will be at the forefront of this discussion.
    10
  309. Dit is wat er gebeurt als de politieke islam je land teistert. Wij moeten niet alleen ervoor zorgen dat wij alle fundamentalistische moslims weren uit ons eigen land, maar ik geloof ook echt dat we wereldwijd de oorlog moeten verklaren aan dat fundamentalistische gedachtegoed. Het is gewoon onwerkelijk dat landen als Saoedi Arabië onze bondgenoten zijn, terwijl zij schuldig zijn aan het wereldwijd verspreiden van zeer fundamentalistische interpretaties van de islam (wahhabisme, salafisme of zelfs gewelddadige interpretaties van terroristen). Daar moeten we tegen vechten. En we zouden ons moeten schamen dat wij met onze mooie moderne legertjes niets hebben bereikt in Afghanistan omdat de Taliban simpelweg de bergen in ging. Ik herinner nog die militair (Apache piloot, geloof ik) die naar buiten trad over hoe nutteloos onze missies eigenlijk zijn en dat we niet veel meer doen dan toezicht houden. Schandalig. We hebben geen nutteloze politieke interventies nodig, maar effectieve militaire interventies. Nog schandaliger, overigens, is dat wij zelf terroristische groeperingen steunen als het ons goed uit komt vanuit regime change perspectief (Syrië, Libië en ja.... Afghanistan een tijdje terug door Amerika). Daar moet het westen mee kappen, gewoon stoppen met die onzin, wat maakt het mij uit dat Syrië een dictator heeft, altijd beter dan oorlog. We moeten gewoon kijken wat we redelijkerwijs kunnen doen in situaties als Afghanistan, het liefst een militaire interventie die de Taliban helemaal kapot maakt, gekoppeld met versterking van het Afghaanse leger zoals we dat nu al doen. En maak er geen westerse missie van, betrek misschien landen als Rusland erbij. Gewoon een moderne kruistocht tegen fundamentalistische islam, hopla weg ermee. Dit keer niet vanuit het christendom, maar vanuit ons geloof in vrijheid en veiligheid.
    10
  310. At least our police doesn't shoot unarmed civilians. We can afford to have 2 warning rounds in our weapons because we actually control the streets, unlike police in America. So scared that they shot an Australian woman who called them in the first place, among many other incidents with innocent deaths... Also keep in mind that regular police officers in Britain don't have gun at all and they keep order excellently. Not being able to afford having a blank round in the first chamber says more about the crime situation and general safety in your country than it says about countries that can. It prevents unnecessary deaths and you calling it a 'nanny' gun won't change that fact. Today we instead train our police to not shoot unless under extreme circumstances, with good results.
    10
  311. De Zweedse immigratiedienst bepaalt na onderzoek dat die man terug moet keren naar Afghanistan en die vrouw ziet 'm en roept zonder de man te kennen, laat staan zijn situatie en hoe het is in Afghanistan: "HIJ GAAT DOOD!" Sorry maar dit is gewoon kortzichtige idioterie, niks heldhaftigs hier.
    10
  312.  @jeredansurgeon1056  Utter nonsense. "It's man's hatred that fuels violence, not a book"... These people don't just randomly hate gays, they do so because their ideology, which they deeply believe in beyond even facts. Religion is illogical. If you're faced with a deeply religious muslim who believes gays should be killed, you have absolutely zero chance of converting him. He'd be too deeply stuck in his ideology and too blind to rational thinking. The reason we in the west accepted gays is because we tend to place rationality and consideration for one another above religion. It's a cultural feature of ours. Some other cultures have the same, others may not. Some cultures place religion above everything and are stuck in that really starkly. It's extremely naive to think "showing your good side" would help against someone deeply stuck in his ideology. Humans are not intrinsically good. We are largely guided by the culture and ideology we are part of, things that shape our world view. Ideology has such a strong effect on people that it could make what was at the time the best educated population of the world, go fascist and murder millions of people in concentration camps. That it could make communists kill their countrymen because they were dissidents and cause mass starvation because it was 'necessary' for reaching the elusive utopia. That it could make highly educated, intelligent people blow themselves up amongst innocent civilians and even children because they believed their god wanted them to do it. The bombers in Sri Lanka were mostly educated and rich men. People like Bin Laden were highly educated. Who we are and what we do is shaped in part by our innate personalities and qualities, but also in very large part by our world view. The western culture we grew up in values freedoms, consideration and science above all. Once the plight of gays became visual to us it was inevitable that we'd accept them to be full parts of our societies. Islamic culture values the religion above all. They don't give a damn about the plight of anyone, they will literally stone gays to death, literally cut off the hands of thieves and more. This is the harsh reality in the more conservative muslim majority countries. Are there more moderate muslim countries which don't follow the laws as strictly? Yes, thankfully there are, it's not all bad. But should we ignore that islam propagates seriously anti-gay ideology and has a very significant following that is fundamental enough to follow that ideology down to the letter? No, that would be ignorant to reality: the reality that not all cultures/ideologies are the same and that some are better than others. There is no universal humanity in everyone that can be called upon by "showing them your good side". In some cultures that might work, in others you have little to no chance. If you're a jew facing a concentration camp guard deeply into his nazi ideology, you're never going to convince him you're good. That man deeply believes that you're barely even human and is backed up in his belief by the ideology he follows and the people that believe the same. The same is true for fundamentalist muslims. They don't think for themselves, they don't even remotely care for your feelings or your life even. If you're faced with an IS terrorist and you're gay, he will murder you without reproach. No matter how kind you are, no matter how much he might like you. It's predetermined what he'll do. Most of our actions are guided by our world view. Even the fact that we don't think it's normal to kill eachother is the result of the social contract of hundreds of thousands of years ago and NOT the intrinsic goodness of humans. We are animals just like the others. We live in groups and don't kill eachother (within those groups) because it was a viable survival strategy, not because it was somehow intrinsic to us. It's an intrinsic part of every culture now. Even that basic moral rule was never a given, it only developed that way because of evolutionary circumstances. That's why we now believe killing is wrong; because society has taught us it is. Can societies/cultures change? Yes, they do constantly. Can people change? Of course. But they do with great difficulty and usually slowly. There is no way to just convince a fundamentalist muslim that sharia law is wrong. All we can accept at this time is that we have fundamentally different world views that are incompatible with one another. We can try to influence them to change in the long run, perhaos with success perhaps not. But we can't understate what it means to import people with fundamentally different world views here. Even migrant children that were literally born here, even their children, even their children's children, STILL are not fully integrated into our societies. Here in the Netherlands a government study reveiled that the now third generation migrants have become MORE conservative islamic than their grandparents who came here and feel LESS at home here. It's a tragedy that we failed to integrate them even when born here. Even for these populations PART of our societies it is the question whether they will EVER become as tolerant of LGBT as we are and if so, how many full generations it shall take. Importing fundamentalist muslims means you get a larger and larger group of people in your country that has radically different views on many things, including LGBT rights. There is no guarantee that they will become as tolerant as we are, even when born here. Perhaps they will immediately fit in, perhaps it will take a generation of two, perhaps it will take literal centuries, perhaps it will never happen and they'll forever stick to their fundamentalist views. We should stop being naive and start seeing how much of a gamble it is to try and mix vastly different cultures. It could go well, but it could also go spectacularly wrong. There will be people who fit in, but there will also be people that seriously clash with your values. And the latter create massive issues with polarisation and hate in your society, which might possibly persist for centuries.
    10
  313. Not yet, but eventually they'll try it when they think they can get away with it. The concept of viewing people from the lense of the times they lived in is not known to "woke" people. And whatever negative trait people had, always vastly overshadows anything positive. It's just tiring. Perhaps one day they'll understand that praising someone for positive things they did doesn't equal agreeing with or supporting literally every single aspect of their lives.
    10
  314. Primarily internal security. Italy can't sustain this many migrants. And it's not an anti-black sentiment but more like an anti illegal migration sentiment. I think Italy would also be pissed if millions of other Europeans entered Italy to stay and required money to house and feed. Remember these aren't refugees, they are looking for a better life and crossing into countries illegally. Syrians are refugees, Africans are not. And even the refugees among the Africans are undertaking huge journeys through safe countries and across a dangerous sea to get to Europe.
    10
  315. Wel de boeren aanvallen op stikstofuitstoot maar intussen steunen ze het immigratiebeleid van grofweg 100.000 migranten per jaar en willen zelfs nog meer, waardoor we in een nu al veel te krappe woningmarkt erg veel moeten bijbouwen, met de nodige stikstofuitstoot en natuurkrimp tot gevolg. En Jetten heeft ook gezegd dat NL een "Berlijn aan de Rijn" moet worden, oftewel één grote randstad. De D66 geeft niet om de natuur, ze willen alleen hun eigen plannen doordrukken ten koste van de boeren. Als het aan de D66 ligt komt er ELK JAAR een heel Deventer, Venlo of Delft bij (allemaal circa 100.000 inwoners), zo niet meer. Ten koste van de natuur, die steeds meer inkrimpt. Mede hierdoor verdwijnen bossen in NL net zo snel als in Brazilië, maar de D66 uit natuurlijk wel stevige kritiek op Bolsonaro. Het zijn een stel hypocrieten die alleen om hun eigen agenda iets geven.
    10
  316.  @maxt9657  I know right... if the German chancellor ordered to invade France the Germans would probably take after French tradition and whip out a guillotine.
    10
  317. Ga maar voor 'm staan met je mes. Deze "slappeling" schiet je knieën kapot, misschien wel eentje door je kop als dat niet lukt. Ik heb liever iemand die begrijpt wat het is om iemand dood te schieten als politieagent en er voorzichtig mee om gaat dan een of andere trigger happy cowboy die voor volk en vaderland iedereen eens ff lekker afknalt, denkend dat hij een held is of zo. Bij dat laatste krijg je een kankerzooi als in Amerika. Het punt is dat hoe erg deze man het ook haat om iemand neer te schieten: hij doet het als dit nodig is. Dat moet je hebben als agent: iemand die je niet pijn wil doen, maar bij noodzaak bereid is een verdachte neer te schieten.
    10
  318. Zoek maar alvast een mooie brug uit, want je kunt er gif op innemen dat de NOS nog meer in petto heeft voor je. En ja, pun intended.
    10
  319. Those groups should not be allowed to begin with. Communists, racists, natsocs, fascists have no place in a democratic society and ought to be banned from marching.
    10
  320. Wilders gebruikt dit om te laten zien dat bepaalde moslims agressief worden om de meest simpele dingen. Hij gebruikt dit juist om te laten zien wat er mis is met bepaalde moslims. En denk hier maar over na: wat is effectiever, zeggen dat als je mohammed tekent moslims door het lint gaan en dit een probleem is of daadwerkelijk mohammed tekenen en in het nieuws komen omdat moslims Wilders en Nederland de dood toewensen om tekeningen? Soms dan is de grenzen opzoeken nodig om een punt te maken. Soms moeten mensen iets ook echt zien om te begrijpen hoe problematisch iets is. En Wilders heeft zeker zijn punt kunnen maken
    10
  321. Tell you what, you stop murdering people in Britain, we have no more reason to demonise you. Deal?
    9
  322.  @veeeks2938  Since Chernobyl, 2 people have died due to problems in nuclear plants. This makes it the power source with one of the absolute lowest death rates. If, unlike in Chernobyl, there are proper safety measures in place, nuclear power is extremely safe. Regarding nuclear waste, very small amounts will be produced for the energy you get in return and storing it is no issue. All you need is some space. Adding to that, there are new technologies in terms of nuclear power that allow us to produce even less amounts of waste per power and makes it even safer. Once we figure out nuclear fission there's even zero risk to safety and waste.
    9
  323.  @Innoruuk  In the Netherlands we built a bunker to store nuclear waste. In Finland they place it in old mines. Seems rather simple. Nobody died in Fukushima, Chernobyl was a dumb mistake and saying we should not get into nuclear power because of the grave mistakes that were made there is like saying we should never fly again because a pilot once did something extremely stupid, ignoring all safety protocols, and crashed s commercial plane (or more relevant today, because Boeing ignored safety protocols in building their new commercial plane because they wanted to produce it quickly and caused two of them to crash). Such grave errors in following safety protocols can't be a reason to stop using nuclear power. Fukushima happened because a massive earthquake AND tsunami hit a nuclear plant. The plant was immediately stopped after the initial earthquake. Regular electrity failed, so they switched to emergency power to cool the plant. The tsunami then took out the emergency power. Then there were second back-up batteries that could cool the plant for several hours, expecting the regular electricity to be back up soon. Electricity never came back up and the batteries ran out, thus causing the accident. Since then, nuclear reactors worldwide have taken notes about additional safety measures. What happened in Fukushima was extreme and still nobody died. If something like that were to happen again, new plants should be protected against even situations like that due to additional safety protocols. But to pretty much all nuclear plants, especially here in Europe, such extreme circumstances will never occur in the first place.
    9
  324.  @Mysteri0usChannel  I agree the UK is pretty screwed up in many areas, but you're comparing it to the US...... NSA mass spying on civilians, police violence is much more normal, you can be sent straight to Guantanamo Bay without trial if you're suspected of certain crimes, politicians usually are in the pocket of some corporation to the point of literally letting companies (co)write laws... The US is pretty extreme in those areas as well.
    9
  325.  @bigelowtech  Democrats don't give a damn either. It's US politics in general that is unwilling to solve the ghetto issue. And the nature of ghettos means that if you leave them to exist they get further out of hand like a festering wound.
    9
  326. +32shumble Except he said migrant and never spoke about his skin colour. Give it a rest, will you?
    9
  327. America would still be pretty irrelevant if the South won. When unified it has a lot of potential and it was that potential that elevated the US to being a superpower during WW2.
    9
  328. Zo kut is Biden, ja...
    9
  329. Wij hebben geen verhaal omdat wij geen immigratieland zijn. Amerika was vanaf het begin al een migrantenland en heeft dus een historisch migrantenverhaal van de "land of opportunity". Een verhaal van hoe men vroeger naar de Nieuwe Wereld kwam om geluk te zoeken en eigenlijk elke Amerikaan een immigrant is. Nederland heeft dat niet, wij zijn geen land van migranten, wij zijn een land waar het inheemse volk al duizenden jaren leeft en een eigen cultuur en identiteit heeft. Dat is waarom het moeilijk is hier te integreren als migrant. In Amerika moet je van het land houden en dan ben je er wel. In Nederland moet je toetreden tot een cultuur, onderdeel worden van het volk hier, wat zeer moeilijk is. En als je dat niet doet, word je simpelweg niet als volwaardig Nederlander gezien. Dat wij migranten accepteren betekent niet dat wij gelijk een migrantenland zijn. Elk land in de geschiedenis heeft weleens met migratie te maken gehad, maar dat betekent niet dat het allemaal migrantenlanden zijn. Een migrantenland is een land opgebouwd door en bestaande uit migranten, zoals Amerika.
    9
  330. +jerus titus Perhaps because she isn't black. She's mixed. I'm mixed myself and I get really annoyed when I'm called black, because then you completely ignore my white side. Black is not her identity. For mixed race identity can be more difficult to ascertain. One can identify with both or one of the two races. If Meghan was vocal about her regarding herself primarily as black, then go ahead and call her black. If she hasn't, then you're being very insensitive by essentially pidgeonholing her as being black. You know it's kind of annoying when you mostly hang out with your white family, mostly have white friends, grew up in a white country and therefore regard yourself as pretty much white and then someone calls you black even though you have little to no connection to that side and it's just as foreign to you as it is to them (or the other way around, if you like). If you want to identify with her, fine. But don't put an identity sticker on her, because you don't know who she is and don't know the first thing about her identity other than that she is mixed. You call it identity denial, but I would call what you're doing forcing an identity on her. The latter is much worse, believe me. In fact, you're denying her identity too (her white side) AND forcing a black identity on her.
    9
  331.  @_-___________  The literal only thing he had to say was "yes I contributed to this in the past, but now I see this discourse must change and thus wrote the book".
    9
  332. +mywife's boyfriend What is it today? Are they subversively trying to make me love China and embrace their future superpower status?
    9
  333.  @wandanemer2630  We have large-scale war industry type violence, which is seen more as a sign of power than a sign of mismanagement/poverty. I was referring to very high criminal violence in particular, an indicator of a failed state. That is seen as something that does not occur in the west, therefore countries with that level of violence are generally ousted from the club even if they'd technically fit in.
    9
  334. Tja.... droomdenken leidt meestal tot dit soort "handige" interpretaties van feiten. Er zit wel meer dommigheid in dat klimaatbeleid, zoals het "prachtige" idee van houtsnippers verbranden terwijl dat én bossen kapt, én meer uitstoot dan kolen. Ook bij windmolens kun je de nodige vragen stellen. We moeten nuchter kijken naar wat wel (of misschien niet) moet gebeuren in plaats van dit idealisme over een klimaatneutraal NL binnen enkele jaren. Idealistisch denken is bij uitstek niet realistisch denken. Trouwens ook grappig hoe die man van de VVD zegt dat we ons land "een beetje schonig" moeten doorgeven. Typisch VVD.
    9
  335. Secretly he loves Mutti Merkel. They will run away together after their terms end
    9
  336. I think Finland is semi-axis at best. Finland was in a unique position because it was forced into its alliance with Germany. What typifies the axis powers is that they wanted to safeguard their expansionism and allied in their expansionist and/or anti-communist endeavours. Finland might have fought with the axis forces extensively, but they do not fit in the underlying strategic/ideological strait of that group. Greater Finland does make for a good case to call them axis after all, however. In that regard you might say while they weren't axis by heart and allied with them out of necessity at first, eventually they were pulled into the full aspects of the axis expansionism. So you could argue either way, it's a borderline case. I would say they are more than just a co-belligerent, yet not fully axis either.
    9
  337. Een beetje zelfspot moet kunnen. Dat respecteer ik zelfs
    9
  338. Tja, wat moet ik hier van zeggen. Ik vind het geen goede zaak, zulke dingen moet je behouden als onderdeel van de geschiedenis. Bouw dat museum ernaast en laat dat graf voor wat 't is. Ik begrijp beide kanten wel, maar het is in ieder geval duidelijk dat de overheid geen begrip heeft voor degenen die het willen behouden. Ze doen het een beetje te snel als je het mij vraagt, zeker als maar 51% negatief over Franco denkt en het land kennelijk nogal verdeeld is hierover. Dit is niet iets wat je eenzijdig zomaar zou moeten doen, als overheid.
    9
  339. I find this "just the flu" argument so jarring. When the flu had its first epidemic in the US it killed almost 700.000 people and eversince it has been killing thousands per year. The flu was extremely bad when it first came to be.
    9
  340. I'm born and raised in western Europe, half black and feel the exact way about America. Here in Europe I've never experienced racism, while in America (only a few months) I noticed everybody cared about skin colour a lot more. I think America is one of the few countries where skin colour matters and the rest of the world essentially looks to how you behave/what your culture is. And there is a lot of discrimination everywhere towards people who are culturally different, but that is not racism. Even in the countries with the most discrimination, people will mostly still accept a person with a different skin colour that is culturally exactly the same as they are. Actual racism is very rare outside of the US, because it's only in the US that culture and skin colour are constantly mixed up. To be a person with black skin is also to be "black" culturally, there. So the lines between "normal" discrimination you see around the world and actual racism are blurred. Because discrimination against their culture is at the same time discrimination against their skin colour, which makes things complicated. But in reality no such thing as a "black" culture exists, unless you're crazy enough to think all of Africa and Aboriginals in Australia and many more groups with black skin colour are somehow all the same identity. They are obviously not and skin colour is meaningless. What matters is your culture, how you fit into the group.
    9
  341. Moord = met voorbedachte rade iemand om het leven brengen. Dus zijn excuus is wel heel zwak, of hij weet gewoon niet wat moord betekent.
    9
  342. I have never before heard anyone pronounce Celts as "selts"
    9
  343. She'll probably be a Mary Sue as well if we're going in that direction
    9
  344. Qamar Zahid You are disgusting. What use is "being treated as a queen" when you have no choice to drive or even walk on the streets without a man? That's not being treated like a queen, it is being treated like a young child or a doll. No freedom of choice and everybody has to do everything for you. A queen has power and women in Saudi Arabia have none, not even the power to decide they want to walk outside without male escort. They are treated like animals, playthings or children, not as equal adults and especially not like queens. How dare you attempt to justify it. How about I lock you up in a room, but I give you all kinds of luxurious things and say you are "treated like a king". Yes, you enjoy luxurious things, but are you not in the end still locked up and unfree? How can a king not even be able to decide where he goes? This is abuse, no matter how good I treat you, I would be taking your freedom by locking you up. Just like that, you can treat women as good as you want, but in the end they are still unable to decide on their own whether to drive or walk outside. You take their freedom away and pampering them like a pet is not gong to compensate for that. This is unacceptable
    9
  345. Yeah, probably necessary
    9
  346. Wtf, the UK literally blocked covid vaccine exports to the EU during the Astra Zenica delivery issues of EU factories and now they say this? It doesn't make any sense
    9
  347. Dit vind ik wel heel erg vreemd. Hoe is een persoonlijke vraag over wanneer iemand het laatst heeft gehuild "op de man spelen"? Je zou misschien kunnen zeggen dat het té persoonlijk is en dat soort vragen beter niet gesteld kunnen worden, maar nu wordt er gedaan alsof Baudet Rutte als een soort huilende metroman heeft willen neerzetten en allerlei kwade bedoelingen had met die vraag. Ik zie totaal geen aanleiding om dat aan te nemen. Ik vind dat een zeer persoonlijke vraag, maar wel een normale vraag waar Rutte ook een normaal antwoord op gaf. Als je er tegen bent dat de politiek zo persoonlijk wordt en voortaan geen persoonlijke vragen meer wil zien in dergelijke debatten, zeg dat dan gewoon ipv Baudet weer van alles in de schoenen te schuiven. Zo triest dit.
    9
  348.  Joe Maleski  Because it will be paid through taxes, that is self-evident. When the government pays for something, it does so with tax money. It's dumb to ask where the money comes from. And I think it's even dumber to imply that saving lives in the event of a virus outbreak is in any questionable. We're facing a virus that if let to its devices can kill hundreds of thousands. Of course it needs to be battled by any means necessary to ensure that the number of deaths doesn't go beyond a few hundred or at the most a few thousand. It's ridiculous to ask this question.
    9
  349. so long story short I think it´s just Europeans being kind of snobbish, haha
    9
  350.  @neilbuckley1613  Interesting... so the English probably didn't distinguish between Duits/Deutsch and Diets/Dietsch and just call Germanic peoples in general Dutch. Thanks for the info
    9
  351. +SansAuthoritas Hungarian revolution against communism: peaceful demonstrations turn violent - civilians arm themselves and take back control of their country - they are crushed by the Soviet army and returned to communist rule. Spanish civil war, 1930's: fascist government is battled by democratic civilians heavily supplied by allies to the point of them having almost equal amount of tanks and airplanes to the government - fascist government wins Syrian civil war: civilians arm themselves against dictator and fight for years with heavy support from America - Assad still in control and winning American revolutionary war: rebels struggle against the British and other European empires, most notably France, have to aid them to achieve victory. Without this aid, no independence. When will you understand? Your guns won't save you
    9
  352. Ja, zeker omdat het echt net aan was in die eerste twee rondes. Als het al duidelijk was geweest dat Rico de overhand had was het niet erg geweest, maar Badr zat er zo goed in dat dit echt zuur is voor beide partijen.
    9
  353. Here in the Netherlands even new cities (1950s+) do not have a grid pattern. Grid patterns are horribly dull and only barely help with navigation. Only complete tools need grid patterns to find their way easily. I navigate European cities all the time and it's fairly simple, even if you take the occasional detour. I've been to New York too and navigating it was just boring, just walking in a straight line. Great city though. And grid patterns aren't good for traffic. You have too many crossroads with traffic lights. A well-designed non-grid city is better for traffic.
    9
  354. Als je ontsnapt uit de gevangenis staan daar binnen de gevangenis wel degelijk straffen op die de directeur gewoon oplegt (minder privileges, camera in je cel 24/7, langere tijd in je eentje in een cel zonder eruit te mogen, geen vervroegde vrijlating, dat soort dingen). Dus ja, klinkt weer als zo'n typische VVD-oplossing om populariteit te werven. Maar goed, ik heb er niks op tegen om dit ook strafbaar te stellen, maar het probleem daarmee is dat de gevangene dan weer helemaal door het OM moet worden aangeklaagd en voor de rechter moet komen etc. in plaats van dat de directeur gewoon gelijk sancties oplegt zonder al dat werk eromheen. Echt leuk om dit er even bij te gooien in een tijd waarin rechters en het OM e.d. veel te veel werk hebben. Geef de directeur van de gevangenis dan gewoon meer bevoegdheden om verdergaande sancties op te leggen, dan houd je dat allemaal lekker binnen de gevangenis met weinig werk, geen procedure die een jaar in beslag neemt. Of zeg misschien bij de eerste veroordeling gelijk "als je probeert te ontsnappen komt er automatisch een jaar bovenop je straf" of zo, dan hoef je ook niet helemaal terug naar de rechter voor een ontsnapping.
    9
  355. De arrogantie ervan, hè. Zij bepalen even voor Europa dat wij die illegalen moeten opnemen. Geen democratie, geen autoriteit, gewoon een paar mensen die vinden dat migratie een mensenrecht is (waar zo ongeveer niemand een voorstander van is) en dus Europa opschepen met duizenden mensen die hier niet zouden moeten zijn en niet eens asiel krijgen. Totaal onbegrijpelijk. Als ze die migranten tenminste zelf zouden opvangen... maar nee, ze bepalen dat wij dat maar moeten doen met ons belastinggeld.
    9
  356. De VS heeft een wet waarin staat dat Den Haag wordt binnengevallen als het Internationaal Strafhof een Amerikaan verantwoordelijk houdt voor oorlogsmisdaden. Een land met zo'n attitude richting misdaden tegen de menselijkheid heeft geen recht van spreken.
    9
  357. I don't see how this can be seen as negative. I think the new trend is much better, not only for the image of women, but also because those pictures are much more beautiful and sexy than a victimised woman.
    9
  358. +XIV LXXXVII Punishment has to be proportional to the crime committed. That's why it's important to think about the level of their suffering for a moment and judge whether it was a fitting punishment. I don't think taking their kids away forever is in any way justifiable in this situation
    9
  359. En dit na allemaal onzinverhalen over een "machtenstrijd" binnen de FvD... Zowel Hiddema als Baudet hebben meermalen uitgelegd dat de kritiek die Otten heeft op Baudet's taalgebruik NIET de aanleiding was voor de onenigheden en dat dergelijke kritiek gewoon een plek had binnen de FvD als open en democratische partij. Maar toch heb ik in de media allerlei theorieën voorbij zien komen over Otten die uit de partij zou worden gezet vanwege kritiek op Baudet of dat er een machtenstrijd gaande was en allerlei onrust binnen de partij. Het is gewoon slechte journalistiek en al die "fake news" comments die ik hier zie hebben jullie over jezelf afgeroepen. Ik verwacht dat grote nieuwszenders wat voorzichtiger zijn hiermee, echt jammer.
    9
  360. Disgusting traitor. Go on and kiss your American masters' arses while conspiring to destroy your European brothers. Absolutely disgusting behaviour. I fully respect your decision to leave, but comments like this are downright treacherous to Europe (not the EU, the continent).
    9
  361. Sinds wanneer hoort een keppeltje bij de Europese cultuur? En ik snap het punt wel dat sommige meisjes min of meer gedwongen een hoofddoek dragen of tenminste onder druk staan dat te doen, maar er zijn ook kinderen die net als de joodse keppeltjesdragers dat gewoon zelf willen. Hoe maak je een onderscheid tussen die twee?
    9
  362. Gek hoor, doe dit in een stad of ergens buiten dat dorp. Zo verander je dat dorp echt drastisch, dat moet je niet doen. Gaat geheid tot overlast leiden, dat weet je gewoon. Zo'n groot en druk complex in zo'n rustig dorp...
    9
  363. If enough people watched it... that seems to be the big problem nowadays. Every older voter just mindlessly consumed anti-Bernie/pro-Biden "news" in MSM
    9
  364. Verloedering van de Nederlandse taal
    9
  365.  Geek X  To them, the enemy was already occupying India and that was the British Empire. It's inaccurate to call them turncoats when the only thing they were loyal to was an independent India, not the Empire. They were never on the Empire's side to begin with, probably always plotting its demise in India.
    9
  366. 20 seats is 13% of the votes. At a turn out of 82% that means 70% voted for a traditional right, left or middle party
    8
  367. Paganism had values telling you how to live your life. And you know what? It did without creating fundamentalism or hatred towards ideas contradicting some book. The Abrahamic religions have been bad for humanity. Pure poison to the mind back then. And the one and only reason Christianity is fine today is because of renaissances reviving pagan/classic ideals and infusing Christianity with those ideals. If that didn't happen we'd have something similar to the backward religion of Islam, that didn't have the enlightenment
    8
  368. Whyever would Montgomery need to show the world he's bold when he had already commanded all ground forces in D-day and planned the Normandy breakout? He never seems to get credit for that. He surely was an overly proud prick, but he wasn't a bad commander all in all. I get the feeling that a lot of people take offence to Montgomery's personal attitude (horrible, admittedly) and go the extra mile to insult his achievements. Why do people always scrutinise his mistakes in great detail, yet never seems to commend his better work? Meanwhile a subpar general like Patton is praised into the heavens...
    8
  369.  @bigbirdmusic8199  It's true... I live in communist dystopia the Netherlands. I have healthcare with great coverage, but don't get fooled by the social policies they lure you in with. Most of my family dared speak up against the government and are now in gulag. With this comment I risk the same. Five years ago, the government had a plan to redistribute food and ended up starving a quarter of the population by taking away their food to give to others. Our situation is dire... don't believe Bernie, he wants to turn America into the communist dystopia that is Western Europe, with its universal healthcare, expansive social policies, higher quality of life rating, higher happiness ranking and more such abhorrent things.... You honestly have to be a moron to believe this nonsense. Bernie wants nothing more than to emulate the superior systems in Western and Northern Europe. Social Democracies consistently top all quality of life, happiness, healthcare, etc. lists. It is the superior system of government. The US has the riches to do the same, maybe to become the best country in the world to live in. The happiest nation on earth. The highest quality of life on earth. But no, that's "communism". You're bloody pathetic. Completely brainwashed by your corporate media, I'm sure.
    8
  370. It's not that simple to take out a modern military accross the atlantic ocean just like that. First of all, the US can't starve the UK. The UK is connected to the continent by tunnel and if you want to cut it off, you have to involve the EU, which is end of exercise for the US as the EU combined actually has quite a bit more warships than the US. And btw, we're ignoring that the EU would be highly likely to support the UK anyway, so yeah (in or out doesn't even matter in that regard). Secondly, good luck getting the logistics together for a landing big enough to knock out Britain. I'm pretty sure the US doesn't have the equipment needed to get all necessary troops there at once. As a rule of thumb, you need a 3 to 1 advantage to even stand a chance against a defending force. The full US Marine Corps is the same size as the British Army, the full US Army is about three times the size of the British Army. That means the US would need to transport all of its active USMC personell, plus 67% of the active Army personell to even stand a strategic chance against an enemy that has all the advantages. Even the US wouldn't be able to do this alone
    8
  371. Jaarlijks importeren we tienduizenden migranten en nu hebben we een tekort van zo'n 300.000 huizen. HMMMMMMMMMMM.... Weer echt dom beleid. Nederland is al zeer dicht bevolkt en dan halen we veel migranten hierheen zonder ook gelijk bij te bouwen.
    8
  372. Dit is ons verdiende loon. Er zijn hier ook Iraanse terroristen die daar tientallen mensen hebben opgeblazen en omdat wij geen uitleveringsverdrag met Iran hebben hier vrolijk rondlopen. Een jaar geleden had Iran als laatste redmiddel nog eentje vermoord in NL die naar verluid 70+ mensen had opgeblazen. En wij maar klagen, maar dan natuurlijk wel juichen als de VS precies hetzelfde doet in Pakistan met Osama Bin Laden. Criminelen moeten gepakt worden, punt. Misschien kunnen we iets regelen met Iran over Taghi als wij ook wat vermeende terroristen aan hen uitleveren. Voor wat hoort wat, maar daar is dan wel een verdrag voor nodig. Een ander alternatief zou zijn om Iran te vragen om van een paar vermeende terroristen het bewijs tegen ze aan te leveren en hier die terroristen te veroordelen voor wat ze in Iran hebben gedaan, in ruil voor uitlevering van Taghi. Die Taghi moet echt gepakt worden, anders laten we zien dat je met een aanslag op de rechtsstaat weg kan komen. Als het echt moet zou ik er zelfs niet tegen zijn om commando's op 'm af te sturen om 'm op te pakken of linea recta neer te schieten want het gaat hier echt om de bescherming van onze rechtsstaat. Vanaf het moment dat hij die advocaat om zeep hielp was hij niet meer een crimineel, maar de meest gezochte terrorist van Nederland. Zijn gedrag mag geen voorbeeld worden voor de toekomst, dus moeten we een manier vinden om te laten zien dat je daar nooit mee weg komt en wij alles zullen doen om je te pakken te krijgen. Terroristen jagen we na, desnoods door ze uit de weg te ruimen maar het beste is natuurlijk om ze voor de rechter te krijgen als ultieme overwinning van de rechtsstaat.
    8
  373. I don't really see that as an argument for even more immigration, but whatever. Immigration today breaks apart societies and causes tensions between the local population and migrant population, especially with muslims. It is a real problem everywhere and we've just had enough of it. Immigration does nothing but damage to our societies. Refugees... fine, they need help. But more than that? No. Multi-culturalism and Europe do not mix
    8
  374. Dat is niet genoeg voor de anti ZP demonstranten. Die hebben ondubbelzinnig te kennen gegeven uiteindelijk compleet van ZP af te willen. Het zwart schminken van iemands gezicht is volgens hun racistisch, welke context dan ook
    8
  375. Kozp dit jaar ook niet. Ik vind het best dat we gewoon geen demonstraties bij de intocht meer hebben, dat hoort niet. Als we demonstraties bij de intocht toelaten verpest je het feest dermate voor de kinderen dat je net zo goed geen intocht kan houden, dat gaat veel verder dan slechts je mening uiten maar ook om het verpesten van de intocht voor anderen. Dus demonstraties weg van de intocht. Pro of tegen deert me niet zo, het gaat erom dat kinderen van de intocht moeten kunnen genieten en dat doe je niet als er een demonstratie door je neus wordt geduwd, zeker als het die KOZP gasten zijn die naar kinderen roepen dat ze racistisch zijn dat gaat al helemaal veel te ver. Pro-ZP lijkt me minder erg omdat zij niets tegen de kinderen hebben en waarschijnlijk gewoon mee zullen doen als zwarte piet, maar alsnog lijkt het me het beste om gewoon de intocht helemaal vrij te houden van demonstraties om de intocht te beschermen.
    8
  376.  @oropher1234  Kom op zeg, gaan we elke populist nu vergelijken met Hitler? Los van hoe je het verkeerd hebt, doe dit nou niet... Dit is echt gevaarlijk. Straks dan krijgt iemand het gestoorde idee om Baudet te vermoorden, net als Fortuyn. Je speelt hier met levens. Dat terzijde, de FvD is de NSDAP zoals de SP de Communistische partij van de CCCP is... Je maakt een vergelijking op basis van heel milde overeenkomsten. Je kan niet serieus zeggen dat kennelijk elke partij die het heeft over een nieuw geluid en het verslaan van de elite (het typische populisme-geluid) letterlijk te vergelijken is met Nationaal Socialisme. Dat is net zo verkeerd als zeggen dat de SP links is en allerlei socialistische dingen wil, dus lijken ze op de CCCP onder Stalin. Slaat totaal nergens op. Je moet naar inhoud kijken. Je bent een partij die Forum voor Democratie heet en meer directe democratie wil aan het vergelijken met fascisten die de democratie te ineffectief vonden en één ongekozen autoritaire overheid wilden. Je bent een partij die openlijk tegen militaire interventies en het demoniseren van Rusland is aan het vergelijken met een groep die zowat de hele economie om hun oorlogsdrang bouwden en één groot Germaans-Europees rijk wilden stichten. Kom nou... dit moet stoppen. Je zegt eigenlijk dat Baudet vergelijkbaar is met de man die Europa van de afgrond heeft gestort in de jaren 40. Dat vind ik walgelijk. Je weet wat er met Fortuyn is gebeurd, je weet dat dat kwam omdat Volkert van der Graaf precies zo dacht over Fortuyn toendertijd. Je moet hier echt mee stoppen. De enige overeenkomst tussen Baudet en Hitler is dat ze beiden charismatisch waren en populistische retoriek gebruikten, maar er zijn zo veel voorbeelden van mensen die zo zijn/waren. Dat heeft inhoudelijk niets maar dan ook echt niets met de ideologie van de Nationaal Socialisten te maken. Populisme, getypeerd door de afkeer van de "elite", het centraal stellen van het volk, charismatisch leiderschap en meer, is iets wat van oudsher vele malen voor is gekomen. In goede, maar ook slechte mensen. Het is zeer onverantwoord om iedereen die binnen die definitie valt rechtstreeks te vergelijken met de NSDAP alsof ze een groot gevaar vormen voor de samenleving. Je creëert hiermee een vals beeld dat mogelijk in geweld eindigt. Stop daarmee
    8
  377.  @guy1177  Je doet alsof dat argument voldoende is om iemand letterlijk te steriliseren zonder hun wil. Straks ga je me ook nog vertellen dat homo's en lesbiennes gesteriliseerd moeten worden omdat "je toch geen twee vaders/moeders wil". Misschien wil je dat niet, maar dat weegt bij lange na niet zwaar genoeg om te zeggen dat we dan maar mensen geforceerd gaan steriliseren. Dat is echt een heftige ingreep die een zeer goede reden nodig heeft om het goed te praten. Ik betwijfel bijna of er überhaupt een reden bestaat die goed genoeg is om zoiets extreems goed te praten.
    8
  378. Is ook niet helemaal geluk, hè. Die blessure komt namelijk ook door de lowkicks van Rico die dat been heeft moeten incasseren
    8
  379. There shouldn't be juries at all, they should be abolished. Random people have no business judging whether I'm guilty or not.
    8
  380.  @Charles-ed3vj  Nothing. Here in the Netherlands we have no juries and generally believe juries are bullshit. A nonsensical remnant of a very distant past, when the community had to judge criminals themselves. In the English justice system this was always kept, here it was thrwown out of the window and replaced by impartial judges and impartial DA's (neither of which exist in the US and the latter of which doesn't exist in the UK). Here, the DA is a judge in itself, in a way, impartially handling your case. Behaving like US DA's, hellbent on getting people in prison, will get them fired ASAP. The DA independently judges what ought to happen in your case and then the judge(s) independently judge whether his case is good enough.
    8
  381. Day 4, Farmer picks up a gun, US retreats
    8
  382. Not as shocking and newsworthy as watching the shithole that is America
    8
  383. Ik kan nog steeds niet geloven dat die plofkip heeft gewonnen. Er waren zo veel goeie nummers dit jaar met Zweden, Oostenrijk, Duitsland en mijn persoonlijk favoriet Estland, maar dit rotnummer heeft gewonnen? Ook Waylon was fantastisch. Dit was de beste Eurovisie die we in jaren hebben gehad qua nummers. Ik vind dit zo zuur, ik was al verbaasd dat Israel überhaupt de finale had gehaald
    8
  384. A man is attacked with a military grade nerve agent only made in Russia and only employed by Russia. The government then states it's "highly likely" to have been Russia. Is this Russophobia or a perfectly logical response to the facts? And if it's the former, what do you propose they'd have done instead of pointing towards Russia?
    8
  385. "don't catch you crossing the border now..."
    8
  386. I find it upsetting that you are laughing at someone who is likely about to see his entire career evaporate in front of his eyes, justly or unjustly. This is not a bloody joke. It's about a possible sexual harrassment where both the supposed victim and supposed perpetrator are right now in a very emotional and horrible situation. It's very distasteful to outright pick a side and ridicule the other as if you know he's guilty. In any decent rule of law you are innocent until proven guilty, and yes that includes (or should include in the US' case...) the media. Disgusting. At least have the basic dignity to wait for the investigation. I find this equally disgusting as people who ridiculed Dr. Ford...
    8
  387. Wat een schande dat dit überhaupt nodig is in Nederland.... laten we het dáár eens een keer over hebben...
    8
  388.  @xCorvus7x  Well yeah, and some say those groups aren't even problematic to begin with. That's why making a caricature of anti-immigration arguments distorts the democratic discussion about it; pretty much nobody, including even some far right afficionados, is arguing that literally all migrants are bad or that migrants are bad because of their skin colour, etc. That is some neonazi shit that nobody in the mainstream supports. It's reserved for the alt right internet types that will tell you there's a "white replacement" going on and stuff like that, as well as actual neonazis. Nobody takes them seriously, they're not part of the political discourse.
    8
  389. Walgelijk, die hebben godverdomme nog steeds niet van Fortuyn geleerd. Ik kan me hier zo boos over maken, dit gaat om levens. Ik zag ook al een video van "anti"fascisten in een demonstratie die "als je Thierry af wil schieten roep dan paf" scandeerden. Dit kán toch niet, hier moet keihard tegen worden opgetreden, wat je ook van de FvD vindt. Wal-ge-lijk. Echt ziekmakend... ik hoop dat Baudet binnenkort wordt beveiligd want de sfeer op dit moment is zeer gevaarlijk, wéér mede door politici en de media. Schaam jullie.
    8
  390. Bijna net zo veel als de anti zwarte piet demonstranten denk ik.
    8
  391. How does speaking for a racial group even work.... Stop thinking in groups, it's an inherently toxic way to view the world
    8
  392. Turkse krantenkop: "Nazinazaten discrimineren Turken door niet op 5e colonnepartij Denk te stemmen"
    8
  393. But polluted in a different way
    8
  394. +Johnny c Oh sure, in what way do we Europeans have no liberty? Do tell... The "Deep State" you speak of exists because it is exactly what we wanted in Europe. In the early 1900's, a change was made from a small government system to an elaborate welfare state BECAUSE THE CITIZENS WANTED THE GOVERNMENT TO CHANGE THIS WAY. What you fail to understand is that here in Europe the government generally takes the shape the people want it to. In the late 1800's there was a movement for more democracy, so the government system changed to be more democratic. In the early 1900's there was a movement for more social policies, so the government grew and became a welfare state. You can NOT equate the US government to any European government. Even if the government wasn't what we wanted it to be, we'd change it again! The current trend is a step back from socialism and more towards privatisation and less social policies, so we in a sense again made a change to the government (we are WAY less socialist today than we were in the 70's, for example). The government moves with the trends here.
    8
  395.  @Ixiah27  Mentions in Roman documents and such, so no Christian sources. But that wasn't my point. The point is that people often without a doubt assume someone like Plato existed even though all we barely have any evidence for it, yet when it's about Jesus Christ I always see people instantly doubting his existence. Bit of a double standard. Jesus Christ is the only historical figure I ever see comments doubting the existence of, which I think is interesting.
    8
  396. Hij schrikt ervan.... het moment dat ik hoorde dat het coronavirus een 2% sterftecijfer heeft, zocht ik op hoeveel doden dat zou kunnen betekenen in Nederland. Toen influenza (gewone griep) voor het eerst naar NL kwam had dat 40.000 doden tot gevolg en de griep is iets milder dan corona. Waarom heeft iemand die ons op landsniveau hoort te vertegenwoordigen dit soort basale informatie niet eventjes zelf opgezocht? Waarom "schrikt" hij ervan, maanden nadat het virus voor het eerst werd gezien, weken nadat het in Europa aankwam en meer dan één week sinds het in Nederland aankwam? Wat een grap. En ik zal niet eens beginnen over onze minister van volksgezondheid, die niet eens de moeite heeft genomen om te kijken naar hoe landen als Zuid Korea, Singapore en China met het virus omgingen en wat wij daarvan kunnen leren. Dat had zo een verschil van duizenden doden kunnen maken. En Rutte... die een paar dagen geleden pas vluchten uit China weerde en lange tijd het sluiten van scholen heeft uitgesteld. Economie über alles, paar extra duizend doden ach joh.
    8
  397. +fredo1070 Well, can't say you're wrong on that unfortunately
    8
  398. If the US puts an EU company on their sanction list, the EU should put a US company of comparable size on their own sanction list. Period. Trump understands only strength and decisiveness
    8
  399. The best part is that public healthcare is cheaper than private, so you end up spending less in taxes than most pay right now for insurance. Even a selfish cheapskate should like medicare for all.
    8
  400. +Mrbrain bob You're making no sense here.... Every car can drive on any road if it's suited for those cars, regardless of the curvature of that road. You're acting like the only possible way to design a non-grid city is a picturesque small French city with narrow streets that barely allow normal cars to traverse them. Organic designed roads have far LESS intersections (and/or far less bothersome intersections with traffic lights) if designed the right way. When designed specifically to guide traffic the right way with the least possible delays, it will always beat a grid city, which by nature is designed without thinking about traffic. It's just a grid, no special considerations for traffic, just straight roads.
    8
  401. @G MG Ik zei bijna omdat ik het één stap te ver vind gaan om Rutte direct te vergelijken met dictators. Maar wat ik van de VVD het geleerd is dat een dictatoriale partij prima zou kunnen functioneren in Nederland zoals de partij van Poetin of Orbán ook het parlement in hun landen in de zak heeft. Dit is echt een wake-up call dat dat soort situaties in NL gewoon kunnen en dat we onze democratie actief moeten blijven beschermen. Dat is waarom een alerte Kamer van groots belang is. Alleen een Kamer die geen leugens en geen Rutte-doctrine accepteert kan ons beschermen tegen premiers die te veel macht naar zich toe trekken.
    8
  402. ​ @jsbart96  I'm not trying to justify their relative plight to European New Zealanders today. Whatever can be done to alleviate that must be done. I'm merely criticising the argument that this is all because of "colonialism". Unless you want to argue that the New Zealand civilisation unfairly distributes its benefits and specifically leaves Maoris behind, it can't be argued that that civilisation is the cause of their falling behind. If everyone within that civilisation is treated as equal, the problem is not that civilisation. Your second point is untrue. Maoris are traditionally minded people, if they did transition to civilisation, it is highly unlikely they'd get near the living standards of the west today. Non-western countries that are on the same (or higher) level of living standards as the west are exceptions in the world and almost exclusively located in the Far East. You don't just get to the absolute top of living standards with ease. Countries that today are on the level of the west either were built by Europeans, previously colonised by Europeans and took what they learned to greater heights than their colonisers ever did (Singapore, Hong Kong) or already had a long history of being a relatively powerful and prosperous entity themselves (China, Japan). Tribal peoples can't just make a transition into civilisation just like that and be on the level of the west. It's too much of a cultural shift to make in a short time. The civilisations of Europe (and diaspora) and East Asia are built upon the experience of many previous great civilisations, going back thousands of years. Reaching what we and several other countries have reached is a gradual process that requires lots of experience. White nationalists use that argument as an excuse to justify past wrongdoings (and perhaps to do them again). I'm not part of them and use that argument to counter the idea that European wrongdoings can be singled out and made to appear as if they were the only or even foremost evil at the time. That would be like blaming Ancient Rome for all violence 2000 years ago, even though Germanic tribes were famous for their incessant wars amongst one another. It is not realistic and not fair. The only difference between your average culture and European culture is that the latter had the technology to conquer farther beyond their borders. As to your last point, I agree. If there are effects being felt today they should be mitigated. But I'm not a fan of reparations, the mitigation should be more long term than simply money. If there is a colonial cause for Maoris not doing as well as others, they should be materially helped to the point where they are on acceptable levels of living standards. In any case I'm a big fan of honouring Maori culture more to compensate for what has been done (not really to compensate, but to restore the Maori culture's importance to New Zealand to what it should be). But to pay reparations for past actions simply because we would today consider them as wrong... no. Let the past be the past and the present the present. And insofar the past unduly affects the present, rectify only the present injustices to regain balance.
    8
  403. There was once an experiment done with line-ups in which test subjects were shown a mock crime and had to identify the culprit afterwards (the actor playing the criminal not among the line-up). They were shown a line up twice. Once right after the crime and another after instilling rumours about one of the people in the line up. In the first line up, about 40% picked someone out of it (the criminal wasnt even among them). In the second, with rumours running around about one of the subjects in the line up, 80% picked that man. Of course all were wrong. It is an inherently broken way of investigating
    8
  404. +Rebel Lucy Why do you even think BBC somehow supports this? They're reporting it and that's it. Every normally thinking human being will look at this and think whoever gave her the key has lost his mind. She did nothing anybody should be impressed by, especially not to this extent. That the BBC reports on this doesn't mean they think it's a good thing, just that it's something special enough to be reported. And this sure is special...
    8
  405. Yeah everybody agrees on the fact that if we continue our capitalist ways the world will eventually be destroyed. Groups all over the world are working on a better system as we speak to replace capitalism. Somewhere in the future we'll have something else. I was more talking about the mentality that capitalism creates, but its effect on the world is much worse. Capitalism won't last long anymore. Here in the Netherlands we even already have a party in parliament that thinks capitalism and its need for constant growth is unsustainable and needs to be replaced by a different system altogether. Expect parties like this to crop up everywhere, especially once there are feasible alternatives to capitalism.
    8
  406. Trump wil lekker geld verdienen en Duitsland Amerikaans gas en olie verkopen! Ik denk dat het tijd is om NAVO te ontbinden. De EU kan zelf de broek wel optrekken, zeker als we allemaal naar de 2% gaan. De NAVO is verworden tot een instrument voor Amerika om de eigen strategische interesses te verdedigen en heeft al lang niet meer met de eigenlijke verdediging van Europa te maken. Sterker nog, met de interventies in Libië en Syrië heeft de NAVO/VS ons meer schade aangedaan (de migrantencrisis) dan al onze "vijanden" bij elkaar. Zoals Tusk zei: "Who needs enemies with friends like that (Trump/Amerika)?". Weg ermee, laat de VS zelf maar oorlogje spelen.
    8
  407. Ja met al die praat over een "beslissing om Europa te bevrijden" doen ze alsof Amerika dat uit pure goedheid heeft gedaan en er geen andere geallieerden waren die een grotere rol in het Europese front hadden. Groot Brittannië vocht hier van begin tot einde, in het begin alleen en vanaf 1944 waren ze nog altijd ongeveer 40% van de bevrijders met Amerika tussen de 50-60% maar we doen kennelijk alsof Amerika de grote superheld was die iedereen redde. En dan nog de Sovjet Unie in het oosten waar iedereen wel van weet hoe belangrijk ze waren. Het waren de drie grote geallieerden die ons gezamenlijk hebben gered, niet Amerika. En van die drie grote geallieerden had Amerika ook nog de kleinste rol in Europa, maar nog steeds een zeer belangrijke rol.
    8
  408. Ja, de meerderheid wil niet uit de EU. Maar de meerderheid is ook heel kritisch over de EU. Verwar het niet willen van een Nexit niet met het willen van een Europese superstaat. Of zelfs met instemming met de huidige status van de EU... En als tweede, waarom zijn jullie zo huiverig over een referendum? Ik wil zelf ook niet uit de EU, ik ben wel kritisch. Maar ik vind ook dat een referendum een goede zaak zou zijn omdat de stem van het volk meermalen is genegeerd als het gaat om de EU. Er zijn verschillende referenda genegeerd en ik vind dat het tijd wordt om Nederland eens écht een stem te geven. Ik vind het continu willen doordrukken van Europees beleid democratisch onverantwoord. Betrek het volk erbij, en dat begint wat mij betreft met een referendum. Dit gedrag ondermijnt juist de EU, want steeds meer mensen krijgen het gevoel dat je ze liever geen stem geeft en achter hun rug allerlei dingen in de EU doet. De EU zal nooit democratische legitimiteit krijgen als je het volk er niet bij betrekt en hun stem liever negeert.
    8
  409. Death, only death
    8
  410. Egyptian rulers, like Cleopatra, were Greek. So... "white". Though older Egyptian rulers probably had light brown skin. And ancient Egyptians are not like the current arabs that invaded there. They had light brown skin colour. There were also nubians living in Egypt, i.e. "black" people. And so did "white" people, as primarily Greeks came to live there. Cities like Alexandria and Rome ended up fairly multicultural as they became important trade hubs and such.
    8
  411.  @ilyjax  Hij laat niet eens discussie toe. Zodra een vergelijking wordt gemaakt tussen verschillende groeperingen in NL zegt hij "dat zijn Nederlanders", alsof die vergelijking überhaupt niet gemaakt mag worden en dat argument niet gemaakt mag worden. Dat is geen discussie voeren, dat is langs elkaar heen praten. D66 volgt altijd het nieuwste SJW-praatje, maar anders dan de echte activisten die ten minste nog kennis van zaken hebben weet D66 eigenlijk nooit wat het punt überhaupt is. Altijd zulke zwakke verdedigingen. En ik vind SJWs zelf al matig argumenteren.
    8
  412. Tax is different. You know how much you have to pay, plus mostly it's paid automatically. Tax is also taken from money you make, meaning it is impossible to not have enough money to pay the taxes. Fines can come at unexpected moments and can exceed the amount of money you have left at the end of the month. They're two different worlds
    8
  413.  @agentmulder1019  Bradley was Montgomery's SUBORDINATE in Normandy. Bradley's entire operation WAS PART OF MONTGOMERY'S LARGER STRATEGY. Look at it like this: you have local officers, then the general that plans and commands a specific operation (Bradley, Cobra), then a general that plans and commands the entire operation (Montgomery, the entire D-day operation plus the breakout of Normandy) and then you have an even larger scale where it is decided what large scale operations should take place in the first place and where (largely political function, Eisenhower). And on each level, credit is due for the planning. You can't take away the credit of a higher general based on what a lower general did as part of the higher general's plan . That makes no sense. Cobra was part of a larger set of operations within the breakout of Normandy. Montgomery's plan was to have Germans believe that there would be a breakout in the east, thin out the forces in the west as a result and then have the breakout happen there. And that breakout was operation Cobra. There is no one general that can take credit for that: Montgomery is the one to plan the breakout on a large scale and Bradley us the one to plan the breakout on a small scale. They both did their jobs excellently and this is NOT mutually exclusive. It's like saying Eisenhower failed his job because a random general on the field did "better", even though they have completely different jobs on completely different levels.
    7
  414. Nou dan heeft ze tenminste de ware aard van de islam gezien.... Dat doet me deugd, maar er zijn helaas meer die terugkomen en die ideologie gewoon blijven steunen
    7
  415. An accusation/eye witness is evidence. It's just very very bad evidence (might as well not call it evidence) if it has no supporting evidence.
    7
  416. Echt walgelijk weer
    7
  417. Als een Nederlander naar Australië verhuist en een Australisch paspoort krijgt raakt hij zijn/haar Nederlandse paspoort automatisch kwijt. Als een Nederlandse moslima naar staatsvijand nummer 1 verhuist om te trouwen met een terrorist die graag ons land met de grond gelijk zou maken, zo veel mogelijk ongelovigen wil vermoorden en een kalifaat in de plaats daarvan wil stichten, dan mag ze terug. En niet alleen zij, zelfs haar kinderen! Linkse partijen zijn nogal hypocriet. Ons beleid als het gaat om paspoorten is vrij streng. Maar als dit soort mensen in het nieuws komt krijgen ze opeens de neiging om te laten zien hoe groot hun hart is en ze weer terug te nemen. Niet alleen passief, maar zelfs actief ze terug te halen. Ik zou willen wedden dat als dit niet in het nieuws kwam, het ze ook niets had gescheeld.
    7
  418. I'm just waiting for that one on one debate. It could end up an absolute train wreck for Biden and swing the election to Bernie again. This is a very volatile primary
    7
  419. Wat een prachtige opmerking. Biden is zo'n wijs man...
    7
  420.  @YKK1357  Ga maar huilie huilie doen. Zo gaat dat in Europa; alles, ook jouw geloof, kan bekritiseerd worden. Dat is één van de redenen dat wij in een welvarend land leven. Niets staat boven kritiek. Als je dat niet zint, is dat jouw probleem.
    7
  421.  @YKK1357  Ach, gaan we nou smoesjes verzinnen voor agressief gedrag? Dit is waarom multiculturalisme vanaf het begin een rotidee was. We kunnen niet door één deur, er zijn constante culturele botsingen. En nu hebben we een punt bereikt waar we elkaar uitschelden en zelfs agressief worden. En ik kan je vertellen waarom je gelooft. Jij gelooft om de simpele reden dat je het geloof met de paplepel ingegoten hebt gekregen. Leuke god heb je. Iedereen die moslimouders heeft een gratis pas naar de hemel geven en iedereen die in een christelijk/hindoe/atheist/wat dan ook land is geboren standaard naar de hel sturen tenzij ze toevallig met de islam in contact komen en ook nog bekeren. Nou bedankt, wat een eervolle god.
    7
  422. Idioot VVD beleid... het grootste probleem is bevolkingsgroei . Bevolkingsgroei die vrijwel geheel door immigratie komt en waar wij dus gewoon controle over hebben. Je kan niet én met 150k (meer dan een stad als Delft!) per jaar groeien én iedereen huisvesten én de natuur beschermen/uitstoot beperken. Er moeten op een gegeven moment keuzes worden gemaakt. Wij willen Nederland niet helemaal volbouwen ten koste van de natuur, wij willen geen overbevolkt Nederland en wij willen ook geen huizentekorten meer. De simpele oplossing is om eens een keer NA TE DENKEN over hoeveel migratie eigenlijk wenselijk is voor NL ipv de grenzen wagenwijd open te zetten "want economie". Wij hebben niets aan die extra economische groei van expats e.d. als we in een overbevolkt rotland leven waarin wij niet eens een huis kunnen vinden. Met de VVD is het altijd maar en en en... maar soms moet je keuzes maken, duidelijke keuzes. De migratie hoeft echt niet naar nul of zo, maar we moeten wel nadenken over welk aantal wij als land aankunnen. Wat wij wenselijk vinden met het oog op de huizenmarkt, populatie en natuurverlies ivm bouw. Beleid gaat niet alleen om de economie, het gaat om het totaalplaatje van geluk in Nederland. Dat totaalplaatje kent de VVD niet. Als de economie als een malle groeit maar ik in één grote randstad woon zonder natuur, geen huis kan vinden en het veel te druk is dan ben ik niet blij. Dan is NL ondanks de economische groei verworden tot een rotland om in te wonen. Geluk gaat om een mooie balans tussen welvaart, cultuur, natuur en veel meer. Bij de VVD is de balans zoek; groei, groei, groei, ten koste van alles.
    7
  423. You defined woman as in sex, not woman as in gender.
    7
  424. Het CDA heeft linkse kenmerken omdat het christendom nu eenmaal extreem linkse dogmatiek is. Vanuit het christendom is het absoluut onverdedigbaar om bijvoorbeeld vluchtelingen tegen te houden of het kinderpardon niet te verbreden. En het CDA is niet eens zo heel christelijk. Zie de Christen Unie voor een echte christelijke partij.
    7
  425.  @thadiussean9133  I find it a disgusting idea that he feels like his beliefs are the one and only truth and that it is his mission to go around the world and get as many people as possible to renounce their own culture/belief system. I take delight in different cultures and he wants to essentially brainwash people and make them drop their own culture. Especially since the tribe has little to no contact with the outer world, they are very vulnerable to his bullshit and he may end up wiping away the tribe's culture.
    7
  426. Probably never watched the full video
    7
  427. Wait... "breathing problems, vertigo-like symptoms". We are calling teargas-like substances chemical weapons now? My idea of chemical weapons is the stuff that was used in Syria and similarly deadly chemical attacks. Calling "smoking out" soldiers a chemical attack seems like a huge stretch. A stretch that could escalate this conflict unnecessarily.
    7
  428. EU: wanna burn the White House again, buddy?
    7
  429.  @MrCarpelan  Not really. The ideological reason for placing dissidents in concentration camps was the same for both ideologies. The collectivisation of society for one group meant killing or enslaving dissidents. For the Marxist proletariat this means killing or placing in a concentration camp anyone who opposed the rule of the working class (part of this was eradicating the bourgeoisie) and for the Nazi government this means killing or placing in a concentration camp anyone who opposed the rule of the German race. The problem with the Nazi counterpart is that the EXISTENCE of other races in Germany was already seen as an opposition to the rule of the German race, so while in the USSR this ideology meant getting rid of political dissidents, in Nazi Germany this meant killing or placing in a concentration camp an entire race and more. So yes, National Socialism is much more nasty (at least under the USSR, you could switch your support to the working class rule, you cannot switch your race), but no that does not mean the ideological background for doing what they did were not the same.
    7
  430. +sri krishna Are you really this naive? You cannot make a deal that 100% aligns with your own interests. This deal is a compromise and a pretty good one at that. It is not perfect, but Iran is not building nuclear weapons at the moment and that is what it's all about. Also, unfreezing billions of dollars that belonged to Iran in the first place is not "showering Iran with billions of dollars". Renegotiating the deal will only create worse negotiating positions and you might even annoy Iran enough to make them walk away altogether and go on their way creating nuclear weapons. And then others will want to create nuclear weapons for themselves too. It works fairly well at the moment and there is no reason to risk a worse deal (because Iran is going to be less willing to give in the second time...) or even a blown up deal.
    7
  431. Interesting..... so now all ports are closed in the mediterranean. Let's see what happens next
    7
  432. S. Michael DeHart aka WVUmounties8  Funny that you show exactly the kind of behaviour that makes the US system so rotten and shameful. You lot just can't work together. Democrats are evil to republicans, republicans are evil to democrats, both try to sabotage eachother's policies even if this blocks the entire government from functioning. It is an absolute disgrace. Here in the Netherlands our last government was one of the most leftist and right wing parties we have here working together in a coalition, compromising where needed and choosing to give up some of their party ideals in the interest of the country. And it went great, too. That is what taking responsibility looks like, not crashing the entire government to a political standstill out of personal gain. The political climate in the US is an absolute disgrace to democracy, a filthy stain on the west, exemplary of how NOT to organise a rule of law. And here I mention only one of many issues you have. I could discuss politicians being completely dependent on corporate "donations" to function and conflict of interest, the complete politisation of the supreme court even though politics shouldn't have a role in independent courts, the complete lack of diversity within congress/senate with only two parties (by comparison we have about 20 in parliament here...), the excessive idolisation of the president, the somewhat excessive power of the president within the trias politica, the politisation of district attorneys, etc. etc. etc. etc. You live in an inherently broken rule of law, and not just broken in one way either. That is why the US system is a disgrace, not "muh liberals". A democrat would say "muh republicans"
    7
  433. Both sides were lied to, both sides could have reason to switch their votes. What you say makes no sense
    7
  434. As is the standard response to comments like this... start with yourself!
    7
  435. Poles hate communists so that was to be expected. Antifa won't fly there
    7
  436.  @mb27b34  Yes. They're a tribe, they live in harmony with nature. Killing a man that threatens your culture and lives is perfectly normal from their point of view. And it was in our point of view when we were like them. Their actions need to be placed in a context.
    7
  437. America is an immigrant country now, the native culture is dead and gone (practically). It's a tragedy. I find it baffling that Americans are even talking about being replaced at all. America belongs to nobody and everybody ever since the native culture was herded into reservations. Now Europe is a different story. If we assume that the "great replacement" would be real (it isn't), then I would agree it's evil to turn the native culture of a country into the minority. But America??? Who cares....
    7
  438.  @guy1177  De overheid dwong ze wel degelijk tot het laten liggen van hun kansen om kinderen te hebben. Deze specifieke vrouw in de video mocht toen ze man was namelijk zelfs geen sperma bewaren voor toekomstige kinderen. Het laten weghalen van de geslachtsdelen is natuurlijk hun eigen keuze, maar als ze sperma of eitjes willen bewaren voor de toekomst moet de overheid zich daar pertinent buiten houden.
    7
  439.  @opoedik88  Goed argument.
    7
  440. Ik irriteer me eraan hoe men dit een "boerkaverbod" noemt in de media. Het is een verbod op gezichtsbedekkende kleding en het heeft een REDEN. Nu doen we alsof dit specifiek anti-islam is of zo. Nee, het gaat om gezichtsbedekkende kleding en geen enkele religie krijgt een uitzondering voor de wet.
    7
  441. Man man man, wat een held
    7
  442. I hope Britain succeeds outside of the EU. I'd hate to see them suffer
    7
  443.  @DocRealTalk  And if you make James Bond black you go against the character of James Bond, who is described as brown haired with blue eyes. Remember that even Daniel Craig got shit for his JB role in the beginning because he's blonde, not brown haired. I'll admit that for me personally I think Idris Elba is such a great actor with that James Bond flair that I'd make an exception for him, but generally speaking it's a bad thing to change characters like that. It shouldn't be impossible, but done only by exception and with good reasoning behind it. If an actor simply doesn't look like the role, that's a hard obstacle to overcome. And the lesser you look like your role, the bigger the obstacle is. We can't just go around changing characters drastically because of, well... nothing. "There should be more black icons" is not an argument to change existing non-black characters, it's an argument to create more films with black icons in them. I loved Black Panther, for example, and would love to see more films set in Africa and representing African culture. But changing white characters is the wrong direction. Not only is it the wrong direction, but it's in itself very questionable. What you're essentially saying is that to have more black icons, you need to appropriate "white" stories and change them into "black" stories. In truth there's a wealth of African, African American and more possibilities out there for films that would diversify films for the better. Diversity is not about skin colour. Taking a European fairy tale and making the main character black (what they did with Little Mermaid) is not "diversity". Representing African mythology by making a new fairy tale film about that (coincidentally, there are actually mermaids in Afrian mythology too) is diversity. There's a wealth of such opportunities that Hollywood leaves in the trash just to insert black characters in non-black roles because "diversity". Real diversity suffers because of this. Real diversity is about culture, not skin colour. Real diversity is representing African stories, not inserting Africans into European stories as if African stories are worthless.
    7
  444. +Shamsudeen Sodangi You're correct that Africans did develop written language and much more, but Africans didn't choose to sell other Africans or even worse; the west instigated slavery? That is pure nonsense. Slave trade was popular in Africa since far before Europeans even were present at all. The Arabs conducted slave trade for 13 centuries, Europe did so in 3. Europe transported 12 million African slaves across the atlantic. Arabs took in possibly over 20 million slaves from Africa and Europe. Now the European trade was worse in the sense that more were taken in shorter time, but my point is that slave trade was going on with Arabs and within Africa for centuries before the Europeans even came along. It was not "created by the West" and yes, Africans did choose to sell other Africans to Arabs (though they also forcefully took slaves), Europeans and other Africans. Slave trade happened with Europeans or without them. Even with or without Arabs. Slave trade would in fact still be a thing in Africa if Europe didn't end it. Europe didn't just end their own trade, but also stopped Africans from selling to other Africans and Arabs from taking any more slaves. Though even today there is illegal slave trade in Africa and the Middle East alike. The Atlantic slave trade was horrible and probably the worst trade ever conducted (some will argue the Arab trade was worse due to taking more people overall, but the European trade took more people in shorter time), but don't take it too far and blame everything on it.
    7
  445. Met die huizenmarkt van nu is het ook zeer moeilijk goede accommodatie voor elkaar te krijgen
    7
  446. +Lord Of frog Hmmm, and if the shooters would have no gun then there would be no gun pointing in the direction of the would-be victims either!
    7
  447. Je ziet Rico consistent Badr z'n benen trappen, keihard. Badr kan niet meer incasseren. Dit was gewoon een overwinning voor Rico, geen gelijk spel. Jammer dat het zo ging, want Badr was wel echt lekker bezig en had kunnen winnen, maar dit kun je gewoon geen gelijk spel noemen man. Er is een goede reden dat hij hier geblesseerd raakt en niet tijdens training: hij kan de klappen op z'n benen niet meer hebben. Dit kwam niet alleen door een misstapje, dit kwam ook door Rico's lowkicks. Niet de mooiste manier om te winnen, maar het was een overwinning. Ik hoop op een rematch waarin wel tot het einde wordt gevochten, maar dit gelijkspel of zelfs geluk noemen klopt niet
    7
  448.  @augustus331  Omdat ze niet begrijpen wat het is. Het enige wat zij kennen is de blackface uit Amerika, waar zwarten mee belachelijk werden gemaakt. Ze zien hier ook blanken die zich zwart schminken, DUS ja ook blackface natuurlijk! Wat buitenlanders denken doet mij niets. Ze begrijpen het niet en nemen niet de tijd om tot begrip te komen ook. Voor hen is het zonneklaar vanaf het moment dat ze zwarte piet zien. Meer verwacht ik ook niet
    7
  449. Nobody less than the crown prince himself will do in my book. This is straight down his alley and you can see similar things happening inside the KSA directly linked to him. If he brings people to "justice" because of this, it's more to punish them for having it leaked than to punish them for the actual deed.
    7
  450. Helemaal mee eens. We zijn onze verlichtingswaarden van individualisme aan het kwijtraken. Steeds meer zien wij niet een individu voor ons, maar een "lid van een groep". Dat geldt voor alle kanten. Het moet gewoon stoppen. Hoe meer groepsdenken, hoe erger het geweld wordt. Straks krijgen we een soort Noord-Ierse toestanden tussen moslims en niet-moslims in de westerse wereld. Dat mag niet gebeuren. We moeten onze verlichtingswaarden beschermen en iedereen die hierheen komt moet integreren en NIET identiteitspolitiek importeren. Je ziet het al erger worden met de heftige identiteitspolitiek van Denk, met voorvallen als wat er laatst in Urk is gebeurd tussen Nederlandse en Marokkaanse jongeren, geweld als in Christchurch... Het wordt steeds erger, totdat wij er iets aan doen. En de oplossing is om identiteitspolitiek te bevechten. We moeten elkaar als individu zien, niet als groep.
    7
  451. Solution: transgender games. Everybody happy.
    7
  452. All Bernie wants is to have the same system in America as is already in place in most of Western Europe. A system that consistently proves itself to be superior to the US when it comes to quality of life and happiness ratings. I don't see how anyone can be against that. Regarding "taking other people's stuff", that is exactly why the US is in trouble today. You work, your work generates X amount of value/profit, but it's NOT you that gets that profit yourself. No, your boss takes the value that YOU created and in return gives you a wage that is only a fraction of the money you generated for him; he took a vast percentage of the value you created for himself. He took other people's stuff. Now there's nothing wrong with this, as you just entered into a contract with your boss and this is all legal. And people in more important positions, who take bigger risks and provide people with job opportunities ought to get more money. But when they take too high of a percentage (because they can basically decide freely how much they take), this can create serious issues. The percentage that workers get back should be at least somewhat fair and good enough for those workers to live a more or less comfortable life, while corporations still get a respectable profit. Otherwise, the life of their employees is absolutely miserable while the corporation walks away with pretty much all of the money that their employees generated for them. Another aspect in which people are taking other people's stuff already in the current system is for example drug costs in healthcare. Some drugs in the US are priced at ten times the amount they cost in Western Europe. Why? Because pharmaceutical industries don't charge you the cost of a product; they charge you as high a price as they can get away with. And in the US they can get away with ridiculous prices. They take other people's stuff. The cost of their product is the production costs and the money needed to give everyone involved a fair pay for their work, but that is not what they ask. They ask a price significantly above what the drugs are actually worth and in doing so they take your money, they take your stuff. You're in essence being ripped off. And this too is fine because this profit they can use to invest in more drugs, to grow their company and of course they use it to give massive bonuses to the CEOs and investors (never the employees though). But again... when they ask too high of a price and take too much (because again they can essentially get away with insane prices in the US), things can get out of hand. Drugs and medicine in general can become so insanely expensive that citizens no longer go to doctors even with dire conditions. It can mean that even if citizens want to treat their illness they simply can't afford the treatment, even if it's literally life threatening. Right now in the US, 500k people go bankrupt yearly due to medical costs and several thousands die unnecessarily due to inaccessible treatment. Many also commit suicide because of medical debts. All because insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry want to take other people's stuff by artificially raising the prices of drugs and asking a very high insurance fee for very low coverage. At the centre of this story is this: the way wealth is distributed should be more or less fair. This doesn't mean taking away everything or even most of what corporations and rich people have. It just means either making sure they can't take too much from the employees or customers (for example a minimum wage raise and some government action that causes drug prices to go down) or taking stuff from the corporations to offset what they have taken from us (and I don't mean offset in the sense of taking everything back, but offset to make sure an acceptable share of the money goes back to the employees while corporations still get their profit). TL:DR To blame Bernie for "taking other people's stuff" is redundant because he seeks to take back a fraction of what corporations have already taken from us, so that the overall balance in the wealth we all get is more fair. Corporations are taking stuff from us at an unprecedented rate because all they care for is maximum profit. Not whether their employees have decent lives, not even whether their would-be patients literally die.
    7
  453. Life is not TV though
    7
  454. Damn, prince Harry has a seriously good taste in cars!
    7
  455. +Johnny c You act as if we don't have constitutions ourselves. We have constitutions, a European constitution, European treaties on human rights, etc. etc. nearing almost 10 documents that protect various rights, including many that the US constitution doesn't protect. As for democracy and the tyranny of the majority, you fail to understand why we are more socialist than the US. We are tight societies in which the people are willing to pay for the wellbeing of other members of that same society. I proudly pay taxes, knowing that my fellow Dutchmen will benefit (and perhaps me, should I somehow get in trouble). We are a society that takes care of eachother. If I lose my house and whatnot, my fellow countrymen have got my back. If someone else does, I have their back. This is why even the most right parties here are arguably still more socialist than the democrats; because we WANT other Dutchmen to profit from our collective wealth. You have to understand that in Europe we have lived here as societies for (tens of) thousands of years. Be it as some Germanic tribe or as a nation, we have been here as close-knit societies for literally thousands of years. We care for eachother, even for our fellow Europeans (why do you think the EU exists?). We may not be of the same specific "tribe"/nation, but the Germans are Germanic just like we are and therefore we care for them too and regarding more distant European countries they are European so we also care for them (but as always: own nation > northern/eastern/southern Europe group you belong to > more distant Europeans). It's about being close and like-minded and therefore being willing to help. The US is more individualistic because of a different and much shorter history. Our socialist tendencies can be explained from our culture and history, your much less socialist views can be explained from your specific culture and history. In America socialism may mean "I don't have responsibilites I have rights", but in Europe it means "I care about my countrymen and I got their back". Neither are strictly speaking wrong, but both do fit the respective countries/regions nicely. You make the mistake of applying your own cultural view to Europe and saying we have "no real liberty". Then I will do the same and tell you America is an ice cold society that doesn't give a damn about others whatsoever. Saying this is a mistake as I apply European views to a country with a vastly different history which perfectly explains the individualism.
    7
  456.  @RHK45  Bersiap, 35.000 vermoorde Nederlanders, ook duizenden doden onder andere 'onwelgevallige' groepen zoals Molukkers en Chinezen. En dat is maar één voorbeeld, in een tijd waar die groepen zichzelf niet konden verdedigen. "Kleine schaal", "niet het vermelden waard". Misschien even onderzoek doen voordat je dat soort dingen uitkraamt. Echt walgelijk.
    7
  457. Bring them back to Libya or another country where they do not want to be. As long as we give in to their wish of coming to Europe, more will cross the desert and die, more will wilfully put themselves into the hands of smugglers in Libya and even pay them while being tortured and more will die in the mediterranean. If they wilfully put themselves into dangerous situations, we'll have to take that will of theirs away. And key to taking that will away is keeping them from entering Europe. They will not risk their lives to travel to other third world countries, only for the riches of a first world country. As long as they can get here, more will come and die on the way.
    7
  458.  @rogiermerlijn  Parallellen, parallellen. Natuurlijk zullen er parallellen tussen een nationalist en een fascist getrokken kunnen worden. Beiden hangen een vorm van nationalisme aan. Fascisme is niks meer dan een extreme vorm van nationalisme. Ik zie ook parallellen tussen democratische socialisten en communisten (en nog erger, er zitten voormalig communisten in sommige linkse partijen), maar dat betekent niet dat ik verdachtmakingen aan hun adres de wereld in gooi dat ze anti-democratisch zijn en identiteitspolitiek voor de werkende klasse voeren, een anti-kapitalistische revolutie willen, etc. Nee, want communisme is de meest extreme versie van hun gedachtegoed, dus ik weet dat ik er niet zomaar vanuit kan gaan dat dat is waar ze voor staan. Dat kun je niet maken. Ik snap dat FvD nieuw is, omdat wij niet echt een nationalistische partij hebben gehad tot nu toe, maar je kan er niet zomaar vanuit gaan dat ze meteen de meest extreme vorm van nationalisme aanhangen, zeker niet als dit uitdrukkelijk en heel duidelijk wordt tegengesproken door het partijprogramma, hun opvattingen en de eerdere boeken/etc. die door Baudet en enige andere kopstukken binnen de FvD zijn geschreven. Het is heel fout om dit te doen, je zet hiermee een hele partij buiten spel. Wat hier gebeurt met de FvD is als wat er in Amerika aan de hand is met Bernie Sanders. Ze zijn daar niet gewend aan politici met opvattingen zoals hier in Europa (gezondheidszorg die compleet door de overheid is geregeld, wat veel verder gaat dan Obamacare. Uitgebreide sociale zekerheid, etc.), dus noemen ze Bernie Sanders een communist en wat niet. Ze worden geconfronteerd met nieuwe opvattingen, dus gaan ze er meteen vanuit dat dat de meest extreme variant van die politieke stroming is. En dat is fout omdat je een stropop opzet en totaal niet naar de eigenlijke argumenten luistert.
    7
  459. Money and power... always. The US government are known hypocrites. The EU also has a good chance to choose oil over principles, but we'll see. I'll have no respect left for my government if they cover up the Saudis.
    7
  460. +Mrbrain bob An intelligently designed road network is much better for traffic than endless crossroads with traffic lights.
    7
  461. This is very sad to read... this gender nonsense is starting to be damaging. Everyone should just be themselves without thinking about what "gender role" to fit their personality into. Your personality is your personality. Nobody should either alter their personality to fit into a gender role or get confused about the sex they belong to based on what gender role their personality fits into. Gender is a social construct, it is not real. It used to be relevant in the days when society very strongly told men/women how they should behave, but those are times of the past. Now it's a lot less relevant. We should just let people be who they are without trying to put their personality into boxes. All this practice of creating new genders and such has to stop. Genders are largely useless social constructs that we don't need more of, but less. If you're a biological woman with a very male personality, that doesn't mean you're suddenly non binary or something, it just means you're a woman with personality traits more typically found in men, which is actually pretty common because there is no such thing as "male/female" character traits. There is too much overlap between personality traits when it comes to men and women to even make a clear distinction at all. So in my mind, a society that takes biological sex as starting point of identifier and then states all people should be whoever they are while still being addressed by their biological sex is best. Trans men/women are an exception to that rule because their identity issues are more closely connected to sex than gender; only they should be able to transition between sexes. But this gender non-binary stuff.... just say you're a man with a lot of "female" personality traits and be done with it. No "they/them" or whatever, just your sex and your personality. Problem solved.
    7
  462. +Marius Vorster Everyone knows the history of Israel and the BBC doesn't have to repeat it every damn time. Everyone damn well knows that it was Israel that was defending itself time and time again and kept some of the land they took in counterattacks. But guess what? That is no excuse to remove the population of the areas you take. If England attacks France and France counterattacks by taking all of England, does France have the right to remove all English people from their homeland? Of course not, it would still be an atrocity if they did that. Besides that, even if you defend yourself rightfully, under international law it's not allowed to then go on and take some land of the ones that attacked you. This isn't the 1800s or something, Israel did it in the post WW2 era, in which it was forbidden to do so. Under international law, Israel legally defended itself (and Arabs illegally attacked) but Israel then illegally took land and illegally removed the locals of that land. Strictly speaking both sides are in the wrong. If your opinion is that Israel should be able to keep the land and rightfully removed its inhabitants, fine. Your opinion and you're entitled to it. But you can't call the BBC biased for not sharing your opinion or not explicitly reporting about it. You calling the BBC biased is a bad joke. It's like someone calling the BBC biased if they report about Assad using chemical weapons being bad, because that person thinks it's somehow justified that Assad used them. It makes no sense. That person has the right to think that, but he can't call others biased for not sharing that opinion...
    7
  463. Hahahahaha, America is like 65% white while European countries (even the multicultural ones) are 90-95% white. And in the East that number is 99%. I love it when the shittiest western country with the most violent ghettos and biggest non-white population say they're going to save the white race. It's truly hilarious. The US is barely a white country at all. Not even 2/3 white, the land is historically not white, the people lost all contact with white European culture, etc.. The US is not capable of holding a line and even if they were... they're the first in line to have white people as a minority. Stop deceiving yourselves. The Slavic nations have the best position, then comes Western Europe, then come Canada and Australia and right on the last spot you have US, which is practically already lost as is.
    7
  464. 30.000 troops facing an army of 1.5 million: "i'M noT tRaPpED iN HeRE wItH YoU - yOu'RE TrAPPed In hErE WItH mE" This myth of US military supremacy is really getting out of hand...
    7
  465. Transfer them on a navy vessel, give them proper care and then let them off safely and healthy in.... Libya!
    7
  466. Omdat het een opmerkelijke gebeurtenis is. Niet bepaald van groot belang, maar toch opmerkelijk
    7
  467.  BARBATVS 89  Christians practically destroyed classical Europe. Rome fell 200 years after the christians had ousted the "degeneracy". You can count yourself lucky that our ancestors revived that "degeneracy" of the classical/pagan times during the Renaissance. European civilisation declined under christianity and only flourished again until a counter-movement took place.
    7
  468. Pretty sad how one side seems to want to whitewash everything while the other side is itching to blackwash history and exaggerate how multiethnic we were. It feels like the extremes are taking over
    7
  469.  @HarryS77  That must've caused a syntax error in those moderates attacking him lmao
    7
  470. @Michael P. Being Dutch we spend a lot of time on that too. WW2 is incredibly important to modern history and changed all of Europe. In Germany there is an extra layer to WW2, of course.
    7
  471. +Mason504 The UK can lecture anyone they want as long as they're right. And on this subject they sure as hell are right. If you fuck up you;re going to get lectured. Lecture them back on other subjects if you so desire, but don't tell others to stop lecturing when you damn well know they're in the right
    7
  472. +Lechu Sarmacki You're a fool who wants to rile up Europeans against eachother. Slavic, Germanic, Latin, etc. countries should all unite or at least be friendly. That includes Russia. You forget what separates us in the west with Russia: they used to be part of the European family but their communist revolution separated us. We have to find a way to reconnect with Russia, not separate even further. Communism even brought Russians to commit vile deeds on their Slavic brothers. This is about a united Europe trying to get Russia (the black sheep) to come back.
    7
  473.  @angelene990  Many black people are immigrants to South Africa too. Why do they, non-indigenous South Africans, get free soil? You don't see justice, all you see is race. White or black. The truth is not that simple, it never was. Some black immigrants are equally or even more foreign to SA than whites are
    7
  474. +njits Het grappige is dat zwarte piet stamt van ver voor de slavernij. Het sinterklaasfeest toont veel overeenkomsten met de Wilde Jacht, waarin Wodan/Odin op zijn paard door de lucht (over de daken...) vliegt gevolgd door een dodenleger (een Romeinse historicus, Tacitus, beschrijft hoe een zwartgeschminkte Germaanse stam het dodenleger speelt op een feest...). Volgens Grimm brengt Odin in de Wilde Jacht welvaart (cadeaus...) en neemt een offer mee (wat je in je schoen doet als je hem zet...), maar volgens weer andere verhalen is het ook zo dat Odin mensen die wat misdaan hadden kon ontvoeren naar de onderwereld (de zak van Sinterklaas en Spanje...). En dat feest werd in december gevierd. Wat je al niet kan leren van wikipedia, dat zouden die anti-zwarte piet zeurpieten maar eens moeten doen. Ik bedoel, een duizenden jaren oude traditie waarin een man met een lange witte baard op een paard een groep zwarte figuren leidt, die werd nagespeeld door een Germaanse stam die zichzelf zwartschminkten. Kom op, hoe duidelijk kan het zijn.
    7
  475. Echt hè. Ik heb geen zin om een dier dat net terug is in Nederland gelijk weer tot uitgestorven te verklaren door ze allemaal af te schieten. We zullen schapen etc. moeten beschermen maar ik zie de terugkeer van de wolf als iets positiefs.
    7
  476. It's an inherently rotten system
    7
  477. More like over exaggerated facts that are made to be insults. There is usually some truth in hate speech, but only some.
    7
  478. +Oh Lawd I was watching BBC the other day and they were reporting about there being a "stabbing epidemic" in London. I believe 2 people were stabbed on one day and the week before that 4 more people were stabbed. This was a drastic increase from the normal situation and had been going on for a while. They immediately acknowledged it was a problem and started thinking about ways to solve this issue. They could have easily said "oh America has these shootings that are much worse, so whatever", but no. That is the difference between the US and Europe. We see issues, acknowledge them as issues and attempt to solve those issues. You see an issue and create bogus arguments to make it seem like it's okay. It's not, 17 people died. Instead of coming with the stupid statement of "it happens elsewhere too so it's fine", go and SOLVE this reoccurring issue!
    7
  479. Juist. Vluchtelingen wonen in opvangcentra, mensen zoals in deze video leven op STRAAT. Het is overduidelijk wie prioriteit moet hebben. En die Nederlandse daklozen met een baan betalen per slot van rekening nog belasting ook, bedoeld om Nederland voor ons allemaal woonbaar te maken maar op dit moment zitten ze eigenlijk de toewijzing van Syriërs van diezelfde sociale huurwoningen die zij zo hard nodig hebben te financieren. Eigenlijk is dit gewoon walgelijk beleid van de overheid, ze spugen in het gezicht van de dakloze belastingbetaler en de belastingbetaler in het algemeen.
    6
  480.  @tacticalrobloxiansunited7441  Holy shit you actually believe US-UK culture is more similar than the UK and the rest of the continent they share tens of thousands of years history with and were willing to enter into a bloody political and economic UNION with. Holy shit I'm so done with this "sPeCiAl ReLaTiOnShIp" nonsense
    6
  481. No matter what it is, it's not islam. Islam is a religion of peace, someone once told me. And I know a muslim that is liberal, therefore islam in general can't have any issues with fundamentalism and implying otherwise would be islamophobic. Fundamentalist islam is not real islam. It's... something else. Just a lot of ill-minded people who happen to have one thing in common. Pure coincidence.
    6
  482. Dus als de regering grote fouten maakt moeten wij daar gewoon achter staan? Volgens mij is dat juist het laatste wat we nodig hebben. Kritiek is nodig, zo lang het maar constructief blijft
    6
  483. Global power is not just about hard power, it's about soft power too. For example, if you need to get China to do something, who is more likely to get them to do it? The UK is a global power because it influences you when you do something together, it influences the EU (for now) when the EU decides on something and it influences a multitude of countries when it engages in talks with the G20 and such and because it generally has good relationships with countries that make those countries sympathetic to the UK's cause. The UK is a global power because its voice is heard everywhere and because it influences everyone in some way, and of course its vast number of alliances. Ask yourself, if things ever escalate between the UK and US, who will be more likely to build a big alliance? The UK will almost certainly have the entire EU backing it (in or out doesn't even matter much), if China had to choose between the US and EU they'd more likely pick the EU at this point, if Russia had to choose they'd more likely side with Europe, if all of the African countries had to choose they'd more likely side with the one who gave them by far the most foreign aid (EU), etc. etc. etc. And what countries could the US count on? South Korea and Japan? Even Canada is questionable at best The ability to build a strong alliance through soft power beats hard power. In a US vs the world scenario your hard power is useless. Hell, in an EU + Russia scenario alone your hard power is already useless. Hard power is something that needs to be combined with soft power if you want to be a true global power. Another example is Russia vs US. One on one you might say Russia's military is so powerful that they even have a chance against the US, but if you take soft power into account... the EU is highly likely to side with the US (at this point it's already RIP Russia), China is a lot more likely to side with the economies it's become dependent on than Russia, etc. etc. etc. And what does Russia have? Belarus and maybe a few countries like Kazachstan? Comparing power is not about hard power only. Hard power probably is even less important than the ability to draw countries to your side to form one big block of hard power. There is an official list of countries with the most soft power and countries like France and the UK are always on top. Why? They have a very strong diplomatic network and a lot of countries that would love to help them if they ever need to get something done. The US obviously also is strong on this list, but not above those two. Think of any possible country attacking the UK that is capable of surviving the following alliance of countries that is likely to side with the UK; there is none. It's always pretty much the world vs that one country
    6
  484. Well keeping your hand in your pocket nonchalantly while shaking the other hand with a world leader is pretty bad imo. It´s like the person who shakes hands doesn´t even care. Very very wrong
    6
  485. We have tried to be strong and united for decades. Sadly, muslims generally failed to integrate.
    6
  486. "Fearing her husband, she fled Guatamala (...) they crossed the border at Arizona". So she travelled hundreds of miles through Mexico before reaching the USA, just to flee her husband? Just like the migrants coming to Europe are travelling through dozens of safe countries and then putting themselves on a dangerous sea on a flimsy boat. They aren't fleeing, they want a better life in rich countries. If they were fleeing they wouldn't come all the way to the USA.
    6
  487.  @thadiussean9133  If you think that going to a tribe like this with the idea to convert them (imagine the impact of the first contact you have with the outer world being someone trying to get you to believe in their religion) is the same as talking to a person with education and upbringing in a modern civilisation, I don't know what to tell you... And about brainwashing, the definition is "pressurise (someone) into adopting radically different beliefs by using systematic and often forcible means". This man systematically sought contact (went 4 times in total) and tried to convince them into adopting his religion. Preaching about how his religion is the "one and only truth" and how they can only be "saved" by believing in Jesus puts pressure on them. He is telling them they need to believe or they won't be saved. He is telling them that Jesus' teachings and the bible are super beautiful and the only truth. That is what christianity is about. It is not some kind of idea you exchange or argument you discuss, it is a belief system you are trying to get people into. What he did fits quite well in the definition of brainwashing
    6
  488.  Yen Feng  Nah, in both WW1 and WW2 (especially WW1) your troops were massively outnumbered by other allies and would have little to no chance of taking over the areas we liberated. Your WW1 numbers are downright pathetic if you'd seriously want to attempt such a thing and while numbers in WW2 were considerable (3 million) you couldn't even take the UK if you wanted (7 million men in army and home guard not even counting any Empire forces that could be used, plus the Royal Navy was the primary force protecting all US shipments coming over the Atlantic from the Kriegsmarine, so....). Even France had more troops in Europe mere months after being liberated. Counting up the UK and all smaller allies (let alone the USSR which I haven't mentioned yet), the US would have no chance occupying western states like the USSR could in the East. The USSR was completely unopposed after defeating the Nazis in the areas they took, the US would have to contend with the British Empire and several smaller allies, plus a 3+ million strong French military in 1944-45 (poorly and quickly equipped, though), plus the US Navy depended on the Royal Navy to even get safely to Europe at all (US Navy dealt with Japan, RN fought the battle for the Atlantic plus dealt with European axis navies. Both had only relatively small amounts of ships in the other theatres), plus the USSR would inevitably seize the opportunity to mix in the fights. All in all, nope. And I could write even more about how the statement that the US "saved" Europe is ridiculous in WW2 and even more ridiculous in WW1, but I'll leave it at this for now.
    6
  489. Ik hoop wel dat ze gaan samenwerken. Heb geen zin in een partij die de coalitie tegenwerkt omdat ze verkiezingen willen ipv inhoudelijke verschillen. In ieder geval ben ik blij met de winst van FvD!
    6
  490. What the actual hell is going on in your head... You are wildly overestimating the US here and assuming the EU basically does nothing but sit still and wait to be bombed. Also funny is that you use the "hodge podge" argument here to dismiss the EU but probably would say NATO would obliterate Russia in the same breath. This video is actually very beneficial to the US, considering it basically ignores that if attacked the EU would activate its war economy. It assumes the EU will produce absolutely zero tanks and airplanes and will fight for years with the current underpaid military.
    6
  491. +King David njoku She has an unhealthy lifestyle and proceeds to blame others for not having the clothes she wants. I agree that the hateful comments go too far, but I don't think being supportive of obesity is the way to go. It shouldn't be called "pushing boundaries". She lives an unhealthy life, so now she's limited in her clothing choice. She can fix that herself instead of blaming others for not offering an extremely specific type of clothing for a rare body type.
    6
  492.  @demilembias2527  Not even humans are fucked. Life will just get seriously harder and some areas will be lost to the sea, but extinction is not going to happen. Climate change is absolutely terrible and will have huge impact, but this "world is going to end/we're going extinct" stuff is equally wrong as the denialism. The predictions are quite clear and it's nowhere near extinction.
    6
  493.  @l.c.7445  Well not in Europe, unless you count cheek kisses. This really surprised me
    6
  494. Europe: caught with drugs = placed in a (closed) institution aimed at taking away the addiction and rehabilitating them back into society US: caught with drugs = prison, plain and simple The US truly has no idea how to handle criminals in general, especially not drug addicts
    6
  495. ​ @jannijhof2083  Waar haal je die quote vandaan? De enige quote die er ietwat op lijkt is deze: "They are expected to reject the traditional role of supporting a husband and strive instead for an “equal” relationship in which “gender roles” are interchangeable." Dat is al heel wat anders dan wat je daar schrijft. En geboortebeperking is niet een noodzaak hier. Tenzij je de Nederlandse samenleving ineen wil zien storten... Bevolkingsgroei is een probleem in bijvoorbeeld Afrika. Hier zitten we op 1.4-1.6 kind per gezin en het zou beter zijn als dat iets hoger zou zijn. Lager dan dat en dan zitten we in zeer gevaarlijk terrein. Denk hier maar over na: als we straks op de 1.0 zitten, HALVEERT de Nederlandse bevolking in één generatie. Dat zou een crisis zijn voor onze samenleving. We kampen zelfs nu al met vergrijzing omdat na de bevrijding men tijdelijk zin had meer kinderen te krijgen. Dat heeft een effect op de leefbaarheid van onze samenleving nu en dan hebben we het over een minuscule verandering in de demografie vergeleken met de geboortecijfers die jij kennelijk wil in Nederland. We zitten echt al op het minimum. Een geboortecijfer dat veel lager zit dan nu zou een regelrechte catastrofe zijn. Krimp is niet erg, ik vind het toch al te druk in NL en zoals je zegt, het milieu. Daar ben ik het wel mee eens. Maar te veel krimp is absolute chaos. Moet je je voorstellen dat we in een generatie van 17 miljoen naar 9-10 miljoen gaan... Nee, Afrika heeft geboortebeperking nodig, wij eerder een verhoging van het geboortecijfer. Het hoeft niet te groeien, maar we moeten wel dichter bij de 2.0 komen en een stabielere bevolking hebben. Over de vermeende lijn in Baudet's uitspraken, ik vind het altijd bijzonder hoe hij keer op keer haarfijn uitlegt dat hij staat voor een inclusieve liberale natie-staat waar iedereen op zijn individuele kwaliteiten wordt beoordeeld, maar vervolgens allerlei uitspraken worden geïnterpreteerd als iets wat haaks daarop staat. Hij hoeft maar één keer boreaal te zeggen en dan is hij letterlijk een nazi volgens sommigen. Ik snap dat gewoon niet. Eén woord en dan worden allerlei genuanceerde en uitgebreide uitspraken over een liberale en inclusieve natie-staat opzij geschoven ten faveure van een vage theorie over fascisme en racisme. Al zijn uitspraken worden op de meest negatieve manier mogelijk geïnterpreteerd ipv in samenhang met andere uitspraken die hij heeft gedaan.
    6
  496. Yeah.... When we in Europe experienced mass illegal migration by "refugees" (really a mixture of real refugees and economic migrants), we called it the refugee crisis and it was our top priority to stop it asap. And the EU did stop the main stream of migrant within a few months, luckily. Meanwhile in America you've been experiencing this level of illegal migration for decades on end and because many politicians are so crazy, they call this a "human right" and ignore what is happening. Honestly, I can't believe that there are actual refuge cities in the US that protect illegal migrants directly against the will of the central government. It's just crazy. And it is all because they are making the line between legal and illegal migration disappear. They just don't make any distinction. I really feel for you guys, because these people just can't be argued with. They don't apply logic at all. Our politicians are usually way more to the left than yours, but I'm happy they at least have the presence of mind to know the difference between legal and illegal migration and they even recognised that multiculturalism in Europe is not working and won't work.
    6
  497. She's happy with the result and wants to tour America now to get a proper career as a singer there.
    6
  498. Dus als je voor de Nederlandse waarden bent, ben je voor het blanke ras? Wat bedoelt die vrouw precies te zeggen? Kan een niet-blanke Nederlander niet voor de bescherming van Nederlandse waarden zijn? Zijn die waarden en cultuur rasgebonden? Waar slaat dit op?
    6
  499. +Richard Upinya Here in the EU we manufacture specific types of steel and aluminium that the US cannot produce . So any US company that needs this specific type of steel/aluminium that we produce, will have to raise its prices and might have to fire some employees. It's not like US and EU products are identical. This is why he says his hands are tied. He HAS to buy from the only source of the types of metal he needs. And those sources are not American.
    6
  500. Hopefully one day, but right now we're somewhat annoyed by Russia continuously trying to spread fake news in the EU and US and of course their intervention in Ukraine. Before Ukraine we actually had a pretty good relationship, y'know. The EU and Russia were no enemies before that. Even our King would visit Russia and be friendly with Putin (the Netherlands). After this Ukraine thing simmers down we'll probably be friends again.
    6
  501. Oh absolutely. And they're succesful too. They made the majority of the world believe that US soldiers made up 95% of the forces in Europe and made Omaha the reason D-day was succesful rather than a screwup that cost many US lives and almost cost the Allies the operation. They love putting everyone else down and boasting about their own contribution. Another nice one is the idea that during the Cold War, Western Europe was helpless and 'Murica protected them as the hero they are, rather than the fact that the Western allies needed eachother desperately to make do and it was very much a mutual need.
    6
  502. The Indian nationalists did, yes. They wanted the Empire to fall in India so they sided with the Japanese. I even think they fought the British Indian forces in the battle mentioned in this video.
    6
  503.  Johnny Fishfingers  So it's happening in Norway too? I'm Dutch and over here in the Netherlands our government has been gripped by this neo-liberal idea of breaking apart our social services as well. "Marktwerking" they call it; privatising everything for maximum efficiency, they say. We've broken down our nationalised healthcare in favour of a system that Obama tried to copy later on with Obamacare: private insurance companies but everyone must insure themselves to keep the prices low. Those who can't afford it get government money to pay for insurance, so everyone is insured. It works, it works well, but there's a discussion going on whether we should go back to national healthcare and whether that was superior. In many other areas we're simply worse off with government austerity, which especially kicked in after the economic crisis. Nowadays, and this might be familiar to you too or perhaps it's just a Dutch thing, the government talks of the "participation society", which means civilians are expected to be more and more independent from the government and must take care of eachother so that the government doesn't have to. Essentially, we're expected to take our sick grandmother into our house and take care of them instead of sending them to an elderly home, so to speak. Guess where this is going... I wonder whether this neo-liberal trend is happening across Europe. Any of the Scandinavian countries were honestly the last places I'd expect this to be happening too. I thought it was just us in the Netherlands. And in Germany it always was terrible for poorer people and pensioners. Now more generally about capitalism, I don't think we're necessarily a victim of the market unless we personally are involved in it. Here in the Netherlands we have a pension system in which we pay small fees into a pension fund that is invested worldwide. This way we built an insane pension fund of right now 1400 billion euros for 17 million people. Just to illustrate how impressive this is: our pension fund is 60% of the EU total, just for 17 million people. Because of our collective use of the market. And if I have it right you have an even more impressive system with investing oil money into the market and funding social policies with it, also worth a trillion or more? Capitalism can be spinned to be to the benefit of the entire population. And there is an unspeakable amount of money left to claim just in tax evasion. All it requires is international action against tax havens. We used to be a notorious tax haven too, but in Europe we already are enacting policies against this phenomenon, which also has sparked the realisation that we must stop taking part in it. Regarding wages, yes that's a real problem with capitalism. If you ask me there should be more than just a minimum wage. Perhaps there should be a minimum wealth distribution percentage within companies. And a general salary + bonus limit to the CEOs and such. Normal rich is rich enough, exorbitantly rich is unnecessary and excessive. In the Netherlands we have a salary limit for government officials, which is around 300k per year. That's an excellent salary, but not exorbitant. Maybe corporate leaders could use similar limits. A fair percentage of the profit should also go to every employee, connecting them to the performance of the company. The biggest problem capitalism has today is globalism. We have no more control over corporations, they're no longer tied to our societies. They're entities that float above nations, looking for areas where they can gain maximum profit. This means settling in tax havens to pay minimal taxes. This means that if a country raises taxes or otherwise impedes corporations' max profit, the corporations will leave . International companies have unprecedented influence over our governments for this reason: we simply don't control them. The only remedy is to be too big for them to leave (think the size of the EU or US) and even then there are limits to what we can do as you seriously downgrade your competitionposition with too limiting rules. If you ask me, capitalism is workable as long as we can properly regulate it, but globalism is undermining that possibility. We can't battle tax evasion when corporations can go wherever they please and other countries take part in this race to the bottom of lowering taxes to rake in jobs. We need to either take global action against things like tax evasion or we must somehow tie corporations to their home country again. Then we can exert control over them and make capitalism at least sufferable and at best a pretty good system even for the lower classes.
    6
  504. +mywife's boyfriend It's just a meaningless joke, but I suppose as you do with BBC reports you have to search for something malicious behind it. And you call me a snake, but I think what you're doing to the BBC is even more dishonest. Those people work hard to at least try to present the news in an unbiased manner and you just come along and claim it's fake news without any semblance of evidence. That's what you've done on several videos of theirs. It's fine if you think the BBC is dishonest or don't like the BBC, but when you openly make a claim make sure you can actually produce arguments/evidence to support them.
    6
  505.  @Fyrebrand18  Nah they were allowed to fight alongside white troops, unlike in the US army. Hell even Nazi Germany had black troops fighting alongside white soldiers, and contrary to popular belief they had plenty of them in North Africa. But the thing is, they were extremely rare compared to white soldiers so it makes no sense to make a significant portion of the German soldiers in a game black. About your argument that most soldiers were backline support, etc. Most soldiers regardless of race were in such positions. Enlisted is enlisted and being deployed is being deployed. Logistics are no less important than frontline troops and may be attacked like any other soldier out there. Let's not act like logistics and similar troops are free of engaging in combat or being fired upon.
    6
  506. Ik heb alleen geleend wat ik anders via de basisbeurs had gekregen, nu duizenden euro's schuld. En ik kreeg geld van m'n ouders om mijn studiegeld en boeken te betalen dus moet je nagaan hoe anderen die dat niet hadden nu in de puree zitten. Dat kan gewoon niet.
    6
  507. BBC always does this, I hate it too
    6
  508. Did you even watch the video? It's an honest report about Hungary. They chose to preserve culture and national identity in exchange for several civil liberties. It's a choice you can agree or disagree with. Hungary protected its culture but at the same time reduced the freedom of its citizens. It's a plain fact, whether you like it or not.
    6
  509.  @wheneggsdrop1701  You assume that the good is unique to Capitalism. It is not. There are systems that theoretically are economically as sound as Capitalism is, while preventing the huge disparity between rich and poor that Capitalism also has. The problem is, are we willing to risk Capitalism (which I would describe as an okay system because at least it works despite all the faults) to try one of those theoretically superior systems out?
    6
  510.  @davidgn40  It's not lack of education that does that, it's lack of integration. They fail to become proper parts of the culture they enter, so they flock together in ghettos and structurally fall behind the natives. How can a migrant child ever compete with a native child if he has grown up with parents speaking a foreign language at home? His very first day at school he'll already have a significant disadvantage he needs to catch up with. He has to properly learn the language even though he was born here, he has to still learn to be a part of this society even though he was born in it. If the parents don't properly integrate, the children are already at a massive disadvantage from the very start. Education is available to them equally, at least it is here in Europe. They still fall behind.
    6
  511. If a mixed race person is born from a Russian and African, that person can be Russian
    6
  512. I agree every culture has its flaws adn its high points. Back then we had serious flaws. Right now we are easily the best culture on the planet. It fluctuates. 2500 years ago India was probably the best culture on the planet. Before that, the Egyptians were the best culture. Before that, certain Middle Eastern cultures were the best on the planet. It's not like we in the west are the be all end all best culture, but for the past centuries we have certainly been.
    6
  513. +ladymusiclover And towards black supremacy ideals? I don't see why we should allow black people to do the same things that you would consider white supremacy if white people did it. It makes no sense.
    6
  514. @Tiemen Weistra Het "Kalergi plan" is onzin. Massa-immigratie komt door globalisme gecombineerd met het tegen willen gaan van vergrijzing en het wanhopig proberen te vullen van veelal lage inkomen banen die Nederlanders niet meer willen doen. Voor globalisten maakt cultuur en saamhorigheid niet uit, ze zien alleen maar de banen die gevuld moeten worden en de snelste manier om dat te doen is natuurlijk immigratie. Ze zijn blind voor de polarisatie e.d. problemen die het creëert. Kalergi was een Europees nationalist die pleitte voor een verenigd Europa om de economische en militaire macht van de VS te evenaren. Hij pleitte er ook voor dat Europa Afrika zou koloniseren. Kalergi heeft vandaag de dag nog een genootschap die zijn politieke nalatenschap vertegenwoordigt en zij zijn nog altijd Europese nationalisten (in de zin van de EU tot een nationalistisch land maken) en stonden tijdens de migratiecrisis bijvoorbeeld voor strenge bewaking van Europese grenzen om migranten buiten te houden. Het complot van het "Kalergi plan" komt van een passage uit zijn boek waarin hij voorspelt dat door globalisering de toekomstige mens gemixt zou zijn. Maar onderdeel van zijn politieke nalatenschap is absoluut niet een plan om dat te bevorderen of waar te maken. De Kalergi prijs wordt uitgereikt aan personen die zich hebben ingezet voor verdere Europese éénwording. Het doel van Kalergi was om van Europa een land te maken. Merkel ontving deze prijs in 2010 en dat is niet gerelateerd aan de migratiecrisis. Stop met het verspreiden van complottheorieën, dat draagt niets bij aan het gevecht tegen het globalistische denken en geeft ze eerder munitie om je een "domme populist" te noemen en vrolijk verder te gaan met de massa-immigratie. Als je tegen massa-immigratie bent moet je goede argumenten invoeren waarom het een drama is voor NL. Argumenten waar globalisten geen antwoord op hebben. Polarisatie, segregatie, overpopulatie, verhoogde criminaliteit (door zelfsegregatie en achterstanden in onderwijs en taal), verwatering van onze cultuur vanwege constante concessies die we moeten maken (zoals Zwarte Piet als één van vele aspecten daarvan) en veel meer zijn goede punten. Maar geen complottheorieën, stop daar alsjeblieft mee want het helpt niemand.
    6
  515. I think a big mistake of this video is that the war industry of Russia and the US are not considered. Russia will not just sit and wait until its air force is depleted, it will pump out record numbers of fighter jets (and any other weapons that may be needed) with its war industry. The US would do the same in an all out war. So the idea of the Russian Air Force being demolished doesn't make much sense, unless their industry is somehow incapacitated (which to my knowledge the US is not powerful enough to do. At least not without nuclear weapons).
    6
  516. Tibet, Taiwan, South China Sea. And I do love that China, while incredibly rich and powerful, never attempted to take over the world. However, in a modern globalised world, will China still remain to itself when it regains its wealth and power? There are no guarantees and its behaviour in the aforementioned territories implies it won't.
    6
  517. Blame the Common law system for that. They're stupid enough to believe that if the prosecutor tries all he can to incriminate the suspect and the defence tries all they can to praise him into the heavens you will find the truth in the middle. The Civil law system tasks the prosecutor with finding the truth, then the defence checks whether the dossier is correct or not and then the judge checks again what he thinks the truth is. The Common law system is inherently less centered around the truth, especially in America. And even Civil law systems can have issues with overzealous prosecutors, let alone Common law systems in which they are essentially supposed to be overzealous. Plus the fact that prosecutors are a political function in the US doesn't help (hurray for being abnormally strict just to get votes for the next election I guess)
    6
  518. They deserved to win, but second place is great for Croatia anyway
    6
  519. Omdat Nederlanders geen terroristen zijn, behalve wat linkse uitzonderingen als de moordenaar van Pim Fortuyn
    6
  520. They're just recapping what happened to some Russian enemies of the state abroad. And while it isn't certain Russia committed these killings... it is very possible that they did. Nerve agents can only really be manufactured by states or other rich entities, so it's highly probable that a state killed Litvinenko and the last one. And the most suspicious state in that regard is Russia, as they are the only ones with a reason to kill these men. It doesn't have to be Russia, but let's be honest they're the prime suspect here
    6
  521. Well that all sounds pretty good actually. Shame that reality doesn't work like that, also not for South Africa.
    6
  522. En waar doen ze dit ook alweer voor? Geen idee. Lijkt er meer op dat ze even zin hebben om herrie te schoppen en de gele hesjes uit Frankrijk kopiëren als excuus. In Frankrijk doen ze het voor de verhoging van de benzineprijs (en wat ze daar doen is al overdreven), maar in België? Ordinaire relschoppers
    6
  523.  @leifharmsen  Yeah, they claim the EU is undemocratic, but they should also take a long hard look at their own while they're at it. First past the post creates this terrible two-party system with little chance for newer parties to be represented. And one party absolutely dominates, leaving vast swathes of the country unrepresented. Give me proportional representation over that any day
    6
  524. Of course! Anything bad that happens in the west is always caused by Russia. Surely it can't be our own depravity???
    6
  525. Eusunt Dac One people, one planet and a large variety of beautiful cultures and civilisations. Let's not kill that variety by mixing everything. Leaving every culture to itself will create the highest amount of variety we can attain and I believe this would be a beautiful thing. No more western interventions abroad and no more migration to the west. Leave eachother alone and let all the cultures flourish, I say
    6
  526. That and Binkov misses one very important thing. If the Battle for the Atlantic never happens (which only happened to secure trade routes from the US to Britain, which doesn't happen in this timeline), the British would have the biggest navy on the planet ready to fight Japan and protect its commonwealth trade routes instead. And Germany wouldn't be so hardpressed to attack British assets in the Atlantic to begin with, because the trade between Canada and the UK would be the only one more or less worth interrupting. So in this timeline, the UK has a huge naval force available to fight Japan early on.
    6
  527. You are part of the European Economic Area. If we (EU) enter into a trade war with the US you follow. You are tied to the EU economically, just not politically or militarily. And even politically you're partly tied to EU economic policy.
    6
  528.  @GeoHdReal  That neo-fascist nonsense? It's not worth reading. I've done it so others don't have to. Seen the video too.
    6
  529. Jammer dat Wilders het heeft afgelast, maar ik begrijp het ook wel. Het punt over haatdragende moslims is gemaakt (en hoe) en hoewel Wilders zelf bescherming geniet, hebben participanten in de wedstrijd dat niet en kunnen ze mogelijk doelwit zijn van terreur. Nu staat alleen Wilders op een dodenlijst
    6
  530. Vertel maar wat hier propaganda aan is...
    6
  531. Americans are desperately trying to protect their influence over the EU. It's starting to look pathetic at this point. The future of Europe will be one with friendly relations between Russia and the West, as it should be. We're not in the Cold War anymore
    6
  532.  Alistair Bolden  That's ridiculous. If the US would invade Europe the UK would obviously not help them.... I think you have a bit too high of an opinion of your SpEcIaL rElAtIOnShIP if you think the UK will actually ever support an aggressor attacking western democracies. UK foreign policy has for half a millennium been to preserve stability and balance of power in Europe. They would never join an aggressor that seeks to control Europe and their allies. Never have and never will. In this scenario, the US is Napoleonic France, the US is the German Empire, the US is Nazi Germany and like always it will be the United Kingdom fighting to stop their aggression. And if you ever wonder who the UK is more closely allied with, just consider that with the rest of Europe they were willing to join into a political and economic union and with the US they wouldn't even consider something as deep as that. You have a close military alliance, sure, but will never have something as deep as what the UK had with the EU. It's obvious who the UK is closer to politically and it isn't the US. Our values are so closely matched that we have European constitutional rights and a European Court of Human Rights that acts like a pan-European supreme court on these matters (this is not related to the EU by the way). The UK would never even consider entering into something like this with the US as your values differ too much.
    6
  533.  @mirceskiandrej  Systems don't exist to create maximum output or profit for companies, they exist to increase the quality of life for the people. This means a proper balance has to be found between economic growth and stability. In my opinion we're currently out of balance. Balance isn't even kept in mind, as the goal of most actors within the economy is maximum profit/growth regardless of the consequences. Recessions do not need to happen and are the cause of overextending economic growth beyond what the consumers even want. More steady growth seems superior to me. It sacrifices some short term profit for a much more stable future with much fewer recessions.
    6
  534. They only care about non-white people, the white cultures should get diversified according to them
    6
  535.  @AlanWattResistance  That's what Christians thought when they took over Europe by force. Why not return the favour? ;)
    6
  536. If that was the goal we'd not be overextending our growth all the time, causing recessions. Wonder for whom maximum growth is actually a good thing.... HMMMMM.
    6
  537. No. It survived 800 years, it can survive another if we rebuild it the traditional way and store the real artifacts there. It's up to us to be careful with it
    6
  538.  @Ixiah27  There is more evidence for Jesus' existence than a figure like Plato, more than most historical figures that nobody has any qualms assuming did exist. He existed, but the real question is whether his miracles and claims of being a god were real. You can guess the answer
    6
  539. +Steven Strain The EU and Russia both make up for about 25% of the global arms trade. In terms of funding the military the EU's budget is 226 billion USD, Russia's is 69 billion USD. The EU's budget is second in the world behind the US, with China only a few billion behind it on third place. Yes, Russia's economy is centered around war more than the EU's is, but in the end both economies have about the same share in the arms trade. Russia just relies on it more than the EU. For the EU it's just a small part of its huge economy, for Russia the arms trade is very important. That doesn't mean they can "place rich Europe under its thumb". You're acting as if the EU barely has a war industry...
    6
  540.  @cristosl  Last time I checked there needs to be a minimum 95% vaccination rate for the population to be immune to the targeted disease. That makes it even more nonsensical to deny vaccines to the poor.
    6
  541. Een oplossing waar politici al sinds 2015 over roepen. Het gaat gewoon allemaal veel te langzaam, als die oplossing er ooit al komt. Er is op dit moment te veel onenigheid binnen de EU over een oplossing, dus op een gegeven moment moet je dan maar als land doen wat je kan ipv alsmaar wachten. Ideeën zijn leuk, maar in de tussentijd moet je ook laten zien waar je voor staat. Dat hoeft niet meteen een structurele oplossing te zijn, maar in ieder geval moet je de burger laten zien dat je iets doet. Bijvoorbeeld wat Italië deed toen Salvini aan de macht kwam. Hopla, havens dicht. Is dit een structurele oplossing? Nee, nog niet, maar het doet wat je op dit moment kan doen terwijl je aan die bredere oplossing werkt. De huidige cultuur van niks doen en jaren aan een oplossing werken terwijl het in de tussentijd helemaal uit de hand loopt moet stoppen. Dat creëert serieuze onrust in de samenleving. De daadkracht ontbreekt gewoon, althans zo lijkt het.
    6
  542.  @MZD15  If the US would use modern slaves to build new stadiums, then yes I will boycott their world cup as well
    6
  543. GIVE ALL GUNS AND POVERTY IS FIXED BECAUSE MUH CONSTITUTION AND FOUNDING FATHERS AND STUFF - Cyan Deich, 2018
    6
  544. Blijf maar door gaan met de door immigratie aangezwengelde overpopulatie in Nederland. Elk jaar 100k mensen (de stad Delft) erbij met alle gevolgen van dien voor de dichtslibbende infrastructuur en achterblijvende woningbouw. De natuur en algehele leefbaarheid van Nederland staat steeds meer onder druk en de alsmaar groeiende bevolking is daar de grootste factor in. Het moet maar eens een keer stoppen, om nog niet eens over integratieproblematiek en de impact op de cultuur te praten (polarisatie, segregatie, leerachterstanden, criminaliteit e.d. hangen allemaal samen). Als de massa immigratie niet stopt is Nederland over een paar decennia helemaal volgebouwd (elk jaar het equivalent van de stad Delft bij, die allemaal ergens moeten werken en wonen, dus verstedelijking en industrialisering die maar niet stopt) en kan de infrastructuur ons reisgedrag niet meer aan (schade aan economie en meer). We zijn een klein landje, we zijn het meest dichtbevolkte land in Europa naast enkele eilandstaten en dat hoeft wat mij betreft niet nóg verder uit de hand te lopen. Dit eindigt in "randstad Nederland" waar heel ons land hevig verstedelijkt is. Ik ben nog jong (24) maar zelfs ik heb al meegemaakt hoe mijn dorp is verdubbeld in grootte en nu een middelgrote stad is geworden. Mijn ouders hebben waarschijnlijk kunnen zien hoe mijn dorp vertwintigvoudigde. Jullie zullen waarschijnlijk ook voorbeelden kennen van de drastisch uitdijende verstedelijking. Het moet stoppen als wij Nederland een leefbare en fijne woonplek willen houden. Steeds minder natuur, steeds meer stad. Waar eindigt het? Wat voor een toekomst gaan we tegemoet? Daar denken de meeste politieke partijen niet aan, die louter de korte termijn voordelen van immigratie zien (bestrijding vergrijzing, economische bijdrage) maar de toekomst van Nederland volledig verloochenen. Ze zijn zo blind voor de lange termijn gevolgen van beleid dat ze niet eens de relatie tussen 100k mensen per jaar binnenloodsen en een woningtekort zien. Onze politici lijden aan chronische kortzichtigheid en een drastisch gebrek aan visie. De massa-immigratie moet stoppen.
    6
  545. The confederacy was morally abhorrent even by the standards of their time.
    6
  546. Can you lot just stop blindly defending him for a sec, ffs!
    6
  547. Luckily the EU gets it now. The NGOs are the only remaining issue and I'm sure the EU will find a way to stop this nonsense
    6
  548.  @YraxZovaldo  Ja, die moet je allemaal blijven verdedigen, tot op het punt waar je goede argumenten voor verandering hebt. Voor stierenvechten is dat dierenleed. Maar gezien zwarte piet niet racistisch is is er geen argument tegen het huidige Sinterklaasfeest.
    6
  549. Die Syriërs zouden best langer in opvangcentra kunnen blijven. En tijdelijk, totdat het weer veilig is terug te keren.
    6
  550. Christianity coming to Europe is the greatest disease that plagues the western world. Look at Japan; secular, but still in contact with their ancient mythological beliefs and culture . The answer to the problem of the dead god (whose death is inevitable in any intelligent society), is a spiritual belief system with strong traditions. Those cultures can combine the spiritual with science and progress. Europe had a similar belief system in classical times. Christianity brutally murdered it and took its place, then inevitably died (as any montheistic religion eventually will, if humans are intelligent enough to see through its evident lies). Sprituality however, does not have that problem, because the pre-christian belief systems were rooted in celebrating nature itself and mythological archetypes. Nature is not a lie, nor are the Jungian archetypes that mythological gods represent. That is why Japan is secular, but still with a strong set of moral values, while the west is secular but struggling with a dead god.
    6
  551. The UK is ranked higher than the US in global soft power and political influence. Just so you know... The US' main strength is its hard power, but for global diplomatic influence you need to go to Western Europe for the heavy hitters.
    6
  552. Hoezo? Moeten we activisten die plotseling doodziek worden (al dan niet door de Russische overheid) negeren? Ik vind dit best nieuwswaardig, als ze maar niet te snel Rusland overal van beschuldigen en neutraal blijven vind ik het goed
    6
  553. Voor mij ligt het eraan wanneer je het doet (als het kind nog niet ontwikkeld is zie ik niet wat er mis mee is) en wat de context is (ziekte, gevaar voor de moeder, verkrachting, of gewoon een ongewild kind?). Ikzelf zou het echter niet doen denk ik, tenzij het om een of andere reden echt moet
    6
  554. Yes, he only changed the Irish question, which was the entire reason May's deal failed. So this could be typified as a deal made by both May and Johnson.
    6
  555. Yes, helemaal mee eens. We moeten terug naar hoe het was voor het Oekraïne-fiasco. Ik weet nog dat toen de Koning zelfs op bezoek ging bij Poetin, zo goed waren onze relaties. Gewoon lekker handel drijven, stabiliteit in onze regio creëren en een amicale relatie onderhouden. Alleen dan zal Rusland stoppen met al die inmenging en agressie in Oost-Europa. Als wij Rusland als vijand behandelen krijgen we dat gewoon terug. Als wij een betrouwbaar bondgenoot en handelspartner van Rusland zijn zullen zij dat ook voor ons zijn. Dat is beter voor iedereen. Misschien kan dat zelfs leiden tot een hecht bondgenootschap tussen oost en west zoals dat voor het communisme was, wat prachtig zou zijn. Rusland moet weer volwaardig onderdeel van de Europese familie worden na al die tijd. Dit is in het belang van heel Europa; stabiliteit, vrede en handel. Nu ik er over nadenk is dit ook de reden dat wij in het westen steeds meer met elkaar optrokken ipv zoals vroeger een vijandige/oppositionele relatie tussen Duitsland, Frankrijk en het VK. Laten we die vijandigheden ook doorbreken met Rusland. Het kan, we waren al heel goed onderweg voor 2011.
    6
  556. Dat komt door al die complottheorieën. Het is een soort traditie in Europa om de Joden dan weer de schuld te geven. En die complottheorieën bestaan doordat men bang is dat hun eigen land uiteindelijk verdwijnt. Dat zie je in die "great replacement" theorie, bijvoorbeeld. Deels gestoeld in de waarheid, als reactie op de massale toestroom van migranten en de snelle verandering die onze landen doormaakt hebben daardoor, maar nog verder uitvergroot en overdreven door te zeggen dat onze landen daar niet alleen te veel door zijn veranderd en slechter door zijn geworden, maar ook dat heel de Europese bevolking wordt vervangen door migranten en natuurlijk dat Joden daar achter zitten. Die complottheorieën zijn onzin en ook gevaarlijk zoals je in deze video ziet, maar toch is het belangrijk te begrijpen dat er meestal wat achter zit dat geen onzin is. Het is inherent aan mensen om dingen die wij niet begrijpen naar aanleiding van verhalen simpeler te maken. Dat deden wij met religie en dat is waarom complottheorieën van alle tijden zijn. Maar er zit altijd wat achter, altijd een écht gevoel van onbehagen gebaseerd op iets tastbaars. Wanneer het slecht gaat met de samenleving zul je steeds meer van die complottheorieën zien om uit te leggen wat er fout gaat en een zondebok aan te wijzen. Hoe meer wij onze landen veranderen met massale migratie en hoe instabieler de economie, hoe meer aanhangers van complottheorieën je zal zien. En als we het bont genoeg maken zullen die complottheorieën zeer angstaanjagende proporties aannemen. Het meest extreme voorbeeld is het nationaal socialisme, het gevolg van de jarenlange vernederingen en ongelooflijk moeilijke tijden na de Eerste Wereldoorlog. Op een gegeven moment zijn mensen zo gefrustreerd dat ze zeer ontvankelijk worden voor dat soort verhalen. En ik denk dat het naïef is om te denken dat dat niet nog een keer zou kunnen gebeuren. Hoe moeilijker men het heeft, hoe meer men tribaal gaat denken en hoe radicaler men wordt.
    6
  557. +Patrick They do need to comply. If Facebook doesn't, they'll be fined 2 BILLION euros (or dollars, don't remember), which is 4% of their income. If they want access to the EU market, they need to comply. The EU is usually their biggest market, or at least one of their biggest markets, so not having access is simply not an option. Facebook has 239 million users in the US and 370 million in Europe, to give you an idea of how important the EU market is to them. It's not an option to leave Europe, from a business perspective, so they need to comply with the GDPR. The question is, will this apply only to Europeans or to all Facebook users around the world?
    6
  558. + Джон Скрельник More like Turkey is/was Greek...
    6
  559. Het beleid van die partij is ook niets waard. Nog nooit zijn we zo belabberd bestuurd, echt nog nooit.
    6
  560. Not only that, she thinks Biden has a chance because his coalition is the same as hers lmao
    6
  561.  @miriamichai158  Different people have different tastes. I think this is absolutely horrible. Not just bad, but horrible. If you like it that's fine, but I don't and many others agree with me.
    6
  562. In Africa Jesus is portrayed as African, in Asia Jesus is portrayed as Asian, in Europe Jesus is portrayed as European. In truth, he was a light brown-skinned Jew from the Levant region. Get over yourself. https://www.nairaland.com/240898/interesting-many-faces-jesus
    6
  563. Hier is de VVD zo goed in... jarenlang een probleem laten bestaan totdat het systeem piept en kraakt en aan het einde (vaak ook naar aanleiding van hard geroep vanuit de samenleving of de opkomst van andere politieke partijen zoals de FvD of PVV) opeens erkennen dat er iets mis is en een (schijn?)oplossing opperen. En als ze herkozen zijn, op naar het volgende wanbeleid. De doodzondes van de VVD: - PAS laten voortbestaan ondanks waarschuwingen vanuit de RvS, waardoor ons hele land maanden op slot stond qua bouw en meer. - een beleid van massaimmigratie zonder dat wordt gedacht aan hoeveel NL aan kan. Zelfs de woningbouw houdt het niet bij als ze op volle toeren bouwen. - niets doen aan falende immigratiewetten die het migranten toestaan om letterlijk 5 keer achtereen te procederen en inmiddels 10 jaar in NL te bivakkeren. - een pijnlijk tekort aan visie voor de toekomst, altijd maar achter de feiten aanlopen (en zelfs in het achter de feiten aanlopen zijn ze betrekkelijk slecht omdat ze een probleem vaak jaren laten bestaan/escaleren voordat er iets gebeurt, laat staan dat ze problemen met een goede visie van de toekomst van NL kunnen voorkomen). De strategie van de VVD is om altijd nuchter en redelijk te lijken, maar in realiteit hebben ze geen visie en zijn ze totaal afwachtend wat betreft de toekomst van NL. Ze zien wel wat er gebeurt en dan kijken ze pas wat voor beleid er moet komen. In deze tijd van veranderingen hebben we juist visie nodig. Mensen die van tevoren zien wanneer er iets fout zou kunnen gaan en hoe wij goed voorbereid en planmatig de toekomst tegemoet gaan. Dat heb je niet als je lekker "nuchter" achter de feiten aan loopt in dit soort turbulente tijden. Achter de feiten aanlopen kan ons land fatale schade toedoen. Als politici de BASALE competentie hadden om bijvoorbeeld te kijken naar hoeveel migranten NL aankan qua huisvesting e.d. ipv de grenzen open te gooien, hadden we geen huizencrisis gehad.
    6
  564. We moeten ze aanpakken, tuurlijk. Maar ik heb serieuze bedenkingen bij wat voor "oplossing" D66 te dien aanzien zou bedenken, gezien hun beleid en retoriek van de laatste paar jaren. Mijn vertrouwen hebben ze niet
    6
  565. Europa overspoelen met migranten
    6
  566. Het grappige van de Balkan landen is dat het land dat het snelste lid wordt waarschijnlijk andere Balkan landen zal blokkeren als zij ook willen toetreden. Als Servië bij wijze van de "race" wint, zullen ze waarschijnlijk nooit de toetreding van bijvoorbeeld Kosovo toelaten en vice versa (en voor toetreding moeten alle lidstaten goedkeuring geven). Dus wie het eerst komt, het eerst maalt
    6
  567. The EU Parliament is riddled with money-grabbers. It's such a shame. The culture in there needs to change. I don't want the EU to turn into the corrupt mess that the US government is with their "donations" from companies.
    6
  568. +YraxZovaldo Tja het uiterlijk kennen we natuurlijk niet precies. Het boek waar ik het over heb is in het jaar 98 geschreven... Het enige dat zeker is is dat men zichzelf zwart schminkte voor de traditie. En mij lijkt dat de kleding, rode lippen, het kroeshaar en de oorbellen daar zeker niet bij horen. Van mij mag alle prullaria die er in de 19e eeuw aan is toegevoegd weg, als het zwart schminken maar blijft. Dat is het belangrijkste. Als men vandaag aanstoot neemt aan kroeshaar en wat dan ook zou ik zeggen, laten we Zwarte Piet zo veel mogelijk naar het origineel terug brengen en het allemaal weg doen behalve het zwarte gezicht. En wat ook wel grappig is is dat de zwarte figuren uit de mythe mogelijk gevallen strijders moeten voorstellen die de Germanen vereerden, oftewel de originele Zwarte Piet zou zomaar eens de geest van een gevallen Germaanse held kan voorstellen. Dus dan zou Zwarte Piet onze eigen voorouders afbeelden met een zwart gezicht. Bijna het tegenovergestelde van slavernij
    6
  569. Ik begrijp dat ze een signaal willen afgeven dat ze respect hebben voor de moslims die hierdoor geraakt zijn, maar tegelijkertijd voelt het niet gemakkelijk omdat elders in de wereld vrouwen geforceerd zich moeten bedekken en dit als teken van disrespect kan worden gezien jegens hen.
    6
  570. Can the EU defend itself against a US invasion?
    6
  571.  @farahansen5582  Er zijn nooit slaven naar Nederland gehaald, slimmerik. Slavernij was in heel Europa al verboden voordat we überhaupt met de handel begonnen... Wij brachten slaven van Afrika naar Amerika. Er zijn geen slaven in Nederland geweest, dat was toendertijd al verboden
    6
  572. And since the Dutch and German form tank divisions together, would Germany be fighting Belgium too? Very awkward indeed
    5
  573. The Netherlands is a much better place to live than the US. Belgium is probably better too
    5
  574. America loses that HARD. They should do NATO vs the world, that one has a chance
    5
  575. NATIONAL SOCIALIST
    5
  576. It is not because he thought they are not nice, it is to say that a building should be a reflection of the place it resides in. I like the buildings he showed, but he is correct that it just doesn't fit Japan. I'm Dutch myself so I would love to see those buildings being built right here. But the thing with architecture is... you can't build an American landhouse in the Dutch countryside, it will look massively out of place, no matter whether you like the building itself or not. A building has to FIT its surroundings, be connected with the people in those surroundings, etc. There is more to buildings than just beauty, they are connected with the character of the culture that built it. That is where the true value of architecture lies. We feel connected with traditional buildings because they represent who we are, not just because they are beautiful.
    5
  577. +Allen Simpson That makes no sense whatsoever, since just about all over Europe we used to believe in the same or extremely similar gods, just with different names. And in its core, all variations of paganism were about the same. Well.... I suppose there are idiots everywhere causing hostilities over semantics. You make a good point. Still, paganism was nowhere near as bad as the Abrahamic religions in this regard. It didn't have the idea of believers being "chosen people" and the rest lesser (Judaism), nor an inherent hostility towards other religions like Christianity (burning heretics at the stake at times, forbidding and/or Christianising every symbol and tradition that wasn't Christian, and having the urge to convert everyone and spread the religion everywhere) or the kind of extreme fundamentalism islam has in many of its interpretations, sometimes including extreme violence. Paganism was a more... loose religion. No book with strict rules that need to be interpreted, just a collection of stories about gods and a lot of traditions surrounding it. I still think Abrahamic religions were worse for humanity because they asked you to live your entire life by some book.
    5
  578. +SansAuthoritas I wasn't referring to that statement. And even so, you also said "perhaps 200 years". States aren't inherently tyrannical, it the US citizens that created the current government, or rather allowed it to become what it is now. Citizens need to actively interact with their government and challenge it if they must, lest that government come to think it can get away with being tyrannical. Tyranny doesn't just happen, it's a slow and steady process in which the government goes further and further in disregarding rights or outright removing rights. As long as the government and its citizens are strongly connected, tyranny is a long way off. We have built an a-tyrannical government over the years. In America, the distance between the government and its citizens is huge, and on top of that the citizens wilfully seem to shy away from confronting the government in any kind of meaningful way. It's like they're asking to be ruled by a tyrannical government. They allow it, as long as they have their precious teddy bear (guns, both equally useless against a truly tyrannical government) to make them stupidly believe they can't be oppressed. Every power, even the most extreme, of the government is morally acceptable through the principle of democracy and proper, untyrannical representation.
    5
  579. You are the modern equivalent of the very people you want to put up against the wall. The only difference is that you're an atheist fundamentalist instead of a religious one. Be ashamed
    5
  580.  @burger_kinghorn  It's two universities working together, not big pharma. They're very unlikely to ask exorbitant amounts of money for it. I'm at one of those universities and these are the same guys that copy big pharma medicine for us when they ask unacceptable prices (yeah that's a breach of intellectual property, but it's only done when big pharma asks hundreds of thousands of euros for life-saving medicine without a proper justification). They'd have to be massive hypocrites to charge top dollar for it. Things are luckily different here.
    5
  581. What a disgrace...
    5
  582. +Daniel CNN is infinitely more biased than the BBC.
    5
  583.  @NoNonsenseNumbskull  That's why this is potentially the perfect smear. If I'd have to think of a fake smear, it'd be something like this. He said something similar to McCain, just make the statement a bit worse but still somewhat in line with what he said and there you have it, the perfect smear. I don't believe he said it, it's too extreme and too dumb even for Trump.
    5
  584. Helemaal mee eens, het is absurd.
    5
  585. Well said, I hope they see this...
    5
  586. Maybe we'll just destroy the Turkish economy then, if you want strength.... We don't do power politics, we do diplomacy.
    5
  587. I'd rather teach them paganism
    5
  588. At least the countries agree on the idea that illegal migration needs to stop. I hope the EU will soon succeed in stopping the influx of migrants and afterwards we can bicker about how we divide the migrants among us. The most important part of it is stopping the migration.
    5
  589. @Said Boudriz Dat is een heel mooi voorbeeld van hoe je de geschiedenis kan omdraaien om het vooral negatief te lijken. Over slavernij, dat is iets dat elke cultuur vroeger deed. Bij ons is de vroegst gedocumenteerde vorm van slavernij in de Oudheid, zowel in meer ingewikkelde samenlevingen als Rome en Griekenland als de Germaanse stammen in het noorden, waarbij Europeanen slaaf waren. Het tot slaaf maken van inwoners van Europa was uiteindelijk in de 14e eeuw verboden en vanaf toen was iedereen die een stap op Europese grond zette automatisch vrij man, blank of zwart. Bedrijven gingen echter door met slavernij buiten Europa en de Atlantische slavernij groeide uit tot één van de grootste slavenhandelnetwerken. Andere slavenhandelaars rond die tijd was Arabië, waar in totaal nog meer Afrikanen werden verhandeld dan in de Atlantische handel, de grootschalige Ottomaanse slavenhandel, de Barbarijse slavenhandel en natuurlijk de slavenhandel binnen Afrika zelf. Zo werden miljoenen mensen tot slaaf gemaakt. In Europa waren er naast grote belangen omtrent geld ook belangengroepen die vochten tegen de onmenselijke praktijk van slavernij. Vooral in Groot Brittannië en daarna ook andere Europese landen verkregen deze groepen de overhand en werd de slavernij afgeschaft. Maar de slavernij werd niet alleen afgeschaft, die landen, met het VK voorop, zetten zich ook actief in om de slavernij van andere landen te stoppen. Zo patrouilleerde het VK actief de Middellandse zee om Arabische slavenschepen te enteren en slaven te bevrijden. Een Engels-Nederlandse vloot speelde een centrale rol in het stoppen van de Barbarijse zeerovers die mensen tot slaaf maakten door Algiers te bombarderen en Frankrijk koloniseerde later delen van Noord Afrika waarmee ook de slavenhandel binnen Noord Afrika werd verboden en aan banden werd gelegd. Ook het Ottomaanse Rijk stond onder druk van Europese machten om slavernij af te schaffen en onder invloed van vooral Rusland ondernam het Ottomaanse Rijk stappen om slaven vrij te laten. Uiteindelijk was met de kolonisatie van Afrika ook de slavernij daar aan banden gelegd. In plaats van zo negatief te zijn over de Atlantische handel, kun je beter aanstippen wat de achterliggende humanistische gedachten uit de Verlichting zijn geweest voor anti-slavernij bewegingen en waarom Europa en niet de rest van de wereld slavernij afschafte en wereldwijd bestreed. Je kan er een inspirerend verhaal van maken dat iedereen bekend maakt met het denken van de Verlichting en waarom dat denken zo goed was/is. Dit denken kan ons ook inspireren net zo te handelen in de toekomst als anti-slavernij activisten dat toendertijd deden: opstaan voor waar je in gelooft. Maar nee, er wordt een nutteloos schaamverhaal van gemaakt. We kunnen trots zijn op Verlichtingsdenken en er inspiratie uit putten, of je kan je schamen en niets leren van het verleden.
    5
  590. Hmm I didn't know kidnapping children and putting them in another family is a legitimate form of punishment now...
    5
  591. American politics have become a bloody joke. Nothing more than a bloody joke.
    5
  592. Dat komt indirect ook door het gedrag van moslims zelf, waardoor stereotyperingen ontstaan die op elke moslim worden toegepast.
    5
  593. +Shny Fan Poland, the Netherlands or Luxembourg is not even remotely comparable to knocking out France with 104 divisions committed to defending it. Of course blitzkrieg wasn't anything new in the Battle of France, but before that it was only practiced on relatively "weak" enemies. Saying that the UK/France should've seen the blitzkrieg coming is like saying Russia should expect the US to waltz right over them with ease because they could do that in the Iraq war against a vastly inferior enemy. If I'd tell you today that the US could defeat Russia as easily as it did Iraq in the 2000's, you'd laugh at me and with good reason. Now apply that to the 1940's and tell France that Germany will defeat them as easily as it did the Netherlands before and they will laugh at you even harder. It's very easy to say things like this after it happened. As for saying that a 2018 war would be exactly like WW2... of course not. Again, what happened in the 1940's was very special. The Germans defeated 3.3 million men (keep in mind that German tanks in 1940 were mostly inferior to their French and British counterparts. There are some amazing stories of some French and British tanks surviving literally dozens of shots from German anti-tank guns) in a matter of weeks, ONLY because the Allies were counting on another trench war. I don;t know about you, but I don't think the EU is expecting a trench war anytime soon... The disparity between strategic vision that there was in 1940 is simply not there today. It cannot be compared. In fact, what you're doing here is exactly what France and the UK did in 1940, but worse: you're expecting the war to go just like the last one, while it evidently won't be. You'd fit right in the French military command in 1940. At least they expected it to go like it did 20 years ago and not 70 years...
    5
  594. And in his world military hospitals are full of stab wounds instead of gunshot wounds haha
    5
  595.  @davidmolishoyombodjema4260  No, because robbing is illegal today and conquest was legal hundreds of years ago. If you claim it wasn't then Poland should be German, half of Turkey should be given back to the Greeks, etc. etc.... It doesn't work like that. I think redistribution of the land is fair because of SA's racist past not giving everyone equal chances/rights, but that doesn't mean that the taking of land should be without compensation. It is unfair to take someone's property without giving anything back for it.
    5
  596. Deze documentaire is controle op de regering. Een regering die de geschiedenis zo profileert dat we ons er vooral voor moeten schamen. Het is belangrijk voor een land om haar geschiedenis te kennen. Positieve figuren uit onze geschiedenis kunnen inspiratie leveren hoe we naar de toekomst moeten kijken en negatieve elementen uit onze geschiedenis laten zien wat we niet moeten doen. Dit speelt een grotere rol in de cultuur en mentaliteit van een land dan je zou denken. Op dit moment leggen we te veel de nadruk op het negatieve, en het resultaat is een algemene mentaliteit van "weg met ons". We geven niet meer zo veel om onze cultuur en saamhorigheid in Nederland ligt onder druk. Het gaat om het nu, zonder enige inspiratie, zonder een duidelijk verbindend verhaal. We hebben juist gedeelde inspiratie en een gedeeld verbindend verhaal nodig om integratie in goede banen te leiden en de algehele samenleving hechter te maken. Ik vind de reactie hier nogal bizar. Dit is woord voor woord wat ik zou verwachten van een brugger op de middelbare school die zich klagend afvraagt waarom hij dit "stomme vak" geschiedenis heeft, want "het is toch allemaal al gebeurd, wat heb ik eraan". Kijk maar naar Duitsland wat er gebeurt als je een puur negatief beeld hebt van je verleden. Dat heeft grote impact op de mentaliteit van nu. Hoe kunnen ze niet begrijpen dat wat je uit het verleden oppikt, grote invloed heeft op de cultuur en mentaliteit van vandaag en daarmee dus ook hoe we de toekomst in gaan? We leven niet in een vacuüm, maar een continuüm van tijd.
    5
  597. +MooperRanger Alright, so it works better then. I looked it up and here in the Netherlands it's banned (or at least not freely attainable in any store without prescription from a doctor). I don't think you need codeine just for a sore throat, I surely never missed it and it seems to do more bad than good. African countries should just ban it or make it limited to doctors only. It's like making morphine pills available to the public because it's better at pain suppression than regular pain killers. You know what the results will be.
    5
  598. Juist, het probleem is dat onze leiders denken "hoe kunnen we zo veel mogelijk uitstoot verminderen zonder dat de economische groei in gevaar komt ?" en dat is een fundamenteel foute instelling. Want juist onze internationale handel (zeeschepen, vliegtuigen, etc. gebruiken om dingen die wij zelf hebben goedkoper te krijgen) en ultra goedkope productieprocessen zijn het probleem. Globalistisch kapitalisme gekoppeld met een eindeloze drang tot groei is ons probleem.
    5
  599. But all of the bands you mentioned were highly popular, regardless of where their songs would end up on the charts. The question is, in 40 years, will we be listening to musical legends from the 2010's that may not have topped the charts but were still very popular? I don't think we have such legends today, at least not on the level of Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, etc. We do have several good artists, don't get me wrong. But now more than ever are we being fed trash above actual quality. Strictly speaking, the music industry is all about money, not talent. It always has been, so in the past there's also been trash at the top. But talent back then used to raise more money than talent does today, because we are not taking the time to appreciate music anymore. Catchy trash is more relevant today than it ever was, I think.
    5
  600. Take a guess ;)
    5
  601. In welk opzicht?
    5
  602. Enjoy your utterly uneven relationship with the US. You can gloat but we both know who's in charge ;) Can't wait for your next Iraq, where you follow the US blindly again like the good little "ally" you are for them.
    5
  603. Jesus Christ it'd be a shock to find that out later
    5
  604. Budget cuts due to LACK of government funding ---------> blames on ideology advocating for MORE government funding Well done...
    5
  605. Some atheists post insulting comments to religious people and some religious people post how atheists are morally decrepit and/or going to hell. Both sides do this, but in the end the grand majority of both sides are respectful to one another. So in my view it's best to ignore the extremes of both groups. And should one want to delve into calling out the extremes, make sure to call out both sides.
    5
  606. +Arron Whyte Firstly: Churchill begged for US support and didn't get it . He asked when Britain was being attacked and the US ignored it. Only years after would there be supplies. All for a heap of money of course. Secondly: Churchill was a proponent of a united Europe and in fact one of the driving forces behind it.
    5
  607. +Neuuä I agree wholeheartedly. Europe has always had pretty good relations with non-communist Russia, both before and after communism. They truly are part of the European family and always have been. After communism/capitalism separated us, we should work to recover our relationship. Before Ukraine relations have been pretty good, but I feel like the US always prevented us from fully recovering that relationship. The US and Russia are so hostile (I think mostly the US towards Russia) and us being strong allies with the US does have effect of our relationship with Russia. The EU should try to bring them together, insofar that's possible and if it's not, I think it's time to make our relationship with the US a bit more loose. We can handle ourselves and if we take a more independent position in the world, we can be good allies with both Russia and the US.
    5
  608. Als een "D66 rechter" Nederland oplegt die mensen terug te halen dan is dat op basis van een juridische verplichting waar de politiek ZICHZELF aan heeft gebonden. De politiek bepaalt zelf aan welke wetten Nederland is gebonden. Al dat vluchtelingen gezeur komt van verdragen waar de POLITIEK ons aan heeft gebonden, dat stikstofgezeur komt van een verplichting vanuit de POLITIEK, Urgenda ook, etc. etc. ALS de rechter Nederland tot zoiets dwingt dan komt dat doordat in het verleden de politiek een of andere regel in het leven heeft geroepen dat bijvoorbeeld iedereen met een Nederlands paspoort in deze situatie moet worden opgehaald. Vrijwel alle problemen die wij vandaag hebben wordt veroorzaakt door de politiek die in het verleden een idealistische gutmensch regel heeft verzonnen zonder uitzonderingen. Bijvoorbeeld het feit dat sommige IS'ers niet de Nederlandse nationaliteit kan worden afgepakt is omdat de politiek in het verleden zich aan de regel heeft gebonden dat niemand stateloos mag zijn, ongeacht de omstandigheden. Dus iemand met alleen een NL paspoort kan die nooit kwijtraken, zelfs niet als die persoon voor een vijandige staat die ons haat vecht. De rechter voert alleen de wet uit en als je het niet eens bent met de wet moet je toch echt bij de politiek zijn. Onderdeel van de rechtsstaat is dat als de politiek zich ergens aan bindt, de regering zich daar dan ook aan moet houden. Dus moet de politiek voorzichtiger zijn met al die onzin waar ze zich aan binden en nadenken over de consequenties. Laatste voorbeeld is dat Marrakesh pact over migratie, de politiek denkt niet aan lange termijn consequenties alleen maar aan korte termijn diplomatisch appeasen en bij de internationale groep horen vanwege politieke redenen. Maar voor zover ik weet geldt er niet zo'n regel tav het terughalen van IS'ers dus we zijn veilig.
    5
  609. Another great depression might be upcoming with Trump repeating the same policy the US had back then: sanctions to "protect" the economy, ultimately ending up destroying it. We'll see how things go this time
    5
  610. Welke economische belangen? Deze mensen zijn alleen maar een kostenpost
    5
  611. Yeah he's described as a white man with brown hair and blue eyes in the novels, IIRC. But for some reason I still think Idris Elba would be great in the role. He has that spy look to him, he's British and he could definitely act teh role well. But ultimately it might be better to call him 009 or something instead of James Bond himself and make him a different agent.
    5
  612. Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen dit komt maanden nadat IS al is verslagen.... Dit is zo nutteloos, hadden we dit maar in 2015 of zo. Ik kan ook niet geloven dat iemand hier NU pas aan denkt.
    5
  613. Exactly... Being mixed race myself I find it jarring to hear people go on and on about needing to see people of the same descent to even be able to identify with those characters at all. I never had some historical figure that looks like me (besides a few exceptions) nor even people in the modern public eye. Hell, I barely even saw other mixed people in real life. Does this mean I never had shining examples in my life? Of course not... because I had white, black, Asian and many other examples that I wanted to be like. Why would being a different ethnicity mean I can't aspire to be like someone? This makes no sense at all and might even be a bit racist if you ask me.
    5
  614. Extreem rechts is inderdaad gevaarlijk (racistisch niet in veel gevallen, dat geldt puur en alleen voor Nazi's, maar goed), maar de PVV en FvD zijn niet extreem rechts. De FvD is gewoon rechts-nationalistisch en de PVV is zelfs links-nationalistisch. Je moet nationalisme niet verwarren met extreem rechts/links zoals fascisme of zelfs nationaal socialisme. Dat zijn HELE extreme ideologieën waar de FvD en PVV niet eens dichtbij komen. Korte uitleg; Nationalisme is het idee dat een samenleving gebaseerd moet zijn op een gedeelde nationale identiteit om polarisatie en verdeeldheid te voorkomen (dus sterke cultuur die een volk verenigt). Hiervoor maakt het niet uit welke etniciteit je hebt (sterker nog, nationalisme is in het verleden heel vaak gebruikt om verschillende etniciteiten tot één samenleving/land te maken), het gaat om de gedeelde identiteit. Ook betekent het dat in de internationale politiek, de nationale belangen belangrijker zijn dan enige internationale belangen. Deze ideologie staat tegenover globalisme, dat een geïndividualiseerde samenleving wil waarin iedereen zijn eigen identiteit heeft (dus geen sterke gedeelde identiteit waar iedereen onder samenkomt, maar verschillende identiteiten die naast/met elkaar leven) en in de internationale politiek de internationale belangen boven de nationale belangen verdedigt. Deze categorie is waar FvD en PVV onder vallen. Fascisme wil een sociale revolutie waarin het kapitalisme wordt afgeschaft en een geplande economie in gang wordt gezet waar de productiemiddelen niet in het belang van individuen (zoals onder vrije markt kapitalisme), maar in het belang van de natie wordt gebruikt. De overheid vertegenwoordigt de natie en organiseert heel het land, tot in de details van de levens van de burgers, zoals het zou moeten zijn volgens een soort nationaal ideaal. Bovendien gaat het ervan uit dat democratie onzin is en het bestuur van landen alleen maar belemmert vanwege al die meningsverschillen. Dit is extreem nationalistisch, anti-kapitalistisch, anti-democratisch én anti-marxistisch. In principe kan elke etniciteit onder de natie vallen, dus deze ideologie is niet racistisch. Fascisme heeft economisch gezien extreem linkse trekken en cultureel gezien extreem rechts. Nationaal Socialisme is een bijzondere vorm van Fascisme waarbij ervan uit wordt gegaan dat natie en ras synoniemen zijn. Je land/natie is dus je ras. Nationaal Socialisme was net als Fascisme anti-kapitalistisch en wilde een sociale revolutie om ervoor te zorgen dat de productiemiddelen niet in het belang van individuen (kapitalisme), maar in het belang van het gehele ras worden gebruikt. Dus geen privaat eigendom, maar eigendom van het ras. Andere rassen mochten dus geen bedrijven hebben en mochten ook niet profiteren van de economie, omdat het doel van de economie was om de voorspoed een bepaald ras te bevorderen. Andere rassen die van de economie profiteerden werden dus gezien als parasitair op de toekomst van het eigen ras, en die werden met massamoord/massadeportatie verwijderd. En het werd nog erger omdat Nazi's ervan uit gingen dat elk land (=ras) zelfvoorzienend moest zijn (autarkie) en alles wat daarvoor nodig was middels oorlog van andere rassen moest pakken. Ze zagen de wereld als één groot toneel voor een soort rassengevecht om voorzieningen, en wie niet genoeg voorzieningen kon verzamelen om te overleven (dus genoeg grond voor landbouw om je ras te voeden, genoeg olie en dat soort grondstoffen om je industrie levend te houden, etc.) zou afsterven. Dit is waarom Duitsland Oost-Europa binnenviel en een plan had om alle landbouwgrond te gebruiken om Duitsers te voeden en alle Oost-Europeanen wilden vermoorden of naar Siberië deporteren (zie Generalplan Ost); Duitsland heeft niet genoeg landbouwgrond om de eigen populatie te voeden, dus moesten ze het middels oorlog stelen van een ander ras en dat andere ras verwijderen van die grond. Het Nazisme klinkt heel vreemd en dat was het ook. Dit is slechts de basis van waar ze in geloofden, het wordt nog veel gekker en ingewikkelder. Deze ideologie is natuurlijk zwaar racistisch, zwaar nationalistisch en economisch extreem links (volledig geplande economie). Nu een voorbeeld waarom het nergens op slaat om FvD en PVV te vergelijken met Fascisme (Nazisme lijkt me al duidelijk... dat is volkomen gestoord); Nederland in de Jaren 30 en ook daarvoor was nationalistisch. Vandaag de dag zouden we dat Nederland zelfs extreem nationalistisch noemen. Een concreet voorbeeld daarvan is hoe Nederland omging met familiewaarden. We hadden een nationalistisch ideaalbeeld van hoe een familie eruit zou moeten zien. Mijn overgrootmoeder woonde in Vreewijk, wat toen een nieuwe wijk was. De woningcorporatie zou eens per week haar huis komen controleren of ze alles wel schoon hield en volgens de maatschappelijke normen haar huishouden regelde. Dat zou vandaag als extreem worden gezien: de samenleving heeft mij niets te vertellen over hoe ik mijn eigen huishouden inricht. Toen kon dat, want het werd als goed gezien om volgens bepaalde maatschappelijke normen te leven. Een ander voorbeeld uit R'dam is dat de armere families uit achterstandswijken die niet volgens dat nationale ideaal leefden (niet goed schoonmaakten etc.) werden in een andere wijk gezet waar ze werden geleerd om "goed" huis te houden, volgens alle maatschappelijke regels. Dat zag de overheid trouwens als hulp. En als de "goede" burgers wisten dat je uit die wijk kwam dan werd je met de nek aangekeken omdat je "onzedelijk" was. Ook werd destijds als je voor het huwelijk een baby kreeg je baby afgepakt door de overheid en in een pleeggezin gezet omdat je dan als vrouw als "onzedelijk" werd gezien en dus als "slechte moeder" omdat je niet leefde volgens de maatschappelijke regels. Het kind werd "beschermd". Ok, Nederland (rest van de wereld ook) was vroeger dus extreem in hoe maatschappelijke regels je leven vormden. Maar het punt is.... Nederland was zelfs in die staat totaal niet Fascistisch. Anti-fascistisch zelfs. En om nu terug te komen op de FvD en PVV; het nationalisme van toen is EXTREEM vergeleken met hun nationalisme van nu. Dus zelfs als je de FvD en PVV nóg nationalistischer zou maken, zouden ze niet eens dicht bij het Fascisme komen, wat écht extreem was zelfs vergeleken met het Nederland van toen. De nationalistische ideeën van de FvD en PVV komen niet eens dicht bij het Nederland van honderd jaar geleden, dat actief tégen het Fascisme vocht omdat dat destijds vergeleken met Nederland nog extreem was. Het is dus volkomen onlogisch om de FvD/PVV Fascistisch te noemen; ze zijn slechts Nationalistisch. Gewoon normaal nationalistisch. Vanwege het grote verschil tussen globalisme (de dominante visie binnen de huidige politiek) en nationalisme (wat we eigenlijk al jaren niet meer hebben gehad, zeker niet meer sinds zo ongeveer de jaren 70-80), LIJKT het erop alsof FvD en PVV extreem rechts zijn, maar eigenlijk brengen zij het nationalisme terug (ook SP een beetje, trouwens). Ze staan rechtstreeks tegenover globalisme, maar dat betekent niet dat ze gelijk extremistisch zijn.
    5
  615. Omdat veel mensen op hem stemmen. Zo werkt democratie nu eenmaal
    5
  616.  @takarab1211  Zo werkt rechts-links niet. Het is veel gecompliceerder dan dat. Bovendien is het zelfs fout als we jouw definitie aannemen: het is ook heel onlogisch om te zeggen dat een stroming die de rechten van het individu belangrijker vindt dan gelijkwaardigheid, tégen kiesrecht voor elk individu zou zijn. Je kijkt heel verkeerd. Volgens jouw definitie is rechts gewoon slecht (minder rechten, minder gelijkwaardigheid) en links goed... Zo werkt het echt niet. Rechts komt op voor de rechten van het individu, ook als dit de gelijkwaardigheid binnen een samenleving niet ten goede komt. Bijvoorbeeld: meer autonomie over je eigen geld door lagere belasting. Hier beschermt rechts het eigendom van individuen. Links zou het eigendomsrecht van individuen minder belangrijk vinden dan wat de overheid kan doen met belastinggeld en zou gaan voor hoge belastingen met herverdeling van rijkdommen. Hiermee heb je een meer gelijkwaardige samenleving qua geld, maar pak je ook veel geld af van degenen die meer verdienen. Geen van beiden is goed of slecht, tenzij je de extremen opzoekt.
    5
  617.  @Danosta  De VVD is veranderd in een huichelachtige partij. Zodra er politieke puntjes te behalen zijn staan ze achter iedereen en spreken ze populaire, nuchtere standpunten uit, maar in de praktijk zien we vaak dat niet wordt geleverd (laatste voorbeeld zullen de IS-bruiden zijn, vermoed ik). En waar iets impopulairs is gebeurd is liegen niet vreemd voor de VVD-Minister (laatste voorbeeld burgerdoden in Irak, daarvoor vele andere schandalen). Ik waardeer het dat jullie daar verandering in proberen te brengen, maar stem alsjeblieft geen VVD voor je die verandering daadwerkelijk teweeg hebt gebracht. Zoals de VVD zich nu gedraagt is schadelijk voor Nederland en als ze heel wat stemmen verliezen zal dat een reality check zijn die tot verandering noopt. Dat heeft de VVD nu hard nodig, Nederland ook.
    5
  618. Random Saitama Everything from eating with knife and fork to capitalism and socialism to the financial system we have today are European inventions. 81% of all significant scientific inventions are from Europe, at least if Wikipedia is to be believed. Almost everything, from the most basic things to some of the most impressive inventions/events in history, comes from Europe. Europe shaped the world into what it is today and continues to shape it
    5
  619.  @Waterdiver3900  Daar gaan we wel naar toe ja. Helaas. NL zit al vol (qua landinrichting) en voor alle nieuwe woningen die moeten worden gebouwd vanwege de onnatuurlijk hoge bevolkingsgroei moet iets anders wijken. Dat is dan ofwel natuur, ofwel landbouwgrond. Moeten we gewoon mee stoppen. Ik heb geen zin in een NL met 25 miljoen inwoners en een hevig uitgebreide randstad.
    5
  620. The most important lesson from WW2 is that perfectly normal people are capable of doing absolutely terrible things if they just take the wrong ideological turn. They were not crazy, they were no psychopaths, they were not insane. They were intelligent, perfectly normal people who somehow got to the point of believing exterminating entire groups of people would be a reasonable and good thing to do. That's the scary part.
    5
  621. +Rico Jakk Want to stop trading with China too? Reality is that sometimes we have to befriend horrible states to further our own interests. We need oil and they have it. In case of China they're horrible human rights violators as well, but their market is too huge to ignore so we must be trade partners. It's the way things go. Best we can do is try to influence them to stop that nonsense
    5
  622. The stereotype is that Parisians are rude, not all French
    5
  623. +Mysterios1989 That is something different. Transactions are not plea bargains. Plea bargains are deals that make the suspect plead guilty in the actual trial. What happens before the trial is not a plea bargain. There will be no prosecution if a suspect accepts the monitary punishment (but the option for a trial is always open). Transactions prevent trial from taking place, they don't influence the trial itself. The problem with plea bargains is that a trial is supposed to be fair and unbiased, but a plea bargain can negate that fairness by forcing the suspect to plead guilty. A trial is supposed to uncover TRUTH, and a fake guilty plea undermines that. Transactions are monetary fines in exchange for the prosecutor to NOT prosecute at all. And transactions can only be monetary, while a plea bargain is about actual prison time. Also, plea bargains aren't even possible here, because in the US the prosecutor decides what the punishment will be (if the prosecutor charges 15 years, the judge can't go below that) while here in Europe the judge is the one to decide the punishment. So what the prosecutor charges is less relevant because the judge can deviate from it at will. And last but not least, at least under Dutch law if the prosecutor tries to make a plea bargain or other deal with the suspect at trial, THE SUSPECT WALKS FREE (yes, completely free). That's why no prosecutor will ever be stupid enough to do it. It is strictly forbidden.
    5
  624. Yeah, an incredibly subversive way of saying "scandinavians are worth nothing, never created anything and don't exist as an authentic identity"... Wow
    5
  625.  @mariekerot3962  Aanpassing aan wat/wie? En waarom? Veranderingen moeten een reden hebben, een goede reden. Dat geldt des te meer wanneer je het over een oude traditie hebt.
    5
  626. Onbegrijpelijk....
    5
  627.  @MrC00kieM0nst3r  Het is net als Europese huisvrouwen in de jaren 60. Het was een "keuze" omdat de culturele normen dat aan hen oplegden. Europese vrouwen in de jaren 50 dachten écht dat de keuken hun plek was, dachten écht dat het volkomen terecht was dat ze niet eens iets konden kopen zonder toestemming van hun man (die immers het geld verdiende), etc. etc. Een cultuur kan mensen onderdrukken door sociale druk uit te oefenen. Een hoofddoek of boerka dragen is geen keuze. Het is pas een keuze als er nul komma nul sociale of religieuze druk staat op het bedekken. En die druk die is er nu absoluut. Als jij nu beweert dat islamitische vrouwen niet onderdrukt worden door het bedekken, dan zeg je dus ook dat alle vrouwen in de jaren 50 die naar eigen vrije wil in de keuken stonden en niet eens iets konden kopen dus niet onderdrukt waren. Alleen omdat ze erin mee gingen. Zo werkt het niet.
    5
  628. +J. Goin Better poor and happy than rich and living in a shell of what was once a beautiful place.
    5
  629. Ja want het willen eten van buitenlands voedsel = het accepteren van complete wijken die meer buitenlands dan Nederlands eruit zien. Super hypocriet... Hij zegt zelfs letterlijk zelf dat het leuk is om even naar de Turkse bakker te gaan maar dat het veel minder leuk is om als bewoner van die wijk alle negatieve bijkomstigheden van multiculturalisme te ervaren.
    5
  630. Gewoon allebei aanpakken. Abrahamistische religies over het algemeen zijn pure tyfus, maakt niet veel uit welke
    5
  631. Ach ja, bijna heel de Kamer voor een motie van wantrouwen en heel de Kamer behalve de eigen partij voor een motie van afkeuring. Minderheidskabinet er doorheen jassen dan maar. "Democratie".
    5
  632. Emotie-gebaseerd wij-zij denken is nooit goed. Wat die rebellen in Oekraïne hebben gedaan is vreselijk en er moet ten minste compensatie komen en het liefst gerechtigheid, maar ten aanzien van Rusland moeten we voorbij onze vijandigheden kijken en naar de toekomst bewegen. Als iedereen zoals jij dacht dan haatten we nog steeds Duitsland om de Tweede Wereldoorlog en zouden we nooit de samenwerking en vrede hebben die we vandaag de dan genieten. Ook met Rusland zie ik een toekomst van vrede en handel voor me (sterker nog, dat hadden we al min of meer voordat het mis ging in Oekraïne). Het is beter voor iedereen om vriendelijk om te gaan met Rusland. Dan gaan zij ook vriendelijk met ons om, zo werkt het. Samenwerken, stabiliteit, vrede en handel. Dat moet ons doel zijn. Demoniseren helpt niemand. Als we toenadering zoeken zal Rusland waarschijnlijk zelfs bereid zijn om de slachtoffers van MH17 te compenseren (en als het rebellen waren die schoten is er kans op gerechtigheid omdat Rusland die wellicht wel wil opgeven). Zolang we Rusland als vijand neerzetten hoef je niks te verwachten.
    5
  633. Gefeliciflapstaart
    5
  634. Hij heeft ook echt dat neerbuigende GroenLinks toontje haha
    5
  635. +colainc90 Nice sarcasm there
    5
  636. We hebben een bijzonder strafrecht nodig voor migranten. Als ze gepakt worden terwijl ze bijvoorbeeld in een truck klimmen of op enige andere manier illegaal willen migreren dan moeten we ze kunnen opsluiten in een soort gesloten migrantenkamp. Geen gevangenis maar ook geen open asiel. En daar wachten ze totdat ze teruggestuurd worden. Het probleem is dan overigens wel dat ze snel teruggestuurd moeten worden want je kan niet zomaar mensen jarenlang opgesloten houden, dus laten we zeggen een minimumstraf van 1 jaar als periode om terugkeer te regelen en daarboven alleen straffen voor zover het gepleegde misdrijf daar aanleiding toe geeft. Het bijzondere van die straf zou moeten zijn dat het geen gevangenisstraf is die moet worden uitgezeten, maar gevangenhouding om die migranten van de straat te houden terwijl hun terugkeer geregeld wordt. Dus ook als hun terugkeer 6 maanden in hun gevangenschap wordt geregeld (of ze zelf te kennen geven terug te willen, dat kan altijd en moet worden aangemoedigd want dat is het doel) zou het niet zo moeten zijn dat ze de straf dan nog moeten uitzitten maar dan moeten ze gewoon weg. En een verblijfsvergunning moet ook conditioneel worden. Als je binnen 3-5 of zo jaar een misdrijf pleegt verlies je in de meeste gevallen je verblijfsvergunning als straf. Althans voor zover dat kan, want als iemand uit een oorlogsgebied komt kunnen we ze niet terugsturen. Hiermee zouden we al veel verder komen.
    5
  637. Wil je haar vergiftigen?
    5
  638. De buitengrenzen
    5
  639. If you let its war economy run for awhile and allow for mobilisation, Germany alone could possibly defeat Russia. The main problem with Europe right now is that we underfund our armies and are not prepared for any large scale war, but we certainly have the industry, GDP and manpower to even overshadow the US if we're prepared to make the investment. Russia's industry is nothing compared to that of the EU or US. But their current military is a force to be reckoned with, especially in the early stages of war Russia is very dangerous. But in the long run they can't cope with the EU war economy and population pool. This makes the initial defence the most important part of a European war.
    5
  640. Ik gun ze best wel wat, maar dit soort praktijken verleiden me om adblock te nemen... Ik kon 'm niet eens overslaan, moest 'm helemaal kijken
    5
  641.  @DocRealTalk  Achilles is described as having blonde hair and blue eyes in the Iliad, so no. Elves have a specific mythological meaning, mostly referring to ancient ancestors of Europeans. So again, no. I agree that historical characters, mythological characters and fictional characters should be separated in this. My opinion on the matter is that Historical characters should be absolutely off limits, mythological characters should always take heed of their cultural significance and therefore be off limits 99% of the time and fictional characters have a bit of artistic freedom about them, making it fine to switch them around but only for valid reasons and with a general restraint to it. General rule of thumb ought to be that the further someone is from the intended character, the more pressing the justifications need to be to change the character. By the way, I share your sentiment regarding the Last Airbender and more.
    5
  642. Zelfs wij in Nederland hebben militaire parades op veteranendag. Ook Frankrijk, Groot-Britannië en meer hebben parades. Dus Amerikanen die dat eerste zeggen praten gewoon onzin. Parades zijn leuk en hoeven niet per se als machtsymbool gebruikt te worden. Ik vond het zelf altijd vreemd dat een groot land als Amerika géén parades had, zeker omdat zij altijd zo trots zijn op hun leger en altijd veteranen met een "thank you for your service" begroeten. Zij houden echt overdreven veel van hun leger maar hadden geen parades tot nu. Vind ik wel apart dat het zo lang heeft geduurd.
    5
  643. +Paolo Pinton He's clearly trolling, or he's actually this deluded
    5
  644. The problem with the US is that the personal conviction of judges can impact cases. So depending on which politcal party they support, your outcome of the case can differ. This is why the selection of Supreme Court judges and their political affiliation is always such a big deal in America. It's completely screwed up and politicised...
    5
  645. Because most bully situations happen at schools. And younger people are the most vulnerable to bullying and most likely to do something radical like shoot up the school. It's just a question of volatile people having easy access to guns, which makes it easy for them to carry out shootings.
    5
  646. Roetveegpieten als deze zullen de anti-zwarte pieters nooit accepteren. Die houden niet op tot er geen veeg bruin/zwart op het gezicht van zwarte piet meer te zien is. Deze vorm van roetveegpiet kan net zo goed zwarte piet zijn. Die idioten vonden dit ook al racistisch: https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/231134/Bedreigingen-om-racistische-make-up-Ze-zouden-mijn-kinderen-iets-aandoen
    5
  647. Watched it all live, it was a beautiful ceremony, apart from that preacher that just wouldn't stop
    5
  648. Mevrouw Drayer. Het is geen honderdduizend, het is nog meer!
    5
  649. Leuke PR stunt om af te leiden van haar schandalige gedrag tijdens de US Open finale. Eerst een schaamteloze tirade, dan een persconferentie waar ze claimt dat die tirade "voor vrouwenrechten" was en nu zo'n actie wat ze normaal niet doet.
    5
  650. En moeten wij echt Europa uit? Ook niet, hè
    5
  651. Brexit itself is not dysfunctional, but the utterly divided parliament absolutely is at the moment. Can't deny that. But you'll be alright in the long run, maybe a bit poorer than you could be but not a big deal
    5
  652.  @thejokerking9268  Thorium is way off, technologically. We can't even make the reactors for that yet and the tech is about 30 years off at this moment in time. It's not a realistic short term solution. But in theory it would be one of if not the best once it's there. It'll just be too late. So right now we're going to have to settle for inferior solutions, at least until the Thorium tech is ready
    5
  653.  @shmeet  No those are communists. Like, unironical communists that want a revolution. As we established earlier, related but not the same. So what do you want? You want to accept them when they're small but suddenly attack them when they become too big and scary? Or you want to just let them grow and stage their little revolution? It's hypocritical to allow them to spread their ideas first, only to not allow them to actually put them into place later. You either accept an ideology into the democratic discourse or you don't. I don't think a fascist or communist revolution is acceptable. I don't think any anti-democratic ideology is acceptable, especially not ideologies that in the past have killed millions through famine, genocide and political repression. I want to fight against those ideas. You want to sit idly and watch them spread, essentially hoping that they don't grow to the point where they can stage a revolution. I think that's irresponsible. Our values need actual protecting to be truly safe from ill-willing actors.
    5
  654. Trump gaat een kleine burgeroorlog veroorzaken door te zeggen dat er fraude is gepleegd. Vanaf het begin heeft hij hierop al ingespeeld door briefstemmen onveilig te noemen. Daardoor zijn eigenlijk alleen Democraten gaan briefstemmen en kan hij nu dus zeggen dat het wel heel toevallig is dat hij eerst aan het winnen was en er toen opeens een "blue wave" kwam. En hij heeft dan zelfs nog een punt omdat het niet voor niets is dat stemmen per brief illegaal is hier in Nederland. Het is ook onveilig en fraudegevoelig. Trump gaat dit geheid gebruiken om de uitslag in twijfel te trekken. Hij kan nog winnen als pennsylvania goed gaat en Biden één van zijn voorsprongen inlevert, maar als hij verliest dan zal een deel van zijn achterban waarschijnlijk een kleine opstand veroorzaken. Best gevaarlijk dit.
    5
  655. There is no such thing as "permanently discrediting". What a toxic way of thinking. I'm not a fan of Ben Shapiro; he's a lightweight intellectual at best, but if someone says one stupid thing (which everyone tends to do about one thing or another at some point) that really has no connection to any other points he makes. You should take everything everyone says at face value. That is the only way democracy will properly work. Don't "permanently discredit" people based on stupid arguments they sometimes make, it is dangerous.
    5
  656. +Judge Morville Ah, I see. So you're the kind of country that will declare the right to family life a fundamental human right on one day but will forcefully separate parents and children without any necessity the next and say "it's my sovereignty" to anyone pointing out your blatant hypocrisy? You're a joke. Same with torture. Fundamental human right one day, but a useful tool against "terrorists" the next. A nation of untrustworthy hypocrites
    5
  657. +Richard Marshall +Sean Rea I'm a law student so I'm happy to explain the difference. In and before the 1930's, there was a global belief that a democracy had to be neutral to all principles, including even fascism (whose entire purpose was to misuse democracy to abolish it and seize power). The belief was that a democracy that excluded a political belief from entering that democracy was no democracy at all, therefore it wasn't protected. This is what Hitler and Mussolini used to seize power. After WW2, this changed. You and we together built a liberal world order and a new belief gained ground that there were certain rights that belong to everyone (i.e. universal declaration of human rights, ICCPR, ICESCR, ECHR and more treaties like that). Certain rights that couldn't be taken away because they were so basic. Today, the idea is that democracy needs to be defended against anti-democratic entities. Yes, the majority rules in a democracy, but do others have the right to take away my democratic rights just because they outnumber me? No. And believe me, if this wasn't our belief during the Cold War, we'd be communist right now. Communist parties and influences were actively battled due to their totalitarian ideas. If they weren't, they'd have taken power in the same way Hitler did. A very good modern example of the so-called militant democracy is Turkey in 2003. First I'll explain that in Europe we have the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Everyone from the Netherlands to even Russia is part of it. And so are some semi-European states including Turkey and Azerbaijan. It's a treaty about basic human rights, like freedom of speech, ban on death penalty, ban on torture, etc. and has its own supranational court that can bind members of the treaty. Kind of a pan-European constitutional judge, if you will. Now, in 2003 Turkey had a huge party that was set to win the elections. They were projected to get a landslide victory of 67+ percent of votes. But then... the leader of this party said something. He wanted to have a sharia law state. Upon further inquiry they stood by this ideal. The government then made that party illegal. 4 million party members suddenly out of a job, the biggest party of Turkey at that moment just gone at an instant. And most importantly: it was a completely non-violent political party like any other. The party went to the European Court of European Rights, which stated that sharia law is incompatible with the principles of democracy and therefore, a complete ban on the political party was completely justified (of course heavily simplified, but that's the core). In the 1930's the Weimar Republic stood at the sidelines as a party that existed for the sole purpose to destroy democracy from within gained ground (and they were violent to boot, which makes condoning the party even worse). In present day Europe, a fascist, communist, islamic or otherwise undemocratic party is illegalised quickly. And if you continue to work for that party despite it being illegal you can be prosecuted. Mind you, I've just explained one of dozens of failsafes meant to protect democracy. Just one of many. Discussing how our democracy is protected against anti-democratic influences would take a book or two. It's solidly protected
    5
  658.  @kurousagi8155  Fair enough, the US did bomb the Syrian government anyway while trying to circumvent hitting Russian forces, I forgot about that. They'd probably do the same in a scenario with Iran. So Russian presence would at best keep a few key positions off the US bombing list and at worst close to nothing.
    5
  659. MsJoshisfat That's what we're trying to do! But those pesky *insert country here* won't allow us to invade and rule them! On a serious note, humans can never be united under one government. We have our differences. The best we can do is unified continents à la EU and even that is difficult to achieve. A unified world is fantasy. And as long as incompetent governments exist, so will starvation. We already help Africa a lot, be it with food or money. Their governments are too incompetent to create self-sustaining countries. It's a continent riddled with corruption and greed. A lot are starving, but it isn't for lack of trying to save them from it. The only way to fully see through that their countries are run properly would be to bring back colonialism...
    5
  660. Mooi hoor
    5
  661.  @ulysses7653  The "plan" is taxes, it really is that simple. I don't get how you can possibly fail to understand this
    5
  662. Well it's not very hard to be against an anti-democratic and authoritarian system that had concentration camps and "progression" programmes that usually led to millions of deaths.
    5
  663. That it's the best system doesn't mean we shouldn't improve it to address some of its issues. Capitalism has some serious issues as mentioned in the video and I'll add that modern capitalism also has the issue of mass produced crap goods being more profitable than actually quality and sustainable goods. Things are not made to last anymore and are specifically designed to make you buy more a few years on. And then there's typically capitalist things like the consumption culture, where we buy way too many things at an incredibly unsustainable rate. Capitalism is great in the early stages wherein it fuels competition to offer quality goods, but when capitalism gets too advanced the position of quality is abandoned and we move into the stage of the mass consumption. Especially with the ecological issues of today, this and other issues with capitalism that are addressed in the video are unacceptable. I think capitalism is the best system out there and changing systems is incredibly dangerous (be it clinging onto old systems that have failed in the past or new systems that we don't know of whether they work or will produce terrible tragedies like in the beginning of the 20th century), but capitalism does need to change. Looking from the perspective of the US, it's evident from all the quality of life indices that the social democratic system in Western Europe is simply superior on almost all fronts when it comes to managing wealth. And there's a more general problem with capitalism that exists in Europe too and that'd be that capitalism needs to become more aware of the environmental impact and sustainability issues. We need to use resources more responsibly and preferrably create circular economies. Capitalism needs to become a system that strives for a certain balance between our wealth/happiness and ecological health/sustainability. Then it's done. In Europe we might already be busy with the latter transition, perhaps we will change. But it's unknown how it'll pan out. The attitude of economic growth über alles is one of capitalisms most dire faults. We can't continue with the same kind of capitalism we had in the 1960s; it worked for us then but now the situation has changed. I am no economist, but if it was possible to create a version of capitalism in which we don't just aim for endless max growth but set a certain wealth goal for a population count and try to keep our economies stable around that point with a circular economy set-up, that'd be great (economic growth based on innovation is of course always good, but growth based on ever-expanding industry should have a limit). Then exchange the attitude of max profit for an attitude of max quality goods, while preserving our social democracy redistribution of wealth, and we're set.
    5
  664. Het gaat om de mogelijkheid om kinderen te krijgen. Dat is niet iets triviaals waar je "als het dit niet is, dan is het dat wel tegenwoordig" over zegt. Dit is geen klein puntje waar jij "ach het zal wel" van zou zeggen als jij nu geen kinderen meer zou kunnen krijgen. Vreemde uitspraak.
    5
  665. Eigenlijk heb je gelijk, maar ze zullen nooit accepteren dat wij weer de controle overnemen. Ze willen hun soevereiniteit en dat is hun goed recht. Maar ja... als wij de administratie tijdelijk zouden kunnen overnemen tot het ontwikkelde landen zijn.... zouden veel mensen mee geholpen zijn denk ik.
    5
  666. Voor de prestatie die Waylon heeft neergezet hebben we zeker niet de 18e plek verdiend, maar ja Country Rock is dan ook niet bepaald populair in Europa. En daar komt bij dat er dit jaar wel heel veel goeie inzendingen waren. Zweden, Oostenrijk, Duitsland, Estland... allemaal fantastisch. Ik vind dat we het nog goed gedaan hebben, met een impopulair genre en sterke competitie.
    5
  667. +Maria Pinto "Oh no, someone has accused my country of doing something incorrectly, I must now insult that country back instead of actually admitting we do something wrong and attempt to fix that!" Pathetic.
    5
  668. +yetlin That people CAN wear a bikini if they WANT is indeed a symbol of freedom, people may wear what they please here. That women are forced or heavily encouraged to wear Hijabs and not allowed to swim with boys is called oppression
    5
  669. +yetlin Because for the woman in the bikini it's her own choice and for the woman with the hijab it's a religious rule that prescribes she must wear it and of course her family pressuring her into wearing one, enforcing that religious rule. The woman in the bikini was never told by anyone or any book she must wear a bikini and one day... decided she would wear it all by herself, because she and she alone wanted it. She could've chosen for a bathing suit that covers more, she could've even chosen for a full-body bathing suit that covers all. The woman with the hijab was raised to believe she has to wear a hijab and told by others she should wear it (and in some cases even forced to wear it). It takes strength to stand up to that kind of influence.
    5
  670.  @brittakriep2938  Yeah that may be the origin of that term indeed. Groot Nederland / Greater Netherlands is also a term I think was only used by fascists trying to unite the Netherlands and Belgium. Groß Deutschland may be the same.
    5
  671. Yup
    5
  672. Its#R3ns _ Strikt genomen zijn heel veel stoffen drugs. De definitie is volgens mij alles wat bij inname een psychologisch effect op je heeft. Dus zelfs cafeïne is een drug. Maar natuurlijk zijn er drugs die helemaal niet schadelijk zijn en drugs die je compleet mollen, dus de term drugs an sich hoeft niet zo zeer negatief te zijn
    5
  673. Amerika heeft een rotgewoonte om zich te bemoeien met dingen waar ze zich buiten moeten houden en juist niet bemoeien met dingen waar ze zouden moeten helpen. Ik heb respect voor Trump's visie van America First, maar dan moet je dat ook echt uitvoeren en niet als een soort halfbakken wereldmacht optreden waar je soms wel en soms niet ingrijpt. ALS je ingrijpt, moet je het ook op een beschaafde manier afronden. En als je dat niet wil, moet je gewoon NIET ingrijpen. De manier waarop Amerika vertrok is gewoon zwaar kut en verraderlijk richting de Koerden die IS praktisch voor ons hebben verslagen. Als de Koerden er niet waren, moesten wij zelf boots on the ground hebben, moesten wij westerse levens opofferen om IS te verslaan. En dit is hoe we ze bedanken? Het is gewoon een oneervolle ruggensteek, iets wat niet bij onze cultuur past. Misschien wel bij de Amerikaanse. De EU is inderdaad zwak op dit moment, juist omdat wij zo veel op de VS steunden. Dat betekent dat wij onze eigen broek op zullen moeten houden en zelf ten minste een regionale grootmacht zullen moeten worden, zo niet een mondiale grootmacht. De economie en politieke macht hebben we al, alleen nog de militaire macht (meer investeren, meer samenwerken, EU leger hoeft niet maar zou kunnen gebeuren als het aan landen als Frankrijk ligt) en dan zijn we er. Als dit gebeurt, wat waarschijnlijk ook echt zal gebeuren want dit is waar ongeveer alle EU-landen op dit moment naar streven, dan is Amerika als dé grote supermacht dood. Amerika met steun van de EU is extreem machtig en kan potentieel heel de wereld aan, Amerika zonder steun van de EU is nog steeds heel machtig maar kan niet in z'n eentje op tegen Rusland en China, laat staan de belangen van de EU, Rusland en China. Dan is Amerika slechts één van vele supermachten in de wereld in plaats van de grote jongen die alles uitmaakt, dus Trump schiet zichzelf in de voet (hoewel... Trump wil niet de grote supermacht zijn en ziet liever een Amerika dat meer in zichzelf is gekeerd zoals voor WOII, dus eigenlijk schiet hij het establishment van de VS en hun globale belangen in de voet). Ikzelf ben hier enthousiast over, want onder voorgaande presidenten was Amerika heel kut in hun buitenland beleid en onder Trump is het beter maar hij doet soms nog wel dingen waar ik vraagtekens bij heb. Ik denk dat een wereld met goede balans tussen meerdere supermachten die elkaar in bedwang houden altijd beter is dan een wereld met één grote supermacht die maar doet wat het wil. En het zou goed zijn als wij zelf weer een prominente rol op het wereldtoneel zouden hebben. Wordt weer eens tijd na 70+ jaar....
    5
  674. US cars to EU = 10% tariff. EU cars to US = 2.5% for regular cars and 25% for pick-up trucks, bigger trucks, MPVs and certain other vehicles. We're both protectionist.
    5
  675. Wanneer stoppen we met zo hypocriet te zijn? Saudi Arabië is een vreselijk land, maar toch onze bondgenoot. En dat is tot daar aan toe, maar wat echt erg is is dat we ze amper wijzen op de gruwelijke daden die ze verrichten. Laat Jemen en Khashoggi daar nou eindelijk eens verandering in brengen...
    5
  676. Rutte had Baudet wel een paar keer en debatteerde over het algemeen goed, maar MH17 was naar mijn mening niet één van die momenten. Toendertijd was het niet duidelijk wie de MH17 had neergehaald en ondanks dat feit werd Oekraïne, één van de mogelijke daders, onderdeel van het onderzoeksteam. Ik vond dat een slechte keuze en dat werpt vragen op tav de kwaliteit van het onderzoek.
    5
  677. That would be a fun one
    5
  678.  @YraxZovaldo  Je stopt daar wel heel veel woorden in mijn mond. Laat wel zien hoe je geen argument hebt. Als je echt een punt zou hebben, zou me nu aan het uitleggen zijn waarom volgens jou er wél een goede reden is om de traditie aan te passen. Maar natuurlijk kies je ervoor om in de plaats daarvan woorden in mijn mond te stoppen en me vervolgens dom te noemen. Typisch. Ik vraag me af hoe je het debat met je volgende comment gaat omzeilen ;)
    5
  679.  @ronjans7884  Hij heeft het over zijn eigen ouders, maar goed... Ga maar door met je "alle kritiek op overheidsbeleid is niet waar"-instelling
    5
  680. En hij doet ook alsof Rutte onvervangbaar is. Die man volgt gewoon blind alles wat het OMT zegt. Behalve als er verkiezingen aankomen, dan gooit hij ff wat versoepelingen het land in haha. Wat een huichelaar is die Rutte toch ook.
    5
  681.  @Moonshinexmoonshine  Well that's kind of the point. We make it harder so less people will come. Here in the EU we have the Turkey deal to stop migrants from passing into Europe through Turkey and it stopped a million or so extra migrants from coming in. Did it stop them all? No. Was it worth it? Absolutely. It's rather strange to say "oh well we can't stop them all, so let the millions of migrants in Turkey come too". Doesn't make a lot of sense...
    5
  682. Then prepare for more budget cuts mate. The UK needs to get some good trade going with the EU and a deal would be best. The government needs to stop these austerity measures
    5
  683.  @ronaldderooij1774  Het EVRM en andere internationale verdragen bevatten vrijwel geheel dezelfde grondrechten en zijn wél aan te voeren tegen formele wetten en treden daarmee de facto op als de grondwet van Nederland. Dat wordt op de universiteit uitgelegd. Bovendien gaat het hier niet om een wet, maar om een noodmaatregel die de regering nam zónder inspraak van het parlement. En dan is ook de grondwet gewoon in rechte aan te voeren tegen die maatregel. Het toetsingsverbod geldt namelijk uitsluitend voor wetten in formele zin (zijnde wetten die dus ook door het parlement zijn goedgekeurd). Lagere wetten/regels kunnen gewoon worden getoetst aan de grondwet, ook deze maatregel dus.
    5
  684. +The Badman Sure, and that's why we must close the borders.... and take away civil liberties of citizens? Liberalism is good, as long as it doesn't go too far. You act as if liberalism absolutely has to go coupled with limitless immigration, which is simply not true.
    5
  685. @Robert Wilkins True, but they have no real way to transport to Germany, so the Nazi's are still without. However, their synthetic oil plants which were in real life bombed might be less impacted by an RAF only bombing campaign, so Germany would at least have some more oil I'd say.
    5
  686.  @brianthelion97  You forgot the Mongols, they completely wiped out several peoples in Eastern Europe and killed many further west into Europe. And you forgot European tribes (or tribes in general really) that constantly fought and at times would invade and genocide other land (like Anglo Saxons coming into the British Isles). And what the Roman Empire did to the Gauls (France); mass murder and theft of their resources (rich in gold). There is so much more we can't list it, because unfortunately this was the norm back then, cross-culturally. Got your eye on land/resources? Well, just genocide or chase away the current people inhabiting it... Luckily global morality increased much since then
    5
  687. Not really... The Nazis attempted to EXTERMINATE AN ENTIRE RACE FOR NO APPARENT REASON. The British let millions die because of bad management. Both are responsible for millions of deaths, but the one that tried to put an entire race in concentration camps to systematically murder them is obviously a lot worse
    5
  688.  @StephenButlerOne  That's all well and good when we're talking about opinions, but TIK has made some real errors. For example, his definition of socialism is completely wrong and essentially comes down to "big government/collectivism", which in turn causes him to group fascism and marxist socialism as one and the same thing. But a closer inspection of those ideologies, as well as their history, would unearth some significant differences that explain why despite their similarities on the surface they still heavily opposed one another. For example, the proletariat (abolishing class) versus class collaboration (solidifying class, but having all classes work together in the interest of the nation/race), egalitarianism versus solidification of hierarchies, collectivising around the working class versus around the nation. TIK misses all of this and wrongly categorises these different ideologies as belonging to the same family. In truth, it's much more accurate to see Fascism (incl. NS), Socialism and Capitalism as three separate ideologies that all oppose one another. That's also in line with what Fascists said about themselves; they called themselves the third option besides capitalism and communism. This is a huge error that has a large impact on all his political/economic videos. All because he gets one definition wrong. Mostly he is still correct, however, so it's not like the entire videos are wrong. It's just that he uses the wrong terms for many things. All because of just one mistake that seeps into the rest of his videos. Fascism and Socialism are both collectivist ideologies with heavy government involvement in the economy, but similarities end there. I hope TIK revises this.
    5
  689.  @marthuntink6227  Ga jij maar janken dat Rutte IV nu nagenoeg niet meer mogelijk is. Het is klaar met die huichelaar
    5
  690.  J and M  What Boris did was more like an attempted coup against the constitution and its parliamentary sovereignty. What he did was constitutionally questionable. On the other hand, I agree with Boris on substance. We need no deal as an option in order to have decent negotiations with the EU. Parliament's discord on this matter is killing the UK's chance at a proper deal, but that doesn't mean we can undermine the constitution and democracy by bypassing the parliament.
    5
  691. Black tribes as well as white countries were colonisers in South Africa. Then only very specific tribes that were already there for thousands of years should get land. And even they fought eachother over land but let's forget that.
    5
  692.  @benjamincannell4906  Because it's a dumb question. If the government spends money on something it was paid for by tax money. Everyone knows this. The "how are you going to pay for it" question is asked deliberately to have Bernie say "taxes", so that the corporate media narrative can then be "Bernie wants to raise taxes on the middle class". This question is never asked when the US spends billinos on wall street bailouts or when trillions are spent on another foreign intervention. On the surface it seems like a normal question, but when you analyse it more you see it's part of a vicious narrative. They also ask the question again and again, after Bernie has answered it over a hundred times by now. It's a sneaky tactic to portray Bernie as the big bad man that will tax you blind.
    5
  693. I hope you get better soon
    5
  694. That's not a 'male' thing, it's basic decency. I as a man hold doors open all the time, but I see women do the same, including for me. And that is a good thing. Everybody should learn to help one another by adhering to the rules of decency.
    5
  695. Next can they invade EU?
    5
  696.  @hamcatjones8028  Yet the British Isles are now called British after what the invading ROMANS called them. Romans brought civilisation with them that ended up destroying the traditional way of life of local tribes and replaced it with the civilisation of today. The English language has huge influences by both Latin and Scandinavian languages due to invasions. And it could get worse: when Christianity came, they mass murdered pagan European (i.e. the REAL original European culture and traditions), forced everybody to convert and banned the practice of European traditions on the punishment of DEATH (most known example of this is the burning of "witches"). They destroyed European holy temples and in many cases built churches in their place. They cut down sacred trees. They desrtoyed one of the wonders of the world at the time, a massive ivory statue of Zeus, and destroyed many many pieces of art (you can still see old statues in musea where nipples and genitals are carved off and in some cases a christian cross carved into the statue. The nose was also often carved off). Books were burned en masse, schools of philosophy were closed. They launched invasions/crusades into pagan lands purely to convert the population. They tried to kill as many European traditions as they could, and where they failed to destroy traditions they erased their meaning by giving them a Christian theme (i.e. Yule/Christmas, Easter, actually almost all our traditions except minor exceptions like Valentine's Day are of pagan pre-Christian origin). A lot of pagan symbols and practices are now also associated with satanism because of slander campaigns by the church. The pentagram for example signifies harmony between man and nature within paganism, but nowadays it is mostly known for devil worshipping. Wise women/seeresses/sorceresses, who had an important role in paganism to preserve and transfer traditions to the next generation, are now known as evil witches (you can also hazard a guess as to why they in particular were targeted for burnings). This is called cultural genocide and all of Europe suffered under this. This is like what Canada did to their natives: forcing western education on them, which killed their culture. But worse, much worse. It's called cultural genocide and it actually falls under the definition of genocide in international law. So believe it or not, but Europe has had it W O R S E than the Maori people, who did not experience cultural genocide. We are only fine because we moved on. We don't wallow in pity about how we lost our traditional way of life, instead we embraced civilisation. We even embraced our new Christian identity after the horrible way it entered our continent... In short, we don't get stuck in the past despite the horrors we experienced and that is why we are fine today. I wish many things throughout history didn't happen, whether it be done to us or by us to others, but it's counterproductive to get stuck in some kind of victim complex. It doesn't suit your future to be stuck in a victim complex. You're ignorant of how much suffering just about every culture endured throughout history. History was not a kind place, it was ugly by today's standards. We slowly improved our morals throughout time to finally end up where we are today.
    5
  697.  @marc8919  If they have a point, hell yeah you should just let them rant
    5
  698. It is you who doesn't understand, not them. Germany is the biggest country within Europe but by NO means controls the others. They are just the most powerful out of all the countries because they represent the biggest single population, not some kind of dictator telling others what to do.
    5
  699. Rutte is de Judas in dit verhaal
    5
  700.  @badhero88  I just told you the EU has the same "attack on one is attack on all" articles as NATO does. Yes it is a military alliance (not union), but the main focus is an economic and political union. Still, it is also a military alliance to defend said economic/political union. An attack on one EU member state is an attack on all.
    5
  701. Damn... with something that serious perhaps going abroad could help. This shit system in the US literally kills
    5
  702. Ligt wel aan de context, hè. Je hebt ook vrouwen die verkracht zijn bijvoorbeeld en onder de Ierse wet geen abortus mochten krijgen. En je hebt kinderen waarvan van tevoren al bekend is dat ze niet levensvatbaar zijn en dood geboren zullen worden of kort na de geboorte zullen overlijden. In dat geval moest onder de Ierse wet de vrouw 9 maanden met dat kind in de buik lopen, wetende dat het uiteindelijk allemaal voor niets zou zijn. Dan lijkt het me ook beter om gewoon maar abortus te plegen. Maar ja, voor de mensen die een kind weg laten halen simpelweg omdat ze per ongeluk zwanger zijn geraakt... vind ik ook maar niks.
    5
  703.  @XRENDERMAN  Socialism is a complete revolution that abolishes capitalism and changes many facets of the economy in fundamental ways, not just "muh government does stuff". Enacting social policies in a capitalist state doesn't make you non-capitalist all of a sudden. Otherwise pretty much all of Europe would have to be called socialist today. But we're not, we are social democracies aka democratic capitalists with social policies.
    5
  704. +TIH YDP I dunno, black people always stealing? The underlying fact is that black people are overrepresented in crime, then it's overinflated into applying to black people in general and used as a negative way to describe all blacks. There is no more than some truth in it. If it is applied to a black individual in some context it could be an overexaggerated fact turned into an insult to that particular person.
    5
  705.  Jack K  Russia is Eurasian geographically, but overwhelmingly European in population and culture. What also should play a role is that most of the populous areas are in the European part. Egypt is 100% in Africa, with maybe a bit of desert in Arabia at best (not sure). Culturally and ethnically they're more Arabic nowadays but it's still Africa. But North Africa is very different from sub Saharan Africa so...
    5
  706.  @curlyg3189  Als Rutte weg is dan heeft de VVD weer de eerste zet in de formatie en zal waarschijnlijk de premier leveren (wie dat dan moet zijn, geen flauw idee). Als Rutte er nog is dan kan Kaag zeggen ja de VVD is de grootste maar de tweede partij dient het initiatief te nemen in de formatie vanwege dit schandaal. Dat is trouwens precies wat Kaag ook heeft gezegd en zou betekenen dat D66 de premier misschien gaat leveren. Voor Kaag is het beter als Rutte blijft en de positie van de VVD in de formatie verneukt dan dat Rutte gaat en VVD met een andere leider de formatie leidt en dus ook de premier levert. Volgens mij spelen ze dus een politiek spelletje om Kaag premier te maken. De grootste kans voor Kaag om premier te worden is als Rutte blijft en de meeste andere partijen hem uitsluiten. Gevalletje 3D schaken zeg maar
    5
  707. Lol ikr. I got about 10.000 so I got a low debt (I got 10.000 from my family to spend on studying so... yeah I'm privileged there). Better than for instance the US, but still not free. But eh with university level jobs it's easy to pay off.
    5
  708.  @Sam-yi7uk  Niet altijd, voor heel veel vrouwen wereldwijd is het geen keuze door sociale druk en/of zelfs een gebod door de overheid
    5
  709. "It happens elsewhere too so it's fine and nothing needs to be done to fix this problem"
    5
  710. +omnivorous65 Well said. It just hurts to see some of the veterans in this video state that "EU politicians force regulation on the UK", which is a complete falsehood. I get this feeling that the only cause for Brexit was complete lack of knowledge about what the EU even is. There are no EU politicians telling the member states what to do, it's the member states themselves that are in control of what the EU does. I would respect their opinions if only they were based on facts. I remember during the campaign that both sides flat out lied to the voters. Brexiters lied about the EU imposing rules (they can't, it's the member states themselves that vote on laws... including the UK, there's no such thing as EU politicians that can impose anything) and money that would be redirected back into Britain (NHS and more, lies of course). Remainers lied that leaving the EU would be a "disaster" and that the economy would collapse and whatnot. It was a campaign full of lies and waht do we get for it? Voters that made their decisions based on complete nonsense. Is that a democracy? The UK government cajoled themselves out of their spot in the EU by allowing such a rotten campaign so devoid of facts on either side.
    4
  711. The popularity of Wilders has nothing to do with jobs. In fact, it would be more accurate to say it's about Muslims NOT having jobs and instead relying on welfare. But above all, it's about integration of Muslims. A fairly large group within the Muslims population (I'd say about 20%) completely segregates themselves, believe in the exact opposite of our Dutch values. Many of them hate gays and according to government inquiries, about one third of gays are too afraid to walk hand in hand in cities with a high Muslim population, which used to be very different. Women also are hit by it. In Amsterdam, in certain areas women are sexually harrassed a lot, luckily only with words, to the point of the government having to take measures to fight this. The self-segregation is also an issue. The government specifically tries to integrate everyone into Dutch society so they can be part of us. This has worked with every ethnicity, religion and nationality... except Muslims, who for a large part choose to distance themselves from our society. A week ago, there was even a Muslim lady on TV who completely integrated into Dutch society (if only everyone was like her we would have zero issues) and she said other Muslims told her she was "too Dutchified". A recent event that portrays this self-segregation is the Turkey coup and the response to that in the Netherlands. I was just sitting in Rotterdam with some friends and suddenly dozens of Turks walk all over the street with huge Turkish flags, yelling "Turkiye, Turkiye" and some in cars with flags hanging out and honking the horn. This is what prompted the "act normal or leave" thing from our prime minister (btw, "act normal" sounds strange in English but it's a normal expression in Dutch). The aftermath was even worse. Gülen supporters in the Netherlands were attacked by Erdogan supporters, just like in Turkey... Those people aren't Dutch, they're Turks living in the Netherlands and we hate that... The Turkish influence on Turks here is also the reason for not allowing the Turkish ministers into the Netherlands a week ago (and no, CNN, "islamophobia" and "acting tough" is not Rutte's reason for this, as you reported... I'm almost starting to believe Trump has a point in his hate for CNN), it is obviously unwanted to import pro vs anti-Erdogan feuds into the Netherlands, with possible violence like there was against Gülen supporters in the past. Anyway, long story short, the reasons for Wilders' popularity are the deplorable "values" of a part of the Muslims that are the opposite of our own values of tolerance and their refusal to be part of our society or perhaps I could even say their downright shunning of our society while we try and try to help them integrate. If you come here you choose to become part of our society. If you walk in the streets yelling "Turkiye" at the top of your lungs with a large Turkish flag in your hands... why are you here and not in Turkey? That's what Rutte meant with act normal or leave and almost all Dutch people agree with that. Wilders has a point and that's a fact, which is why all parties acknowledge these problems too. The difference is that other parties want to intensify the integration policy (each in a different way) and Wilders actually want to get some of them to leave and prevent any more from coming. And Wilders is not just the Dutch Trump, Trump is the American Wilders. He's been in politics since 2006 and before him, there was an even more popular guy named Fortuyn, who said the same about Islam in the 90's. He got murdered by a leftist guy in 2002, though. Integration and Muslims' failure to do so has been an important topic in our country for 20+ years and populists have been big in politics since the very beginning of that. That said, the popularity of Wilders is somewhat exaggerated. 20 seats in parliament is 13% of the votes. So 13% voted for a right win populist and 70% voted for a traditional right, left or middle party. Most votes actually go towards the middle (CDA and D66, both with 19 seats at 3rd and 4th place), mine included. The thing about Dutch politics is that we have a huge number of parties, each with their own views on running the country. No one party will ever win, it's always several parties that have to work together and make a compromise. This time around, there will have to be at least 4 parties working together in government to get that majority (most likely VVD (Rutte), CDA, D66 and one more)
    4
  712. Niet zo overdrijven... we hebben werk te doen en moeten linea recta immigratie stoppen als je het mij vraagt maar wat jij beschrijft klopt gewoon niet
    4
  713. +Grind State This is complete bullshit. The British contributed by far the most in the Battle of the Atlantic and taking down all axis navies around Europe. They guarded most of the boats, they commanded the entire operation and they took the most losses in terms of warships. Look at this list of allied warships hit by u-boats: https://uboat.net/allies/merchants/warships.html I counted 171 British Empire warships hit by u-boats and 38 US warships.... Also look at these lists (http://www.naval-history.net/WW2aBritishLosses10tables.htm), especially the "total axis losses and those inflicted by the Royal Navy" section and at the German u-boat table, where you see that the total German u-boat losses were 780. Of these, 275 were inflicted by the Royal Navy, 244 by the Royal Air Force (totalling 519 of 780 sunk by the British Empire) and 175 by the USA navy and air force combined. The US lacked the technology to effectively battle submarines while Britain was world leader in anti-submarine warfare at that time, constantly developing new tech to battle subs and constantly trying to find out where German wolf packs were. The percentage of German, Italian and Vichy French surface warships sunk are even better for the British. Almost all of them were sunk by the Royal Navy or Royal Air Force. Where the US did the most was in the Pacific against Japan, they by far got the most Japanese ships there.
    4
  714. He's not even back yet
    4
  715.  @Innoruuk  Well of course we have to take heed to how to store it. It's why we built a specially designed bunker for it and Finland also took the necessary precautions to prevent spreading of nuclear waste outside of the mines they stored it in. Germany was careless, apparently. About Fukushima, those figures are false, very false. https://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/a_e/fukushima/faqs-fukushima/en/ The only health consequences of Fukushima are zero deaths, a handful of increased chances of cancer (for a couple of workers) and the most serious consequences are that the forced evacuation of thousands of people caused mental health issues (entirely unrelated to any nuclear problems). The latter consequence is quite serious, I do agree. And that is the major flaw of nuclear power. IF anything should go wrong, which it close to never does but can nonetheless, it's a disaster. It may be safe enough to not even cause deaths in a serious instance like Fukushima, but the fact that a large area has to be evacuated is disastrous in itself. Prevention is of grand importance. Newer nuclear technologies make it even safer and can prevent nuclear radiation altogether. From what I've gathered, Thorium plants for example (soon-to-be perfected tech) are safe even when breaking down. They can't have a melt-down in the case of a disaster because they don't have to be cooled all the time. I agree with you that the current nuclear technology is risky, no matter how safe it is (as you say, mistakes will be made even if it's one in a hundred years that's disastrous). But technology that is within reach can make nuclear 100% safe in the face of breakdowns AND Thorium also reduces the waste. I think the future is in such advanced nuclear plants.
    4
  716.  @avggamer86  You act like the Democratic party deserves your vote. You have to choose between enabling Trump or enabling a Democratic party that has absolute disdain for progressives and democracy itself to the point of rigging primaries to get what they want. The option is evil, lesser evil or blank. I choose blank.
    4
  717.  @hihoi6085  2 Timotheüs 3:16: “Heel de Schrift is door God ingegeven en is nuttig om daarmee te onderwijzen, te weerleggen, te verbeteren en op te voeden in de rechtvaardigheid.” 2 Petrus 1:19-21: "En wij hebben het profetische Woord, dat zeer vast is, en gij doet wel dat gij daarop acht hebt, als op een licht schijnende in een duistere plaats, totdat de dag aanlichte en de Morgenster opga in uw harten; dit eerst wetende, dat geen profetie der Schrift is van eigen uitlegging; want de profetie is voortijds niet voortgebracht door den wil eens mensen, maar de heilige mensen Gods, van den Heiligen Geest gedreven zijnde, hebben ze gesproken." Hebreeën 4 : 12: “Want het Woord Gods is levend en krachtig, en scherpsnijdender dan enig tweesnijdend zwaard…” Ef. 6:17: “En neemt de helm der zaligheid, en het zwaard des Geestes, hetwelk is Gods Woord.” De bijbel noemt zichzelf het woord van god, geöpenbaard door de discipelen die niet door eigen wil, maar de heilige geest/god dóór hen de bijbel schreef. Dus wel degelijk claimt de bijbel het woord van god te zijn. En "topwetenschappers" mogen zeggen wat ze willen, maar ik geloof alleen iets wat ze zeggen als het onderbouwd is. De meeste wetenschappers uit het verleden waren christelijk en velen zijn dat vandaag de dag ook, maar dat betekent niet dat het christendom de ware religie is. Alleen bewijs zou dat kunnen aantonen, hetgeen dit zeker niet is. Je maakt hier een foutief beroep op autoriteit, een drogredenering.
    4
  718. Zou prima zijn áls de resultaten zouden worden gebruikt om versneld te versoepelen indien vaststaat dat zelfs zo'n evenement verantwoord kan. Dan moet de horeca e.d. open met verantwoorde maatregelen tegen de verspreiding van corona
    4
  719. And Trump blaming the EU for counter-sanctions... pathetic. If you impose unilateral sanctions you're going to get unilateral sanctions right back at you. You lose jobs in trade wars and it wasn't the EU that started this trade war.
    4
  720. En dan durven ze te zeggen dat dit de "huidige tijdsgeest" is. Grappig hoe eerst 30% en nu 45% bepaalt wat de "huidige tijdsgeest" is en niet de meerderheid... Als ze nou tenminste eerlijk waren kon ik het nog respecteren. Maar ze verschuilen zich heel laf achter de "huidige tijdsgeest" terwijl daar niets van klopt. Ze nemen hier gewoon een keiharde positie in in een discussie die allesbehalve uitgepraat is.
    4
  721. Wait, so anybody that has a violent husband can flee to the US now and stay?
    4
  722. The Roman empire is pretty much the basis for all of European civilisation, which today is by far the most dominant one in the world. The British empire brought industrialisation to this civilisation, essentially creating the modern world we have today. In my opinion, the basis of European civilisation is more impressive than a very important improvement upon European civilisation. After all, where would we (including the British empire itself) be without the basis?
    4
  723. Als de paarden goed worden behandeld en tijdens de show niets hoeven te doen wat slecht voor ze is, wat is dan het probleem? Ze blijven maar van alles vinden wat dan weer niet mag en het houdt nooit op. Soms hebben ze een punt, maar vaak ook gewoon niet. We worden een land vol met beroepsdemonstranten die demonstreren om te demonstreren. Als dierenwelzijn op nummer één staat bij een show is daar niets mis mee.
    4
  724.  mahdi sabri  The largest, bloodiest and most destructive wars of human kind were pretty much all fought on our soil, so....
    4
  725. Hillary Clinton as president via a small detour. Imagine the riots lmao
    4
  726.  @glennsmith1676  The British Empire outproduced Germany, the US and USSR massively outproduced Germany. It is exaggerated to say that "nearly every" bullet came from the US. The US supplied certain much-needed things like rubber for truck wheels, but in terms of for example tanks the USSR outproduced the US, in terms of several things like mortars and armoured cars the British Empire outproduced the US. And the British Empire also supplied the USSR with vital supplies they didn't have. The British Empire was dependent on outside supplies for sure because they were continuously bombed. The USSR was partly dependent on supplies because they didn't have certain resources that Britain and the US could supply them. The US was probably the only fully self-sufficient ally, even though some of the things they could produce locally were of lower quality than elsewhere (like European steel vs US steel), but if they needed to they could produce everything themselves. It is important to note that every ally, the USSR and US on top and the British Empire a bit behind them, produced A LOT and the difference is not huge. Especially not between the US and USSR. So it wasn't like one industry was supplying everyone, but I would definitely call the US industry the best of the three and the one that aided the others the most. Mainly because the other two got bombed continuously and the US industry was safe behind two oceans. But yeah, let's also not forget that the UK actually traded something for access to the US industry: technology. With the Tizard mission, the UK gave the US highly valuable tech like the theory of creating a nuclear bomb, jet engine tech (literally only Germany and the UK had this tech at the time, both the US and USSR got it from the UK), radar (US did not have this at the time, which would put them at a huge disadvantage towards the Germans and radar in naval ships was also one of the main factors why the US Navy curbstomped the Japanese, so this is pretty big) and many more highly sensitive tech. The UK paid dearly for their supplies (literally bankrupted themselves) and also gave away they hugely valuable technological secrets to the US in exchange for their supplies. And I don't know what the US fighting chance would have been without some of that tech. And the UK and Germany were the two leading countries in tech at that time.
    4
  727. You forgot white supremacist
    4
  728. What annoying behaviour...
    4
  729.  @Betterhose  Well said. I find it sad that most comments fall back on stereotypes ("Germany is a shadow of its former self", "France will surrender") and also seem to be completely unaware that the war economy is a thing. If a switch is turned, EU nations will start pumping out tanks, planes and more at a rate that Russia can only hope to achieve.
    4
  730. So because of a 3 week jail time she loses her children forever ? Seems... fair. At this point you're just doing everything you can to justify whatever the US is doing here...
    4
  731. +paul han A swastika is thousands of years older than the nazis... it's time to stop acting like it was ever a nazi symbol, they stole it
    4
  732. Yeah, 4 years without war already... this is so unlike America
    4
  733. And again the EU fails to get its own foreign issues sorted. Why do we need Russia and Turkey to solve Libya for us? Seriously? It's right there in our border region and we failed to sort it out. We really need to get our act together. I'm thankful that these countries jumped in to try and find a solution, but we in the EU should've stepped up first. It's mainly our problem. But well... when Italy supports the UN government and France the General that holds most of the other parts of Libya, I guess a uniform EU policy is going to be difficult.... Sometimes I think the attitude of EU countries is stuck in the 1800's. I never expected France and Italy to fight a proxy war in 2020.
    4
  734. +Anonymous So on an Islamic market in what can easily be called the shittiest and most Islamised place in all of Europe, you see about half the women wear headscarves? Not bad. Tell me, how many black people do I find if I go to one of those violent ghettos in the US, which are infinitely worse than even the worst Europe has to offer? 99% black?
    4
  735. Sorry to tell you but it wasn't the BBC that locked him up lol
    4
  736. The British had about 13 divisions to help defend France/Belgium (the British Expeditionary Force). France had over 100 divisions (by comparison, at that time the entire American army was 400k men, the total allied force involved in the battle of France was 3.3 million men). France failed but was supposed to hold out, it was expected to be like WW1. Britain relied on France in the early days and didn't go all out in a continental war yet by 1940. When the Germans attacked, they only had a pretty small force there to help France keep back the main attack. France had 104 divisions defending her, the British sent 13 divisions (the BEF), the Dutch had 10 divisions, the Belgians 22 divisions, the Polish 2 divisions. 1940 was France's war, NOT a British war. When France fell, you couldn't realistically expect the countries that were only there to support them to take their place. Besides, we're living in 2017/18, not the 1940's. What the Germans did in the early 1940's is exceptional. They revolutionised warfare back then when the other countries were still thinking about trench warfare. What they did was miraculous. They ran rings around the allies because they were strategically completely out of their league. Do you really think Russia is just as strategically superior to the EU as Nazi Germany was against the Allies? No. Not by far.
    4
  737. Yennefer looks close enough, despite being half native American. I don't see an issue, apart from her age. She looks too young to play Yennefer and I fear that acting like her she will come across as a bitchy teenager instead of an intimidating sorceress... But we shall see.
    4
  738. Waarom staat het beste land ter wereld op nummer 21, achter de meeste westerse landen, als het gaat om de welvaart mediaan? Amerikanen zijn veel minder rijk dan wij (NL staat op nr 6) en dat is nu eenmaal een feit. Dan kun je zeggen maar ja goede economie, weinig belasting etc. etc. en dat is waar, maar wat heb je daaraan als je bevolking er niets van terug ziet? Wat heb je aan een hoger inkomen als je er niet veel van over houdt en alsnog armer bent dan mensen uit sociale democratieën? Het beste land ter wereld voor mij is een land waar je met normaal werk een goed leven kan leiden, niet een land waar de kloof tussen rijk en arm absurd groot is en de rijken verreweg het meeste van de economie profiteren. De "American dream" is een farce en bestaat alleen voor zover je al rijk bent of iets heel bijzonders doet. Die droom geldt helemaal niet (meer) voor de gewone man.
    4
  739. ​ @peter-jantentijeookwelgeno7042  Waarom kwamen er ook alweer miljoenen migranten naar de EU? Oh ja, omdat de VS een burgeroorlog aanwakkerde in Syrië. Die stroom heeft de EU gelukkig kunnen dichten met de Turkije deal (niks met onze "beschermer" te maken). Maar waarom komen er nu nog migranten uit Afrika dan? Oh ja, omdat de VS het briljante idee had om Libië helemaal kapot te bombarderen en de NAVO daarin leidde... Zoals Donald Tusk zei: "with friends like this, who needs enemies?". Onze grote "vriend" de VS heeft de EU meer schade toegebracht dan welk land dan ook. Rusland niet, China niet, niemand. De VS is de reden dat ISIS bestaat, de VS kost ons miljarden euro's in handel door de Iran deal kapot te maken (VS zelf had natuurlijk niet veel handel met Iran, dus wat boeit het ze?), de VS probeert continu de relatie tussen Rusland en de EU te frustreren, de VS bespioneert zijn bondgenoten, etc. etc. etc. De VS zouden we moeten zien als onze grootste vijand. De enige momenten dat ze iets goeds doen is wanneer onze interesses toevallig hetzelfde zijn, maar als Amerika iets wil wat de bondgenoten hard raakt doen ze het gewoon. Welk land wakkert een burgeroorlog aan in een land dat een grens heeft met zijn grootste bondgenoot? Wat Amerika in Syrië heeft gedaan is vergelijkbaar met een situatie waarin de EU een burgeroorlog aanwakkert in een midden-Amerikaans land en dan verbaasd opkijkt wanneer alle migranten naar de VS spoelen. Hoe de VS ons als "bondgenoten" behandelt is ronduit schandalig. Moeten we zo snel mogelijk vanaf.
    4
  740. No, she was arrested for 2-3 weeks and now her children are gone forever. Forever , in another family. You'd have to be batshit crazy to think this is in any way justifiable
    4
  741. +The Badman Yeah, how dare they imply there's blossoms in China, everybody knows this is fake!
    4
  742.  @fretkoe  We weten niet precies wat het effect van ons handelen is. Het is geen "bullshit" het is gewoon onzeker of het waar is. Maar zolang de kans bestaat dat het wél waar is, is het oliedom om door te gaan met vervuilen. Die kans dat we wel degelijk onze toekomst aan het verkloten zijn is het waard om de overgang te maken. Het gaat om de gezondheid van onze omgeving en daarmee de gezondheid van de mensheid zelve. Daar moet je niet mee spelen.
    4
  743.  @lilak483  Wat zijn we toch zielig als we zo bang zijn voor vrouwen met 'ballen'... Er is niets mis met vrouwen met 'ballen', het probleem in het westen zit bij de mannen zonder 'ballen'.
    4
  744. The EU is also a defensive alliance. It has training, it has EU military missions, it has "attack on one is an attack on all" article in the treaty. It's not as steady as NATO because the military aspects of the EU are mostly left on the backburner compared to the economic and political aspects of it, but it is a fact that the EU is also a military alliance. A political and economic union and a military alliance.
    4
  745. De VS is een kutland vergeleken met WESTERSE LANDEN. Tuurlijk komen ze uit Zuid Amerika naar de VS. Zelfde hier, voor Afrikaanse migranten is zelfs Griekenland al mooi.
    4
  746. Tja hij heeft niet al te veel hoeven doen haha
    4
  747. Yup, US companies are spying on us all the same. They are right now even way more powerful and thus a greater threat than Chinese companies. We're better off developing everything for ourselves.
    4
  748. Depends which brands. Shitty mass produced chocolate from Europe is of higher quality than shitty mass produced chocolate from the US, but if you buy great artisan chocolate from either the US or Europe it should both be similarly good.
    4
  749. Inderdaad wel typisch ja. Ik denk dat dit soort framing nooit gepast is van een nieuwszender, zelfs niet bij zaken die overduidelijk slecht zijn. Het nieuws moet gewoon relatief neutraal gebracht worden. Ik hoorde ook geen zielige muziekjes onder video's van de aanslag in Bataclan en dergelijke rampen. Dat is gewoon niet nodig, je ziet dat het erg is en we hebben het hier niet over een dramafilm of zo maar het nieuws. Echte mensen. Dus die zielige muziekjes zijn zeer ongepast
    4
  750.  @benbow7  Because you can't strangle someone to death anymore? If you join the police force expecting that to happen in the first place, you should probably never join. Good riddance
    4
  751. Oh by that time they'd notice how wrong they were. Problem is that would be far too late
    4
  752. Ze willen gewoon een Nederlander in de top van de Commissie. Het Timmermans-effect
    4
  753. The origin of Zwarte Piet is literally laid in the abolition of slavery. The story goes that saint Nicholas saved a slave and brought them to the Netherlands, where he is free. The slave, thankful for being freed, stays with Sinterklaas and acts as his servant. The story was created around the time we abolished slavery too, in SUPPORT of the abolition. And by the way, slaves were automatically free when setting foot in the Netherlands since before we started atlantic slavery to begin with. Slaves were never held in Europe, unless you go back to the times when Europeans had other European slaves. And fun fact about Zwarte Piet: there was originally only one black Pete, but after WW2 when the Canadians liberated us they celebrated Sinterklaas with us. The Canadians would all paint their faces black and this was the first time we had a group of black petes instead of just one. Ever since we celebrate it with a group of them. This is another example of how appearances deceive (a white man leading a group of black characters??? SLAVERY!) and how it's important to look to the actual meaning and history behind culture. Sinterklaas may have the appearance of being racist, but the actual background story is innocent and even originally anti-racist
    4
  754. @xfistsclenchedx He considers the price tag more than anyone else. Public healthcare is cheaper than the current overpriced system. The US pays literally almost twice as much as countries like the UK or France even though America's system is also inferior. Bernie's plan will make healthcare cheaper and better at the same time. He has explained this many times already and he is correct. The US pays 17% of its GDP on healthcare, the UK pays 7.7% for better coverage . If an NHS styled system were to exist in the US, simply redirecting the money that is already being paid to insurers now, will be enough to fund it two times over.
    4
  755.  @populationkid  De hele verkiezing is bijna 50/50. Trump heeft bijna alsnog gewonnen en het land is tot op het bot verdeeld
    4
  756.  @YraxZovaldo  Een demonstratie kan in het belang van de openbare orde worden verplaatst, zoals in Tilburg ook is gebeurd: anti zwarte piet demonstranten waren een plek toegewezen buiten zicht van de intocht. Het is zelfs mogelijk om een compleet verbod te beargumenteren vanwege de veiligheid, gezien de meerdere confrontaties met hooligans. Maar dat laatste is niet nodig als je het mij vraagt, de politie heeft dat allemaal in goede banen kunnen leiden.
    4
  757. Carriers don't destroy anything.... All they do is carry equipment, smartarse
    4
  758. +Brizzolo That's a lie. EU tariffs on cars: 10% US tariffs on cars: 2.5% on regular cars, 25% on trucks, MPVs, SUVs, pick-ups and much more. People always forget the 25%, but that is exactly the part of the tariffs that equal them out with the EU's 10%.
    4
  759. It'd be hilarious if they secretly funded him or something
    4
  760.  kuvikina  Then Russia will lose to a bunch of sissies, which is even worse.
    4
  761.  @user-ls6dm3kv4b  *doesn't ask where trillion dollar bailout comes from*
    4
  762. Baudet/Wilders in verband leggen met nazistische terroristen is tien keer erger dan islamitische terreur direct in verband leggen met de vredelievende islaminterpretaties. Dat kun je niet maken. Baudet en Wilders hebben niet eens dezelfde ideologie als die terrorist in Christchurch en hebben ook 100% duidelijk gemaakt tegen geweld te zijn. STOP met ze te demoniseren. Je moet echt bekrompen zijn om niet te zien dat wat jij nu doet precies hetzelfde is als wat die terrorist heeft gedaan: vredelievende moslims de schuld geven van wat terroristische moslims doen. Dát is wat die terrorist heeft gedaan en dat is wat jij nu hier doet met Baudet en Wilders. Jij verbindt ze direct met terrorisme terwijl je WEET dat ze er niets mee te maken hebben. Walgelijk.
    4
  763.  @AlanWattResistance  You're going to call me a nazi for saying Africa needs population control? They really do need it
    4
  764. Vreugdevuren zijn een hele oude traditie. Als je onnodig tradities van mensen afpakt worden ze boos en krijg je ordeverstoringen. De burgemeester had ook gewoon kleinere vreugdevuren kunnen toestaan en het probleem van vorig jaar zo oplossen. De beslissing van de burgemeester was oliedom (waarschijnlijk begreep hij niet dat vreugdevuren cultureel erfgoed zijn) en onnodig. De Mos heeft gelijk hier.
    4
  765. Ja kees, maar hij heeft wel zn diesntwapen mee hè, hee
    4
  766. +mywife's boyfriend It was actually a meaningless joke. We established only one thing the other day and that is that I am open to any ideas and you failed to produce proper argumentation and/or evidence as to why the BBC would be fake news. In fact, you acknowledged that individual reports of the BBC are unbiased but that thousands of their reports together somehow constitute fake news. It was I who was open to YOUR views and YOU who failed to defend them. How can you claim I'm dishonest or even stupid when you can't even defend your own opinion? And here you go again with this "a lot of people believe it, therefore it's true" nonsense. Firstly, show me that supposed study and secondly, even if that study is perfectly legitimate (which I seriously doubt) it does NOT constitute evidence of the BBC being fake. So I say again, before you insult journalists who try their best to do their reporting honestly, produce evidence and/or sound argumentation to prove that those journalists are in fact dishonest. I never dismissed your claims and even now remain open to evidence. You, on the other hand, dismiss BBC reports standardly without any kind of evidence. It is YOU that is dishonest here. Am I an imbecile for not wanting to believe your claims without actual evidence? Or is that called critical thinking?
    4
  767. 20% voor Dijkhoff, 19% voor Klaver en 15% voor Baudet. Zo ver lag dat niet uit elkaar
    4
  768. +The Badman Do tell me what the liberal bias is in this video. Don't they honestly say that Hungary protects its culture and national heritage? Do they not honestly say that Hungary's method to avoid immigration was in fact succesful? And yes, whether you like it or not, Hungary did these in my view good things at the expense of some civil liberties and other freedoms, which is the negative side of Hungary. I'm sorry to disappoint you but there is no 100% perfect country and this report seems to honestly lay out what the upsides (protected culture/nation, no immigration issues) and downsides (loss of civil liberties) of HUngary's political coarse towards an illiberal democracy are. If you do think this report is wrong, do tell me where you disagree, enlighten me...
    4
  769. @Said Boudriz Nee, omdat de wet op dit moment toelaat dat scholen hun kinderen leren: "wat is de gepaste straf voor afvalligheid? A. onthoofding B. van een dak af gooien of C. stenigen" (voorbeeld uit een echt salafistisch schoolboek). De wet beschermt dit soort gevaarlijke ideeën onder vrijheid van onderwijs icm vrijheid van religie, terwijl dit eigenlijk een walgelijke ideologie is die haat verspreidt. De meeste moslims zijn gewoon okee, maar salafisten hebben echt een walgelijk geloof dat op bijna elk gebied rechtstreeks tegenover onze manier van leven en waarden staat. Als je dit soort lesmateriaal "niks aan de hand" noemt, ben je naïef.
    4
  770.  @MerkkledingSchreeuwdArmoede  "Dingen veranderen nu eenmaal" zeggen wanneer je een traditie verbiedt is als "mensen sterven nu eenmaal" zeggen nadat je iemand hebt vermoord. Je hebt natuurlijke en graduele veranderingen en dan heb je geforceerde veranderingen. Dat eerste is culturen eigen en volkomen normaal (zo blijven culturen ook modern en relevant), dat tweede is allesbehalve normaal en ook niet positief (tenzij er een zwaarwegende reden bestond om die cultuur abrupt te veranderen).
    4
  771.  @zgsfreaky9102  De vrijheid van godsdienst vrijwaart je niet van kritiek. Als iemand een dom idee volgt noem ik hem zwakbegaafd. Ik snap dat mensen die zijn opgegroeid met religie eraan vasthouden, maar ik heb totaal geen begrip voor mensen die overstappen op een religie als de islam. Er is niet één logische reden om dat te doen. Geen bewijs, niks. Als je overstapt op de islam heb je je of laten overhalen door moslims of je hebt gewoon behoefte aan spiritualiteit en koos dan maar de islam uit alle religies. Geen logica aan vast te knopen.
    4
  772.  @shmeet  Ok, to make it more specific; we live in a democratic rule of law. This means democracy within the limit of the law. Democracy exists for representation and self-determination purposes, the law exists to protect everyone's rights against being infringed upon. In a democratic rule of law, genocide is absolutely illegal, even if the democratic majority wants it. The law is the outer limit of what is acceptable, within that limit democracy is absolutely free. So democratic ideas that involve policy that unacceptably hurts others in their human rights are not allowed. Freedom of speech exists to ensure the plurality of ideas that democracy needs in order to function. If there are ideas that are not allowed in a democratic rule of law to begin with, there is no point in protecting them. If you live in a country with absolute freedom of speech (I think pretty much only the US) you're essentially saying to people with those ideas; you may express your ideas and enter into the democratic discussion... until your ideas get enough support to actually become policy, in which case we'll stop you. This is a bit hypocritical; either you accept ideas within your democratic discourse or you don't. And allowing a destructive ideology to spread into popularity first and only THEN opposing it is just not logical; you have to oppose it from the beginning to prevent social unrest. You can't first allow an idea to become massively popular and THEN tell the populace they can't get what they want; it's asking for trouble. That's why hate speech and anti-democratic political views are illegal in most of the western world. We used to believe that only a democracy that allows literally all views into the discussion is a true democracy. Then the 30's happened and Nazis managed to use democracy to abolish democracy. Today a true democracy is viewed as a democracy that not only allows ideas to partake in the discussion, but also to protect democracy against views that seek to destroy it. This concept is called the militant democracy and is the current norm. America is basically stuck in the 1930's in terms of their approach to freedom of speech and democracy. That makes the US system vulnerable to foul ideologies abusing democracy just to abolish it and impose their dictatorial system. Some people on the left see fascism as a real threat nowadays and are afraid they will abuse the US system like this, so they take matters into their own hands and use violence to oppose their views. Whether you agree with that last part is up to you (I personally don't and think making hate speech illegal is the only correct solution) but that is why they do what they do. And considering the flaws of the American system and its refusal to learn from the past, perhaps it's understandable that they're worried.
    4
  773. What kind of negative consequences could she possibly even mean?
    4
  774. +Eastwood007x *BBC shows pro-Jewish news* - comment section: "BBC is zionist fake news!" *BBC shows anti-Jewish news* - comment section: "BBC is pro-Palestinian fake news!" Don't like what you see? Call it fake news!
    4
  775. +Machinist Firstly, you're still in the EU for now and secondly, the UK and EU have already agreed that all military and intelligence cooperation stays. If there was a war between the west of Europe and Russia, you sure as hell would be there to defend Europe and so would the EU be there to defend you if necessary. You left but we are still allies
    4
  776.  @redshuttleredacted6422  A family member of mine in the US graduated a month ago. I almost went, but couldn't due to covid... Maybe I'll get a chance to sing the lyrics aloud at an American graduation some other day :) I will regardless what they will think of me
    4
  777.  @mrturner4620  Leopard 2 are outdated in a lot of ways too. It makes no sense to buy a vehicle that itself needs an upgrade package to counter the latest Russian tech, because your current tanks need an upgrade package. It makes no sense whatsoever. All the Chally 2 has over the Leopard at the moment is armour. With an upgrade package it can get a decent power package for that much needed mobility boost, it can get decent optics, it can get a new 120-130mm smoothbore and an armour package that further buffs its already decent protection (probably needed for the hull). And you know what? It'd be better than the Leopard 2 after this upgrade. Possibly even better than a Leopard 2 with future upgrades to boot. The Chally 2 is a great platform, but neglected. This thing was around since before the 2A5 and barely changed since due to neglect. With upgrades the difference can be as massive as between the 2A4 and 2A7+. And then the Chally 2 would suddenly be one of the absolute best tanks in the world. The platform is capable of this.
    4
  778. You're missing a lot here. The corporation gets its fair share for what it offers society, but how that corporation distributes this profit internally is not necessarily fair at all. If you're self-employed, what you earn is exactly what your fair share is. If you're employed with a corporation, your boss decides what your share is and how much of the profit goes directly into his own and/or shareholders' pockets. And most of the time an extreme amount of money is taken away from the corporation and placed in only a few private pockets, leaving workers in the dust. Workers, insofar their employed, do not get paid for what they contribute to society. Money always seems to concentrate at the top. Not because it's fair, but because that is what naturally happens in any competitive system; in the end the top amasses all of the resources unless there's a counterbalance. It's perfectly natural that the rich have the resources to become even richer, and this process repeats itself until the vast majority of wealth is located at the top. For example, being able to buy a few apartments to rent out is essentially free money if you can temporarily miss the first investment and wait for it to pay back. That money can in turn be used to start various businesses, the money from that can be used to invest elsewhere or expand, etc. etc. Simply having resources means you will naturally allocate a lot more in the long run, because there are so many opportunities open for you to make more money. In the end, this means the rich get ever richer and those without resources stay behind. The natural end game is that most wealth is right there at the top. But do we want this? It's difficult to say what exactly is "fair", as there are many actors within a corporation that all deserve a share, from the workers up to the managers up to CEOs and shareholders. How do we measure the "value" of their contribution? Is having money and lending it to someone else a lazy contribution because it requires no effort, or is it a huge contribution because without it the corporation'd be nowhere? Is working a 40 hour week to produce goods an unimportant contribution because workers are interchangeable and provide unskilled labour, or is it a large contribution because they spend the most labour-intensive contribution to the corporation and produce the goods that lay at the centre of what that corporation does? There is no such thing as deciding exactly what is everybody's "fair share". The only certainty is that the corporation at large gets exactly the amount of money that consumers want to exchange with it, and therefore gets its fair share from what it contributed to society. How that share is divided within the corporation should at least be generally proportional. If 75% goes to a few higher ups and, 10% is spent on costs and 15% is left for employees, I don't think that's fair. Yet that is the current reality. I don't see how anybody's fair share can be 50 billion dollars or something crazy like that.
    4
  779.  @Brand131  Oh ja klopt. Daar heb ik overheen gelezen. Mijn fout. Tja als mensen willen twerken zeg ik boeien laat ze, maar zoiets als in deze video vind ik gewoonweg walgelijk
    4
  780. He killed someone for no reason. The victim should have been arrested and brought before a court, not strangled to death. This is a serious crime. If the police stop caring for civilian lives, why do we have a police force anymore? The entire point of having a police force is to make sure professionals handle crime and do so only with the necessary violence needed to stop crime or hunt down criminals. This sort of vigilante behaviour in which suspects die when they really shouldn't have is the exact reason why we entrust the police with this job instead of ourselves.
    4
  781.  Kees De Jong  Het enige wat de FvD wil is betere integratie van de mensen die hier al zijn en immigratie die iedereen die een bijdrage levert aan onze economie welkom heet. Als jij zegt dat de FvD racistisch is, dan noem je dit beleid racistisch.
    4
  782.  Kees De Jong  Ok, dus alles wat de FvD zegt is een leugen en ingericht om Nederland ten gronde te richten. Niet luisteren naar wat ze inhoudelijk proberen te zeggen, gewoon negeren en ervan uit gaan dat het een leugen is. Waarom zou de FvD Nederland willen vernietigen? Waar haal je dat allemaal vandaan? Is er ook maar IETS waar je dit soort aantijgingen op baseert of verzin je dit ter plekke?
    4
  783.  Kees De Jong  Leg het uit. Als dit waar is wil ik het uiteraard weten. Dit is alles behalve evident, dus ik heb uitleg nodig. Je kan daar niet zomaar vanuit gaan, dat moet je kunnen onderbouwen met feiten en argumenten. Ik sta daarvoor open.
    4
  784.  Kees De Jong  Hieruit vat ik op dat je het niet kan onderbouwen en een onzinverhaal verkoopt. Helaas vergooi je hier een kans om iemand kenbaar te maken waarom FvD een gevaar is voor de toekomst van Nederland. Misschien zal ik wel bijdragen aan de ondergang van NL door op FvD te stemmen, ik weet nog niet waar ik op zal stemmen. Jij hebt hier een kans om te voorkomen dat iemand daaraan bijdraagt maar kiest ervoor die persoon uit te schelden en weg te lopen. Vreemde keuze. Ik sta nog altijd open voor een uitleg, maar zonder argumenten kan ik zo'n standpunt als dat van jou niet accepteren. Zonder propere onderbouwing is jouw standpunt ongefundeerde nonsens gebaseerd op drogredeneringen en niks waard. Jammer dat JIJ kiest om je kop in het zand te steken wanneer je wordt geconfronteerd met iemand die bereid is je verhaal aan te horen en te overwegen.
    4
  785. Zijn bedoeling was om te laten zien hoe gestoord fundamentalistische islamieten zijn en die idioten geven 'm precies wat hij wil door zo dom en agressief te doen. En ik vind het in principe niet nutteloos. Wilders wil ontmaskeren hoe slecht het gesteld is met de islam op dit moment en hoe hard ze een verlichting nodig hebben. Tja, daar heeft hij toch wel een punt
    4
  786. "The BBC reports something negative about my religion, therefore they are liars and only want to destroy me". You are pathetic and can't take any kind of criticism like a rational man.
    4
  787. Both sides deserve hatred for their acts. There is no good side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They are filled with hatred for eachother that they turn to degenerate acts, both of them
    4
  788.  @DocRealTalk  I'm not worried about it happening, I've already seen it happening and do not like it. Same for whitewashing by the way. I've seen a film with a black Achilles, with African elves and other such nonsense alterations to European mythology. I don't like it. James Bond wouldn't be as bad as those examples (and as I said, I'd personally be open for Idris Elba as JB, because he has such flair that to me that compensates for him not looking like the role), but still not a good thing. Also, what I wrote is barely 200 words, come on...
    4
  789.  @rikabok6883  Niet de illegalen nee, maar ik heb het over de legale massa-immigratie van zo'n 100k per jaar. Die worden bewust hierheen gehaald om te werken. Ook binnen die groep zijn er best veel die niet werken, wat de sociale zekerheid onder druk zet omdat ze in de bijstand komen. Maar de reden dat ze hierheen worden gehaald is werk en de "meerderheid" doet dat ook. Ik zet meerderheid tussen aanhalingstekens omdat de meerderheid wel werkt, maar ook een ongelooflijk hoog percentage gewoon in de bijstand terecht komt. Volgens CBS cijfers uit 2015 zit 4% van de NL'ers in de bijstand, maar iets van 15-20% van de Marokkanen dus dat is een zeer hoog percentage. Ter vergelijking zit maar 3% van de Polen in de bijstand dus die werken gewoon. Ik vraag me af of we met bijvoorbeeld Marokkanen winst overhouden als je de belasting die de werkenden betalen compenseert met wat de bijstandsmarokkanen kosten. Het is gewoon dom om mensen hierheen te halen die een grote kans hebben om in de bijstand te komen, zelfs als de meerderheid werkt. Ik vermoed dat jij het hebt over illegale economische migranten, maar dat is weer een ander verhaal. Iedereen wil dat dat stopt, van links tot rechts (hoewel ik vraagtekens zet bij een volkomen gestoorde partij als GL). Het probleem daar zit bij ineffectieve maatregelen om dat voor elkaar te krijgen en dat ze er maar niet uit kunnen komen hoe we dat moeten aanpakken. Ze hebben geen ruggengraat.
    4
  790. Allebei, ja klopt.
    4
  791. Alles is beter dan de Rutte-doctrine als je het mij vraagt. Rutte breekt onze democratie af en zet het parlement buitenspel.
    4
  792. Die "mega vuurbulten" zijn cultureel erfgoed. Dat wordt al duizenden jaren gedaan in Europese culturen. Er moeten duidelijke limieten worden gesteld aan de omvang van vreugdevuren, maar een algeheel verbod is zeer ongepast.
    4
  793. +Apex We are now in the exact same situation we were in in the late 1800's. Do we ban companies from copying for example the sowing machine that another company designed and sells? Just like people today are saying this law would destroy the internet, back then people said any form of copyright would destroy the diversity of the market. It was an intense discussion back then as this is now. Of course in the end we went for copyright rules. This is that discussion, but the digital version. You shouldn't be so one-sided and look to the underlying discussion. I myself think it goes too far
    4
  794. Inderdaad. Een wereld vol met multiculturele landen is een wereld zonder cultuur. Eén grote mengelmoes van niets. Er is niets mis met migratie, maar dan moet dat wel gepaard gaan met goede integratie. Een gezonde samenleving heeft een bepaalde mate van verbondenheid nodig tussen de mensen in die samenleving. Die verbondenheid vind je in cultuur, en dat kan ook een open cultuur zijn die migranten ontvangt, maar geen multiculturalisme waarin verschillende groeperingen niet samen leven maar eerder langs elkaar heen. Dat creëert wrijving en onrust. Polarisatie.
    4
  795. Let's celebrate by bringing as many back to their home countries as we can! I'm sure they'd love to see their families again after spending months or even years in refugee camps after being denied asylum...
    4
  796. +Devil Hex The EU Navy hugely outnumbers the US Navy in combined destroyers, frigates, corvettes and other warships, as well as outnumbers the amount of American attack submarines by a few. The aircraft carriers of the US would never arrive at Europe's shores and would be billion dollar scrap metal on the ocean floor if they even try to come here. The EU has 161 total destroyers/frigates/corvettes/cruisers and the US has only 96 destroyers/frigates/corvettes/cruisers in total. The EU has 55 attack submarines and the US 53. All the aerial superiority you have is irrelevant because you can never get your carriers past the EU defensive navy. Even if your ENTIRE navy ships out, it will be outnumbered almost 2 to 1. And in terms of attack submarines you have no edge either. So you can list all the jets you have, but what matters is how many can you get here? The answer is very few, if any at all. Carriers need to be protected by their strike group and against this number of EU ships you simply can't. ANd this is not even taking into account that the defender always has the tactical edge in any war. Generally speaking, the US has a huge aerial advantage, the EU a huge naval advantage (when used defensively, that is, which is what it was built for) and in terms of land forces both are roughly equal with a slight edge to the US in amount of tanks etc. and a slight edge to the EU in terms of manpower. To invade the EU, the US would need a navy capable of getting there. To invade the US, the EU would need more aircraft carriers and more aircraft in general to attempt a landing. Neither of the two is capable of invading the other, any attempt would be doomed to fail.
    4
  797. Ik hoop dat de waarheid boven water komt. Het is zeker een indrukwekkend verhaal maar de rechter zal er nog naar moeten kijken
    4
  798.  @adiabd1  Nobody is asking for it to be a church, just a museum to respect its long history and status as world heritage
    4
  799.  @kenmar4009  Look up the Catalonian anarchists then and how their community functioned. You also forget that throughout most of human history, we have functioned on almost completely free trade and authorities were never powerful enough to really exert meaningful power everywhere. The government used to be a very weak entity, not capable of enforcing rules like they can today. Kings had no meaningful power in remote rural areas of "their" kingdom during most of history. These societies ruled themselves for the most part, with almost completely free trade
    4
  800. They're still as sharp as ever, but mainly lie in diplomatic power nowadays instead of hard power
    4
  801. +SadWings Raging There's just a difference in how Europeans and Americans view the government. We see the government as something positive that represents us. We built a strong government that is protected against becoming an oppressor in the first place. We see the government as something that is an instrinsic part of our lives and something that exists to serve us. If it's built in a proper way, it can never become oppressing. There's a strong connection between citizens and the government here. In America there's a gap between the government and its citizens. A rather big one. American politics more often than not don't serve the American people at all, but prefer to serve themselves or corporations. I fully understand why you'd want to arm yourself against that government. The American government is disconnected from its citizens. That is what makes it dangerous and a possible oppressor (if you ask me American citizens are already being oppressed, it's beyond me why nobody seems to have outed serious concerns over the way the government acts there, but whatever). If I lived in the US I'd want guns too.
    4
  802. The Democratic party is being cleansed by Bernie. All the "moderates" are globalist shills who serve corporate interests instead of the people. It's why Trump will destroy any establishment crony they push up for election. Trump is also there for the people, he is a nationalist who cares first and foremost for America, not globalist interests. That is why Trump won against Hillary and that is why Trump would easily win against any other Democratic nominee except for Bernie. Trump himself has already said he fears only one Democrat and that is Bernie. He has good reason to say that and I'll tell you why. Just like Trump, Bernie doesn't serve corporate interests but stands for his personal bona fide views on how best to serve the American people. With Bernie, Trump can't lean on anti-establishment rhetoric anymore (the American people are truly fed up with the establishment), because both presidential candidates will be anti-establishment. Trump will have to convince the voters that his views on what is best for America are better than Bernie's views on what's best for America. It will be a battle between two honest presidents, who are not there funded by massive corporations to spew what best serves the establishment and 1%. Two presidential candidates who both put forth their ideas on how best to organise America... for the citizens. Unprecented. Who will win? Bernie's social democracy or Trump's more conservative views on economy and more? In any case, with Bernie as the Dem candidate Trump is sure to be pulled into an actually difficult discussion on the future of America. It's easy to expose globalist/corporate shill #34 for the empty vessel he or she is. Americans are sick of so-called establishment "moderates". That is why Bernie Sanders is the only true opposition to Donald Trump... and Trump understands it. That he's already recognised this shows he understands what the people want, I'm actually impressed. Bernie also knows what the people want, knows how sick they are of the establishment, how much they've suffered under certain aspects of the US system. I have a feeling this will be a deeply interesting clash. And by the way, what you are calling "far left" is just what we have been in Western Europe for decades. It's capitalism with social policies, no big deal and far from "far left". Though by current US political standards I guess anything left of far right economic views can be called "far left" already. Just as an illustration, "far right" populist parties in Europe are still considerably to the left of "moderate" Democrats when it comes to healthcare and such. Liberalism is firmly to the right over here. It's all relative. Talking about left-right is outdated, it's better to look at what the candidates actually want in terms of policy and whether that'd be something you support or not. Labels are just labels.
    4
  803. Not really, France is listed as having so much diplomatic power that they exceed even the US and UK in soft power. Germany is like 5th or so. But it all depends who attacks first, really
    4
  804. I never knew that the fair treatment of Jesse Owens was actually a propaganda ploy by the Nazis. Interesting
    4
  805. Als halfbloedje, nee hoor, niet hier. Vind het allemaal maar onzin. We gaan toch ook niet zeuren over dat Spanjaarden ons zielige Nederlanders zo lang hebben bestuurd, of dat de Romeinen ons daarvoor hadden bezet? Gaat helemaal nergens over. Dat was gewoon hoe het toen ging. En iedereen vergeet dat het de Afrikanen waren die slaven verkochten en dat zelfs vandaag het nog de Afrikanen zijn die illegaal slaven houden. Of dat de Arabieren nog meer slaven verhandelden dan alle Europeanen bij elkaar. Sommigen hebben gewoon die walgelijke slachtoffermentaliteit, ik weet niet waar het vandaan komt.
    4
  806. To be fair, anyone who hasn't enjoyed private school education in the US has by definition had sub-par public school education. A lot of Americans received sub-par education because of the horrible public schools. This can easily be fixed, but taxes and America don't mix well
    4
  807. No it's not exactly that, their problem is that accepting the facts threatens their entire ideology. An ideology based on bashing western civilisation for being a "white patriarchy" and wanting to replace it with a society in with absolute diversity and no overarching culture. They revolt against the dominant culture and none else, because their entire point is that we should move towards a society in which each culture has an equal footing and none are dominant. To them, having a dominant culture intrinsically means oppressing all the other cultures. Accepting that one culture may be better/worse than another or that for example the subsociety of LGBT and Muslims can't possibly live together and are not compatible hits their ideology at its core. They would have to literally drop their entire relativist world view
    4
  808. ZwARte PiET iS rACiSmE
    4
  809. Dat betekent twee dingen: er komt een race naar de bottom tav CO2 uitstoot om de kosten en dus ook de prijs laag te houden en door de hogere prijs koopt de consument minder CO2-intensieve producten en zal in ieder geval de goedkoopste (en dus schoonste) producent opzoeken. Het is beter dan het direct belasten van de burger, zou ik zeggen. Een CO2 tax, mits die niet al te bezwarend is voor bedrijven (dan riskeer je dat ze simpelweg vertrekken), haalt geld binnen voor de overheid én verduurzaamt zowel de sector zelf als het koopgedrag van de consument. Dus ja ik vind dat hier zeker naar gekeken mag worden.
    4
  810. Breivik mag Wilders bewonderen, maar andersom is dat absoluut niet het geval.... Jij wil hier Wilders in verband brengen met terrorisme, wat ik een walgelijke zet vind. Dit is al net zo dom als zeggen dat islamitische terroristen de islam bewonderen DUS is de islam ook terroristisch van natuur. Nee. Zo werkt het niet.
    4
  811. If Germany would enter Belgium to invade France that would be the fastlane to defeat, more like. They can't handle France, let alone France and Belgium over a stretched front
    4
  812.  @barta9342  Je haalt een aantal dingen door elkaar. De VN is na WOII antikoloniaal geworden vanwege het feit dat koloniale landen zwaar in de minderheid waren én beide supermachten (Amerika en Sovjet Unie) antikoloniaal waren (maar wel zelf imperialistisch buitenlandbeleid voerden dus hypocriet). Strikt genomen was het VK in die tijd nog een grote macht, maar zij waren door WOII verzwakt, net als andere Europese landen. In ons geval was het met name Amerika die de invloed gebruikte om kolonialisme tot een eind te brengen. Zo heeft Amerika succesvol de positie van Europa verzwakt en zichzelf verheven tot leider van het westen. Dit kwam zeker niet van een goede plek, aangezien zowel de VS als de Sovjet Unie zelf imperialistische oorlogen voerden om hun ideologie te verspreiden. Wat dus ook gewoon neerkomt op een vorm van kolonialisme, zij het met minder directe controle over andere landen. West-Europa was tot WOII het absolute centrum van de wereldwijde macht. Amerika en de SU wilde dat veranderen. Daarom hebben zij in een tijd dat Europa al redelijk zwak was vanwege WOII de genadeslag toegediend door ook ervoor te zorgen dat wij onze koloniën zouden verliezen. Dit zorgde ervoor dat Europa langere tijd zwakker was en eigenlijk zien wij pas sinds ongeveer de eeuwwisseling dat wij ons weer als grote macht hebben opgesteld, in de vorm van de EU. Dit heeft niks met socialisme te maken (wel in het geval van de SU natuurlijk), maar alles met politiek opportunisme om de macht van Europa in de kiem te smoren.
    4
  813. Rotamerika... altijd voor het berechten van oorlogscriminelen tenzij ze het zelf zijn. Geen lid van het internationaal strafhof, geen tribunaal waar Amerika actief is.... stel hypocrieten. En daardoor zouden wij terroristen naar NL moeten halen ipv ze daar door de slachtoffers te laten berechten? Absurd. Als Amerika zo bang is voor een tribunaal mogen ze zelf die terroristen in Amerika berechten, niet ons als dumpplek gebruiken.
    4
  814. +Qamar Zahid You can't just say "I live there so I know more than you" and then pretend you won the argument. This means nothing. You have to share your observations and point out why my previous comment is wrong. I'd love to know
    4
  815. +Wim Nee, dat was de ultieme zielepoot actie geweest. Direct tegen politiebeleid gaan (in benen schieten) omdat je bang bent. Ik ben trots op agenten als dit. Hij begrijpt de ernst van het neerschieten van burgers en hoopt het nooit te hoeven doen, maar doet het wanneer dit nodig is. Dit is precies wat we nodig hebben
    4
  816. @The Wave Omdat het geen Duitsers zijn. NSB'ers werden ter dood veroordeeld als ze echt erge dingen hadden gedaan en werden anders gewoon publiekelijk vernederd tijdens de bevrijding of in de gevangenis gegooid.
    4
  817. @The Wave Dat jij dit een onsamenhangend verhaal vindt zegt meer over jou dan mij. Jij begrijpt niet het simpele verschil tussen objectief kijken naar wat er in de geschiedenis is gebeurd en het subjectief kijken naar of dat wel of niet goed was. Als ik zeg dat wij vroeger massaal Duitsers uitzetten vanwege de oorlog, dan betekent dat niet dat ik dat goed vind. Dat betekent dat ik zeg dat dat is GEBEURD. Ik zal je tegemoetkomen door dan nu wél mijn mening te geven hierover. Ik vind dat wij de Duitsers die wij toen hebben uitgezet groot onrecht hebben aangedaan, althans voor zover zij niets met de nationaal socialisten te maken hadden. Het is niet juist om iedereen binnen een bepaalde groep de schuld te geven van iets wat slechts een deel van die groep doet/deed, zelfs wanneer dat laatste deel van de groep zeer aanzienlijk is. Het is zeer belangrijk om elkaar niet als lid van een groep, maar als individu te zien. Niet aansprakelijk voor de handelingen van de groep, maar puur aansprakelijk voor eigen handelen. Als ik zeg dat ik uitzetting een redelijk iets vind, dan bedoel ik dat in de context van landverraders zoals NSB'ers of IS'ers. Met de vergelijking tussen hoe wij vroeger met onze vijanden om gingen en hoe wij dat nu doen, bedoelde ik te laten zien hoezeer wij zijn veranderd in dat opzicht. Vroeger waren wij wat mij betreft veel te streng als ik het voorbeeld van de uitzetting van Duitsers noem. Maar nu zijn we juist heel soft, tot op het punt waar wij kennelijk het afreizen van duizenden kilometers om specifiek zich aan te sluiten bij onze grootste vijand omdat je je kan vinden in hun ideologie goedpraten en medelijden hebben met die mensen. Ik wil naar het midden; hard waar dat nodig is, maar zacht naar degenen die dat verdienen. Die harde kant missen wij nu. Vroeger misten wij de zachte kant. Laten we dat in de toekomst beter doen, zeg ik. IS'ers verdienen geen medelijden, zij hebben hun keuze gemaakt.
    4
  818.  @mcdonalds4219  Best verbazend eigenlijk. Ik heb nooit wat met die letters gehad
    4
  819. Mishandelt* of mishandelde*
    4
  820. Random User Cool, another one of those people who have no idea how the EU works
    4
  821. Klopt. De meeste Biden-stemmers stemmen ook niet voor Biden, maar gewoon tegen Trump. Echt triest als je zo president wordt, zonder eigenlijk echte steun en alleen omdat je niet "die andere" bent.
    4
  822. +Jim Nicholas US supercarriers are still not secure from European subs, so you still have much to learn then. Latest was France in 2015-16 wargames, sank US supercarrier and a few escorts with it. One sub again. And between the French and Swedes I think the British did it too.
    4
  823. +Michael Jensen So you are preparing for a major war in which you can't rely on the EU or Canada by being hostile towards the EU and Canada. It makes no sense. There is no major war imminent, you're making redundant preparations for something that may or may not (probably not) happen in the future in exchange for short term damage to your economy and huge damage to your diplomatic relations with your closest allies. And let me tell you this; having the EU as an ally in a major war is infinitely more useful than being able to produce steel yourself. A major war without allies is an instant loss.
    4
  824. Easier than Iraq? What are you smoking?
    4
  825. Nederland op slot voor China, hoplakee... waarom "overwegen" wij dit alleen? Dat virus is er al enige tijd en je kan niet voorzichtig genoeg zijn.
    4
  826. +Philip Cowell There is not a single band today with the talent of either the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd or any of the legends of yesteryear. That says a lot. The sheer amount of quality music they produced is unequalled today. I think the main difference between the past and now is that the trash (present in both eras, true) is now promoted more while the quality is left behind. It used to be quality over trash, but now it's catchy trash over quality that requires a longer attention span. So that doesn't mean there was less trash 40 years ago, but it does mean today we value the trash more than we used to. Think of this; in 40 years, what legendary musicians will we remember from today and how do they compare to The Beatles? The quality is held back today and trash takes the spotlight
    4
  827. Yes, Guy Verhofstadt is awesome. A bit too federalist for my taste, but he's very capable
    4
  828. +Tony Liu Traditions are not a religion. In Europe we still decorate trees in Christmas time, but that doesn't mean we praise Thor or something. Traditions, even though they can be closely tied to local mythology/religion, are sometimes just traditions and no expression of belief.
    4
  829. Because his debate would be double in size (4 hrs) he would be able to afford letting Trump and Biden talk longer. I'm sure that'd diminish the interrupting. I think the biggest issue is that these debates are pretty short per topic and the candidates (esp. Trump) feel the need to push to get their point across. A more laid back conversation would do the pres debate well imo
    4
  830. This is BBC world news, not the branch of BBC that focuses on British stories.
    4
  831.  @YraxZovaldo  Je hebt helemaal niemand eruit geluld. Je argumenten zijn zeer gebrekkig als je hiermee tegen zwarte piet in wil gaan. Je pakt een stelling over Sinterklaas (cultuur mot je afblijven) en past hem vervolgens toe op stierenvechten. Ja, "cultuur mot je afblijven" is een veel te generieke opvatting die niet voor alle stukjes cultuur opgaat, daar heb je gelijk in. Maar wat heb je in al die comments nou aangetoond? Niets anders dan "niet alle cultuur is het waard om te verdedigen". Nou, knap hoor, het zal moeilijk zijn iemand te vinden die het daar niet mee eens is. In wezen is dit alles één grote non-discussie geworden door jouw gezever. Niet alle cultuur is het waard om te verdedigen, maar je hebt nul komma nul aangevoerd om aan te tonen dat zwarte piet één van die stukjes cultuur is die het niet waard is te verdedigen. Jullie zitten tientallen comments al over niets te discussieren.
    4
  832. De VVD kan altijd achteraf mooi praten (en dan nog volgt vaak geen daadwerkelijke actie). De VVD is een partij zonder visie die altijd achter de feiten aanloopt en afwacht tot er een probleem ontstaat voordat actie wordt ondernomen (en soms wordt het probleem geheel genegeerd en laat het kabinet het helemaal uit de hand lopen, zoals bij de stikstofcrisis of wellicht de toekomstige demografische crisis als deze overbevolking verder oploopt). Het vervelende is dat de kiezer er kennelijk keer op keer weer in tuint, die achterafpraatjes van de VVD. Ze klinken als gezond verstand maar dat zijn ze niet. Nederland wordt wakker.
    4
  833. I didn't know that not plunging your economy into a recession by spending money you don't have is "right wing". Greeks pensioned in their bloody 50's... Italians now want to spend a huge amount of money on early pension, all kinds of subsidy even though they simply don't have that money. Opposing that is not right wing, it is the only sensible thing to do. They are destroying themselves with those policies. Short term fun for long term malaise. And we in the North usually have to pay. They must change their policies and be sensible.
    4
  834. In the year 98 Roman historian Tacitus described how Germanic people painted themselves black as part of a tradition that is extremely similar to Sinterklaas of today. And all Germanic countries today have their own version of it. In the Netherlands we have Sinterklaas and black pete. In France it is Saint Nicholas and Père Fouettard. In Germany it is Saint Nicholas and Krampus. You are calling a 2000+ year old tradition racist. The origins of black pete is so old that our ancestors had never even seen an African in their entire life. Bit difficult to be racist back then. The origins is the yule festival of the Wild Hunt, in which Odin soars the skies followed by an army of black figures. Black pete is the modern and christianised version of that ancient tradition and you see similar cultural festivals all over Europe in which the black figure is slightly different. Don't talk about things you know nothing about.
    4
  835. En de samenleving wil het niet eens, dat is het ergste. De meerderheid wil dit dus niet. Dus waar zij de "huidige tijdsgeest" op baseren is mij een raadsel. Volgens mij bepaalt de meerderheid wat de huidige tijdsgeest is, maar goed.
    4
  836. Not as violent as the US
    4
  837. Het was een prachtige ceremonie. Die ene pastoor die zo lang door ging was wat minder, maar de rest was perfect
    4
  838. Als je de eerste ronde bekijkt, ja. Maar daarna moest Badr ook wat incasseren. Dit gevecht ging min of meer gelijk op tot de blessure en ik vind het moeilijk te zeggen hoe het verder was gegaan in de 4e ronde
    4
  839. @tom donoughue I meant steady as in steady increase/decrease or status quo. Explosive growth or shrinking is very damaging at this point. I think our birth rate is just a little too low, 1.8 would be better, but overall good. Recommendable for the rest of the world... The problem with immigration is due to the population INCREASE that the boomers created, not the low birth rate now. The population boom created a huge generation that is now older and straining the economy while that generation had a normal birthrate. This means the few young people have to take care of the huge group of older people and this creates economical problems that governments today try to compensate with mass immigration. When it comes to demographics, STEADY increase/decrease is key, but whether it's increase or decrease as such doesn't matter too much. In the third world we're seeing a massive looming problem with overpopulation as they get way too many kids. We'll suffer from this later. They'll start flooding here if we aren't careful. They'll come whether we have a high or low birthrate. That isn't the problem. The problem is THEIR birthrate. Overall it'd be good if the planet had our birth rate. I'm probably going to have 3 kids or so to compensate for our birthrate, as 1.6 is just a tad too low for my taste, but a shrinking population would be good imo.
    4
  840. Dit keer was Frankrijk degene die met bewijs kwam. Amerika vertrouw ik al lang niet meer en Groot Britannië loopt altijd achter de VS aan, maar Frankrijk zie ik nog steeds als redelijk betrouwbaar, vooral terugdenkend aan Irak. Die gaan niet voor niks over tot aanval en als er geen bewijs is doen ze het dan ook niet
    4
  841.  @aslanfromnarnia339  Best is if nobody is the leader and every world power stays in its own region. The problem with one major superpower like the US is that they can get away with dumb wars like Iraq, Syria, Libya with zero direct consequences. We need other superpowers to keep the US in check.
    4
  842. Sure, if the EU consisted of Germany, Italy, Bulgaria and Romania maybe... Let's try again with the UK and France in there, shall we? RIP Russia, in that case
    4
  843. Jezus zeg, hou toch op over de "boreale" speech. Dit wordt zo vreselijk overdreven... Het feit dat Otten denkt dat Pepe the frog een "alt-right symbool" is spreekt boekdelen; dat is gewoon een meme van het internet die op veel verschillende manieren wordt gebruikt. Wat een hysterie.... Dat hij de speech niet goed vond voor de partij, prima. Hij wilde een iets rechtsere VVD, prima. Hij wilde een partij die zich profileert als een soort middenpartij, prima. Maar doe niet alsof die speech een soort alt-right neo-nazi ding was, dat vind ik echt zo laag.... Deal with it, de FvD heeft ervoor gekozen om voor een breder cultureel verhaal te staan ipv VVD 2.0 te worden. Baudet heeft gekozen voor een route met meer visie. Geen typische bestuurderspartij zonder visie zoals de VVD, maar een echte politieke beweging. Dat je het daar niet mee eens bent vind ik echt prima, maar doe dan niet zo triest door achter hun rug om kwaad over de FvD te spreken. Er is totaal niets mis met die speech, als je weet waar Baudet het over heeft. Het probleem is dat je enig historisch en cultureel inzicht moet hebben om te begrijpen wat hij bedoelt, en veel mensen hebben dat niet. Veel mensen weten niet dat er een politieke en culturele omwenteling is geweest waarin wij van prachtige romantische muziekstukken naar de atonale moderne muziek van vandaag gingen (in dit opzicht heb ik het over de klassieke muziek), waarin wij van prachtige klassieke architectuur naar de utilitaristische betongebouwen van de jaren 70 gingen om uiteindelijk te eindigen bij de kille mondiale architectuur van vandaag waarmee je niet eens weet of je in A'dam of in Berlijn rondloopt, waarin wij van prachtige schilderijen en beeldhouwwerken naar "kunst" als een banaan die met ducttape op een muur is geplakt of een onopgemaakt bed of andere nietsbetekenende nonsens gingen. De schoonheid verdwijnt uit onze cultuur. En in politieke zin gingen wij van een politiek die het nationale belang verdedigde en het tot haar taak zag het Nederlandse volk te vertegenwoordigen naar een politiek die steeds meer met internationale belangen bezig is, minder geeft om ideële vertegenwoordiging en zich steeds meer ziet als bestuurder van NL ipv politiek/ideëel leider van NL. Rutte is hier een schoolvoorbeeld van; hij heeft geen visie voor de toekomst, dat geeft hij zelf ook toe. Hij zit er slechts omdat hij Nederland wil besturen. Ipv een duidelijke visie voor de toekomst, kijkt hij bij de dag naar wat politiek het handigst is en wat er vandaag weer moet gebeuren qua bestuur. Hij loopt achter de feiten aan. Dit alles ondermijnt onze cultuur en onze democratie. Gewild of ongewild, maakt niet uit. Het ondermijnt onze toekomst, een toekomst die wij zelf (mede) vorm zouden moeten geven in plaats van af te wachten wat er over ons heen komt en bij de dag te leven. Wij hebben visie nodig.
    4
  844. +XIV LXXXVII You sure as hell should feel guilty about taking her child away, that's the point. If you deport her nobody will bat an eye. Hell, I'll applaud it because I think the USA has been accepting illegal migration for way too long. But this policy of taking children away makes no sense from a deportation point of view and is incredibly cruel for no real reason. If you want to get them out, get them out. Don't put their children in American families
    4
  845. The oldest swastika was found in Ukraine. It is an ancient symbol here in Europe too. It is related to good luck and is a sunwheel representing an endless cycle. I think it's time to stop seeing it as a Nazi symbol and remember what it really represents. The Japanese should be able to use it, you in India should be able to use it and even here in Europe it should return as a peaceful symbol.
    4
  846.  @melikootje  Hij is noord Koreaans, dat zie je toch. Geef Kim Jong-un toch de tijd om de integreren, hij probeert het
    4
  847. Expel them where? To another European country? Even if we assume Roma are posing a problem, placing that problem on your neighbour's doorstep won't solve a thing.
    4
  848. @John Smith Diversity of culture does, yeah. Because you put people with different behaviourisms, customs and beliefs together and that can clash and generate distrust. But diversity of skin colour is irrelevant as long as you have a shared identity. The problem is that in multicultural societies there is no shared identity and it isn't forming either. A homogenous society with a small amount of foreigners that fully integrate into the main culture is much better. But it's wrong to think this is about skin colour; it is not. It's about identity.
    4
  849.  @LaurenceLionKing  Dat ligt eraan. Sommige extreem linkse groepen willen alleen dat, maar veel willen dat bereiken door eerst alle kapitalisten te vermoorden of in een werkkamp te gooien, dan een dictatuur te installeren en vervolgens zeer wankel economisch beleid te voeren dat waarschijnlijk leidt tot de ineenstorting van onze economie (zoals de CCCP). Als je het hebt over autoritair socialisme (zoals CCCP, China) dan zijn het echt schurken. Onder zo'n staat wil je echt niet leven. Meer libertaire socialisten zijn vaak wel oké, maar ook daar kunnen types tussen zitten die een linkse staat (of links anarchisme) willen bereiken door kapitalisten om te leggen. Dat is net zo gevaarlijk als extreem rechts, behalve natuurlijk nazisme want die gekkies zijn moordlustiger dan wie dan ook.
    4
  850. That is becaise the social democrats are not socialists, the Nordic countries are capitalist as everything in the west is. Socialism is a completely separate system from capitalism that seeks to abolish capitalism altogether. The social democrats are just more social capitalists, not full blown socialists that want a USSR-like system. When talking about socialism here, we speak of the ideology and econonomic system, not socialist as we know them in democratic/capitalist systems. Unless your social democrats want a literal revolution overthrowing the current capitalist system, they are not socialists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
    4
  851.  @carlosrod100  It's not about who has done it in the past, it's about who is doing it now: only America, Saudi Arabia and China, maybe a few other totalitarian states do it too.
    4
  852. Britain would focus its submarine force on the aircraft carriers and dispatch of hundreds of US jets a pop. The US' incompetence at protecting their aircraft carriers is widely known, with European, Canadian and Australian subs sinking sometimes entire Carrier Strike Groups in training, all while being hunted down by both helicopters and other subs (and sometimes getting away with it unscathed to boot...). You're not taking this into account and blindly assume that the US can even hunt down a competent sub crew at all. The UK would probably try everything it could to turn those precious aircraft carriers into billion dollar sea reefs, and they'd be succesful more than once if you look at the US' history of having those things sunk in training. The French even did it with a sub from the 80's, so go figure.
    4
  853.  @Thyalwaysseek  I'm not talking about war, but about severe economic sanctions that will make China think twice before intervening violently in HK. That is the least we can do, just threaten economic sanctions. We can't just sit and wait before they do something, we have to make clear that if they do something inappropriate there will be consequences.
    4
  854. +Hamza Ahmed Doing it for a reward is equally bad. If you do anything it should be because you truly believe in doing that, not because you're afraid of hell or just want that reward. Wrong way to live
    4
  855. +ugaaa5 Okay.... ?
    4
  856. Yet America has lower quality of life than most of Western Europe, some Asian countries, Australia, Canada... Sure we´re all jealous of people who have lower quality of life...
    4
  857.  @MajaBiana  If I believed Trump was actually going to succeed in turning America fascist, I'd say that too. But I don't so I'd definitely vote green party or something. Because if Biden is elected, there is no more hope of breaking the neoliberal cycle. Trump is a unique opportunity to force the Dems to think of finally electing actual good candidates that voters get excited over. If Biden winst we go back to neoliberal supremacy. Now they are on shaky grounds due to Trump. If he wins again, it should be a wake-up call for the Dems to forge a new, better left.
    4
  858. High, but in the end there would be significantly less criminality and drug abuse, therefore in the long run you should be able to close a few as recidivism lowers and actually save money. See it as an investment.
    4
  859. +Goldfinga Sliverfinga Protests do not have to be violent. Peaceful protests in front of the border, without throwing stones or trying to cross the border into Isreal would not give Israel an excuse to shoot. That said, I think Israel is being way too trigger happy. As always in the Isreal-Palestine conflict, both sides are doing wrong. It's truly a mess, one big violent mess
    4
  860. Geef 'm maar ongelijk. We zitten in Europa echt alles op Italië te gooien op dit moment en ik begrijp dat ze er ook moe van worden. We moeten deze onzin stoppen, zorgen dat ze überhaupt niet meer de oversteek wagen...
    4
  861. The migrant crisis was caused by the oh so brilliant idea of the US to fuel a civil war right next to EU borders in Syria and Libya, which is then exactly where over 2 million migrants came from to Europe... It wasn't caused by Merkel, she just took them in as they came and said they're welcome (which I disagree with).
    4
  862. +Krisztián Kőrösi Orban is not a disgrace. He wants to house refugees in their own areas. This will prevent refugees from having to pay a human trafficker, cross the Sahara, cross the Mediterranean, all with their own lives at risk. He and many others recognise that it is the journey that is the most damaging to refugees, therefore we must force them to stop undertaking this journey.
    4
  863. @RS Martinez Not cultures per se, as of course within sub Saharan Africa there's a lot of diversity as well and they can't simply be grouped together like that, but it does distinguish teh parts of Africa that have been previously conquered by Arabs from the parts that generally speaking still have their indigenous peoples living there. And that statement is also a bit iffy because it's not entirely correct to call North Africans non-indigenous Arabs, but the point is that the term sub Saharan serves as a distinction between the North African countries that are heavily influenced by Arabs and the sub-Saharan countries that are influenced to a lesser extent.
    4
  864. And yet there still is a contradiction in their stories. They can't even fabricate a story correctly, those lawyers
    4
  865. @yopo69 Nee, zij geloven in integratie: een Nederland waarin iedereen welkom is die onderdeel wil worden van onze samenleving. Écht onderdeel, niet "ik woon hier en heb een paspoort". En even voor de duidelijkheid, de meeste allochtonen zijn op dit moment al geïntegreerd, het gaat om een minderheid die totaal geen respect heeft voor de Nederlandse waarden en zich niet eens Nederlander voelen.
    4
  866. Attacking Baltic states = attacking EU, which is more than a match for Russia
    3
  867. +Bsh 555 What a pitiful excuse. The only question that matters is this one: do you think any French people avoided this film for the sole reason of the antagonists being French? It's not about being the biggest audience, it's about needing films to constantly portray your country as being positive. Why can European audiences accept being the antagonist, while American audiences can't? It has nothing at all to do with the size of the audience, it IS about the temperament. If Americans didn't have such a temperament, any film could be made, regardless of how Americans are portrayed. Let's say French audience was the largest, would you think it's justified that no historical film could be made about Waterloo, for example? Just because the French would only accept positive films about France? It's a disgusting and repulsive mindset that damages filmmaking. I'm convinced that it's the temperament of American audiences that partly is to blame for most of the horrible Hollywood films out there.
    3
  868. America is the greatest country in the world! has lower quality of life than western Europe, much less working rights, a less healthy population, no proper social security and a ridiculous amount of shootings and deaths in cities like Detroit and Chicago
    3
  869. Wow I never knew Greece had such a big army. Pretty much the size of Turkey´s, that´s pretty damn impressive
    3
  870.  car ger  The EU is not the problem, the nations in it are the problem. Since Britain's exit, less EU migrants came to the UK and non-European migration is at an all-time high. You can't solve a problem by leaving the EU if it's your national government that is the problem! It's dangerous to think that the UK's issues are solved now, they've gotten worse if anything
    3
  871. At this point, yes.... because the 2nd amendment gave guns to the criminals and it'd be too difficult to take them back again...
    3
  872. Mooi gezegd. Tegenwoordig leven we in een samenleving waar verontwaardiging over van alles en nog wat heel populair is. Het is een rage die hopelijk binnen 10 jaar van de aardbodem is verdwenen. Het gaat niet meer om logica, niet meer om de waarheid, het gaat alleen om de vraag waar ik me vandaag weer eens beledigd door kan voelen en dat aan de wereld kenbaar kan maken, met voorkeur gepaard met veel furore. We leven in een aandachtseconomie.
    3
  873. Zelfs belediging en smaad is strikt genomen verboden, laat staan doodsbedreigingen...
    3
  874. +Justin B You think that will save Europeans? It was US-led NATO forces that bombed Libya and created a migrant stream to Europe. It was again the USA that fuelled a civil war in Syria and caused another migrant stream to Europe. Getting rid of Merkel won't change a thing, the root cause of our migration problem is the USA and its brilliant ideas of intervening in nations that are practically at the EU border. The US government is the single biggest threat to Europe, while it ironically is supposed to be our ally. The EU must turn its back on the US
    3
  875. All Tigers should shoot HE at the Leo 2, messing up its optics and hampering its target acquisition as much as possible (best case scenario, optics are damaged and other superficial damage hampering their performance), then rush the Leo 2 and get in a side shot with AP.
    3
  876.  @jayjaymanu  Nee, ik ben zelf half donker en heb zelfs op de middelbare school voor de grap een keer sinterklaas gespeeld met mijn vrienden als witte pieten. Dat was allemaal wel leuk voor die rotdiscussie er was. Als kinderen worden gepest met zwarte piet betekent dat dat de pesters aan racistische grappen/pesterijen doen. DAT is het probleem, niet zwarte piet. En het weghalen van zwarte piet haalt het racistische denken niet uit die kinderen. Het heeft zelfs een grotere kans om racisme te VERSTERKEN uit boosheid dat een traditie om zo'n domme reden wordt verpest. Al dit gezeur roept allemaal vijandigheid op bij mensen van beide kanten en speelt racisten in de kaart. Nu hebben ze een echte reden om buitenlanders te haten: ze willen tradities wegvagen, kijk maar naar die activisten! Hoe veel niet-racistische Nederlanders zullen buitenlanders daardoor nu alsnog in negatief daglicht bekijken? Vijandigheid lost geen dingen op. Je kan je afreageren op zwarte piet, maar dat doet meer schade dan dat het wat dan ook oplost. Als zwarte piet weg is, zul je MEER mensen hebben die met wrok naar buitenlanders kijken. Mensen zoals jullie laten meer dan wie dan ook zien dat wij maar moeilijk samen kunnen leven en het misschien wel beter is om dat gewoon niet te doen. Zwarte piet is aantoonbaar niet racistisch en daarmee moet het gewoon klaar zijn.
    3
  877.  @jayjaymanu  Nee, alles wat ik zie is dat jij geen deugdelijk respons weet op te geven voor mijn comments. Eerst was het een groep racisten die zwarte piet zwart wil houden, toen liet ik zien waarom het niet racistisch is om zwarte piet zo te willen houden. Daarna waren het kinderen die werden gepest met zwarte piet, waarna ik dat weerlegde met het feit dat het pesten zelf het probleem is en niet wat er in die pesterijen wordt genoemd. Je moet het (racistische) pestgedrag weghalen, niet één van de vele onderwerpen die in dat pestgedrag worden genoemd. Toen werd het een simpele "waarom niet", waarop ik zei dat bij het veranderen van een traditie de bewijslast niet ligt bij degenen die het willen behouden maar degenen die het willen veranderen. Je moet een reden hebben, een goede reden. Daarnaast roept het geforceerd veranderen van tradities alleen maar meer vijandigheid en daarmee meer vreemdelingenhaat op, wat het een slechte move maakt. Volgens mij begrijp jij de situatie niet zo goed. En als je denkt dat je dat wel doet, leg het dan maar eens haarfijn aan mij uit.
    3
  878. My lord... would they stoop this low, betray the American people so badly?
    3
  879. +Hell Cat There should be no need for civilians to protect themselves in the first place
    3
  880.  @hihoi6085  En de christenen zeggen dat over de bijbel, de hindoes zeggen dat over hun geschriften, etc.... Wat een lege en ongefundeerde opmerking. Heeft niemand wat aan. Kan ik net zo goed zeggen dat de Donald Duck het woord van god is
    3
  881. +Kers Vers Klopt. Het vervelende is niet zozeer het gezeur zelf, maar dat we er geen deugdelijk debat over kunnen hebben. Hun standpunten worden niet kritisch bekeken, maar simpelweg doorgevoerd. Ze zijn zo overtuigd van hun gelijk en zo overtuigd dat alle weerstand ertegen alleen "dom gezever" is, dat ze direct aan de slag gaan om het erdoor te drukken. SJW's zijn ironisch genoeg een van de meest ondemocratische en illiberale mensen in onze samenlevingen op dit moment, waar ze nu juist voor claimen te vechten.
    3
  882. +Max Pain That is ridiculous. Despite the UK leaving, we will still have very close defence relations. In fact, nothing at all will change in our defence and intelligence relations.
    3
  883.  @commander0zero  Nothing even close to modern slavery of Qatar, in recent history.
    3
  884.  @itsame2271  So you think we will go back to slavery and criticise other nations for not having slaves? This is truly your argument? We cannot know whether slavery and abuse of human beings is bad because Europe might start doing it again in the future? What a joke argument.
    3
  885. And don't forget that that mission is heavily based on a famous real story (sabotage of heavy water source in Norway), featuring Norwegian and British commandos. All written out of their own story and replaced with one young girl and her mother. If they had made the story up I'd not mind much, but rewriting history like this is a plain insult
    3
  886.  @bobsemple262  If he had you, though, the war would have been won with ease. The Bob Semple tank remains the most advanced piece of military technology ever created
    3
  887. You're generally right, but women's football got A LOT better in Europe last year. It's becoming a larger and larger sport and the athletes are becoming better too. It's decent to watch now, at least the better teams are.
    3
  888.  @Ghastly_Grinner  Because there is no reason to be anti-Russia. Up until the disaster in Ukraine, we were having very friendly relations despite the US doing all it can to keep us apart. We need to fix our relations for good and put the Cold War (and NATO) behind us. Russia is not our enemy, they are a member of the European family that got split off from us because they went communist. Now it's time to fix that.
    3
  889. And Murica and Israel have Jahweh on their side. Will this be a superhero battle? :)
    3
  890. Wat dacht je van een goeie ouwe boterham met kaas
    3
  891. TIK, your definition of socialism is deeply flawed. There is authoritarian socialism, which you seem to focus on in the video, but also libertarian socialism. You even mentioned Bakunin's (a libertarian socialist) criticism on totalitarianism, call him a socialist (true) and then turn around and say that socialism = totalitarianism. You do this at 5:07. This is an internal inconsistency in your argument that requires your attention. You can't both acknowledge Bakunin's heavy criticism of the state and at the same time say that his ideology is for totalitarianism. He was a socialist and anarchist. Authoritarian socialism = totalitarianism. Libertarian socialism is entirely different and highly critical of big governments (or even critical of the government existing at all, if you look at leftist anarchism). This is not only an issue in this video (though this example is probably the most blatant internal inconsistency in your view of socialism), but across the board I notice that libertarian socialism is a blindspot of yours. Please look into this issue and adjust your definition of socialism accordingly. As it is now, it ignores the existence of libertarian socialism, which is a problem. I think you should think about how libertarian socialism and leftist anarchism fits into your views of public vs private and capitalism. There's a gap in your logic here. You claim that democratic socialists believed the "lie" of Marx (which is fair enough to say about authoritarian socialism and its use of gradual change to eventually usher in a revolution), but this is completely false for libertarian socialism. You know very well that libertarian socialist and leftist anarchist factions have historically fought authoritarian socialists and are against the state as much as capitalists are (hell, in many cases even more against the state than capitalists generally are).
    3
  892. In the year 98 Roman historian Tacitus described how Germanic people painted themselves black as part of a tradition that is extremely similar to Sinterklaas of today. And all Germanic countries today have their own version of it. In the Netherlands we have Sinterklaas and black pete. In France it is Saint Nicholas and Père Fouettard. In Germany it is Saint Nicholas and Krampus. You are calling a 2000+ year old tradition racist. The origins of black pete is so old that our ancestors had never even seen an African in their entire life. Bit difficult to be racist back then. The origins is the yule festival of the Wild Hunt, in which Odin soars the skies followed by an army of black figures. Black pete is the modern and christianised version of that ancient tradition and you see similar cultural festivals all over Europe in which the black figure is slightly different. I studied the origins of black pete alrightm you're just confusing it with blackface ;)
    3
  893. I never thought I'd say this, but... I wanna eat that baby
    3
  894. I'm not British, I'm Dutch. But it makes sense for me to mention soft power's importance because it's the EU's main focus. Anyway, soft power is hugely important and shouldn't be forgotten. Especially in everyday situations, soft power is a lot more useful. This is no longer a world of empires that use hard power to expand their influence, this is the world of using soft power to get others to do what you want them to and to get others to follow your agenda. Let's look at the Iran deal, for example. Why is it that when talks came to a conclusion, the big news was announced in a joint press conference by the EU's foreign minister and Iran's foreign minister despite the US and other major powers being part of the talks? Why is it that this year, it was the EU's foreign minister and Iran's foreign minister that were nominated for a nobel prize for their role in the Iran deal and not anyone from the US? Because the EU shaped that deal. The EU got iran, Russia, China and the US to agree on that deal. The EU acted as a mediator between the world and Iran. Even the US was influenced into doing what the EU wanted them to do in that deal, even though Iran is just about their arch enemy. That is real power, not having a bunch of tanks that you can't realistically use against anything other than some 3rd world country. Even Syria's soft power could counter America's attempts at regime change by bringing in Russia. America's hard power has been made useless by Syria's soft power. As soon as Russia was present in Syria, the US using hard power against Syria was already no option anymore.
    3
  895. > "Capable soldier" > Running out with a machine gun randomly shooting around you outside of cover, probably hitting nobody and seriously risking your own life for virtually no benefit PICK ONE
    3
  896.  @TheFourthWinchester  It's an ancient Indo-European symbol, it predates Indians and Europeans of today and came from a people that are the ancestors of both Europeans and Indians. The swastika is an old symbol here in Europe too, the oldest one was found in Ukraine and dated to over 10.000 years ago. It can be found in ancient temples, on viking swords, on clothing throughout time. The Nazis picked it as their symbol because it is one of the oldest European/Indian symbols and they liked such things. They also used a lot of runic symbols from the Viking age. Unfortunately we in Europe now associate the swastika mainly with nazis even though it isn't their symbol.
    3
  897.  @Funkytrip73  Mee eens, maar de zwarte piet uit de jaren zestig was wel degelijk een beledigende karikatuur. Het probleem is dat de anti zwarte piet demonstranten doen alsof dat het nog steeds is. Zwarte piet is al veranderd op een dusdanige manier dat hij niet meer racistisch is. Maar nu wordt er gezeurd over kleur. Walgelijk dat ze nog gelijk krijgen ook.
    3
  898. Ja hè... en tot 2014!
    3
  899. Nee, je hebt het prima omschreven. Het had overigens ook over zowel Baudet als Azarkan moeten gaan. Dit leek verdacht veel op een soort van persoonlijke tirade jegens Baudet. Hij zag gewoon zijn kans schoon om eens z'n ongezouten mening te geven van Baudet en wat hij de FvD toewenst. Kan echt niet
    3
  900.  @justkerry173  Nobody denies the definition of sex. This discussion is about the definition of gender.
    3
  901.  @malkyn9998  Honestly, even that isn't fool proof lmao
    3
  902. +A.M M. "Most likely" hahaha. You call BBC fake news and then you yourself go on and say it was "most likely" Mossad or CIA. If you said "possibly" I'd give you the benefit of the doubt, but "most likely" ahahaha. Do tell me what evidence you have to come to that conclusion, I'm curious. Probably a highly trustworthy conspiracy video on youtube :)
    3
  903. Heel verwarrend allemaal... Het zou kunnen dat Otten inderdaad uit de partij wordt gegooid, maar het zou ook kunnen dat er helemaal niets aan de hand is en dat Otten gewoon in de Eerste Kamer aan de slag gaat voor FvD en daarom niet meer medewerker is in de Tweede Kamer. Afwachten dan maar
    3
  904.  @Edax_Royeaux  If I recall correctly the US was far behind in jet tech and even after the war relied on British information to eventually develop their own stuff. Jet programmes of Britain and Germany were started long ago at that point, while the US still had a tiny military of mostly WW1 tech, so obviously those two had a massive head start. Same for the USSR, which relied on stealing jet tech from the UK to build their own (MiG-15 engine is f.e. just an enlarged version of a British engine they reverse engineered).
    3
  905. Problemen, geld en werk. Stop met alles zo absoluut te bekijken. Je kan niet zomaar het levenswerk van deze boeren afbreken, je kan niet zomaar 90 miljard aan export halveren en ja, je kan ook niet zomaar toestaan dat de natuur wordt beschadigd. Dat is het grote dilemma. Er moet een oplossing komen maar die oplossing kan niet zijn om na tientallen jaren van medewerking van boeren (sinds 1990 hebben de boeren al grote investeringen gedaan om maar liefst 62% minder ammoniak uit te stoten) zonder met ze aan tafel te zitten de boeren te vertellen dat ze geen toekomst meer hebben. Als boeren een goede prijs krijgen voor een kleinere en het liefst ook biologische veestapel zullen ze vast met blijdschap erin mee gaan, maar de realiteit is dat je niet de veestapel kan halveren zonder dat vele boeren ten onder gaan. De laatste paar decennia moesten boeren juist uitbreiden om te overleven, wat velen niet hebben gehaald, vooral kleine familiebedrijven. Na al die investeringen vraag je ze nu alles weer weg te gooien. Door economische ontwikkelingen is een grote veestapel en uitbreiding nu de norm, anders overleef je gewoon niet. Uitbreiding doen boeren niet voor de lol, maar omdat dat is wat de economie nu van hun vergt, willen ze hun werk kunnen blijven doen. We moeten een manier vinden om kleine biologische boerderijen de norm te maken op een manier waarbij zowel boeren als natuur tegemoet worden gekomen. Zowel de boeren als de natuur zijn hier slachtoffer van de economie. Je kan het echt niet maken dat je alles wat die boeren hebben opgebouwd gewoonweg afpakt en we kunnen het ook niet maken dat we de natuur laten verpieteren om geld. Die grote bedrijven met megastallen en vleeskuikens boeien me allemaal niets en zie ik graag verdwijnen, maar niet de familiebedrijven.
    3
  906. @North rock 99 Selling arms to your allies to the point of literally bankrupting them = saving them. Alrighty then. No, that is a simple business transaction, not aid or help or saving. And besides that, I was talking about the actual military contribution to the war in Europe, not bought supplies. By that logic France was 100% saved by Britain in WW1 (even more so than the US "saved" Europe in WW2 because besides the supplies the British also had a huge part in the fighting) because in that war it was the British industry that mainly supplied the war effort. No, they were both extremely important in fighting WW1. It was not one saving the other, they were allies fighting a war, each contributing a very significant amount of manpower and supplies. You need to stop with this absolute "X saved Y" mindset. That is not how war works. And by the way, the British Empire alone had 15 million men in service. Oops, not as much of a difference as you thought.... ;) And to remind you, you started with 300.000 men in 1939 (of which 2/3rds in the National Guard). You took years to build that up to almost 100 divisions in 1944 to help liberate France. France had 94 divisions in 1940. The US military started out tiny and took several years of the war to build up. That is why for most of the war you were either absent or a minor nation supporting other nations that had huge militaries from the start of the war. And finally you came in full force in 1944 with D-day, as planned, when you made up about 40+% of the western allied force. Remember that the US wasn't a superpower back then, the main powers were colonial European nations like the British Empire and the French Empire, who could field millions of men right at the start of the conflict. WW2 is the story of how the US rose to that position of superpower, which it achieved by the end and certainly not the beginning. I'm not saying the US did nothing, I'm saying that all three main allies were hugely important to winning the war and none of them "saved" the others. The US did not save Europe. European powers and minor nations themselves outnumbered US forces in Western Europe (let alone all of Europe), but that doesn't mean the US wasn't an integral part of the victory. The point is: we did it together and there was not one country that distinctly rose above the others in this regard. The British Empire, United States and USSR were the three big allies that won the war together and each was roughly equally important throughout the war.
    3
  907. Hij verwijst hier naar hoe vrijwel alle andere beschavingen hun einde hebben gevonden. Vele tekenen die bijvoorbeeld voor het Romeinse Rijk golden, toen zij hun einde naderden, gelden vandaag voor grote delen van het westen. Waaronder Nederland. Als wij nu geen renaissance doormaken van onze verlichtingswaarden en weer begrijpen waarom onze cultuur en waarden zo belangrijk zijn, zal ook het westen binnenkort vallen. Baudet kijkt naar de lange termijn, de meeste politici kijken naar korte termijn. Het is juist die lange termijn visie die wij vandaag de dag nodig hebben. Politici als Jetten zien dat er banen te vullen zijn en zegt: 50.000 Oost-Europeanen hierheen. Waarom? Geld, de economie. Maar politici als Baudet zien niet alleen de economie, maar ook de lange termijn effecten van dit beleid. We hebben een huizentekort, hoe gaan we ze huisvesten? Wat is de impact op de samenleving? Zijn er geen andere opties zoals Nederlanders uit de bijstand aan het werk krijgen of wellicht tijdelijke tewerkstelling van de Oost-Europeanen? Er wordt simpelweg te makkelijk gedaan over veel onderwerpen, zeker immigratie en integratie. En dát denken heeft geleid tot de hevig gepolariseerde samenleving van vandaag. Dat korte termijn denken, dat wegwuiven van mogelijke toekomstige consequenties van wat je vandaag doet.
    3
  908.  @gtagta8086  The US and EU are drastically different, we don't share many values and there are large cultural differences. It's not comparable to European countries amongst one another. And to say that Europe is far from western values is ridiculous. There is no "true" set of western values. Our values are diverse and have changed throughout history. Western values are whatever values we currently adhere to. The values of the western/European civilisation. That's it. There are many contradictory values within European/western history, so it doesn't make sense to pick a few out of that pool to call them the "true" western values. Whatever values the European civilisation currently adheres to are the western values of the moment. They may change, but they can never not be "truly" western. Everything we spawn is automatically western. We are the west. And the EU as such is like the most neoliberal thing on earth; it's the epitome of the reigning neoliberal world order we created. People who like the neoliberal globalist way of thinking will love it, those that don't will hate it. It's the embodiment of what the current western world order stands for. What do you call "western values" then?
    3
  909. They explicitly stated poverty grew under Obama. They're just calling on Trump to try and fix it
    3
  910. If they prefer to live in less adanced, traditional conditions and in harmony with nature, they have the right to. They won't have any of the benefits of civilisation, but that is their choice. I agree she's being obtuse when ignoring the positive sides of civilisation (it is particularly dumb to blame child mortality on the civilisation that brought you advanced healthcare....), but ultimately colonisation is based on the idea that our civilisation is superior to other ways of life and natives should be taught our ways above their own. And that is wrong, at least by today's standards. If they don't want filthy cities, pollution and destruction of nature and traditions and instead opt for a hunter-gatherer life in which they live happier with their traditions but miss out on healthcare and general comfort of civilisation, that is not an inferior life to our own. It's a choice.
    3
  911.  @jesper771  Ik begrijp wat je bedoelt, maar de oplossing is om de context uit te leggen door bijvoorbeeld een bord erbij te plaatsen waarin de mindset van toen wordt uitgelegd en de geschiedenis van het beeld. De oplossing is beslist niet om kunst te vernietigen en de geschiedenis weg te vagen.
    3
  912. Die man is een held. Hij staat op voor de rechtsstaat, met gevaar voor eigen leven.
    3
  913. De naam is Humbelness (humbleness) maar het gedrag laat heel wat anders zien
    3
  914. +cgdude yo Funny you mention Communists because they're the original reason we started banning firearm ownership in Europe, or at least in my country. Much more difficult to stage a revolution without weapons. The Communist excuse is really poor, you should know that Europe obviously was plagued by it (and worse: by the USSR attempting to start and aid revolutions) a whole lot more. We also used to have an anarchist problem, who used to shoot up random places in the early 1900's, before the restriction on firearms. Nowadays we can have only hunting rifles (double barrel shotguns or bolt actions) or if you're a gun enthusiast you have gun ranges for the kind of guns you Americans would be allowed to take home. Why would I need more? If you are a member of a gun range for a few years you can even take a more advanced gun home. Being a criminal or mentally ill person disqualifies you for owning anything. What is wrong with a system like this? The Columbine excuse is also quite poor. They had bombs, therefore they should have firearms? Both are problematic and one problem doesn't negate the other. They should have access to neither. You do make a fair point about gangs. I also believe it's pointless to ban guns in the US now. You have allowed firearms to become so numerous that it's impossible to take them away from criminals now. A gun ban would diminish the amount of mass shootings but criminals would go on their merry way and continue killing. The cause of this is the availability of firearms in the US, caused by decades of legal firearm sale. It's past the point of no return for criminality. They have the guns and they won't give them away now. And no that doesn't mean gun ownership is good, it means gun ownership has seriously fucked up your country and you can't even fix the damage it has done at this stage. The high murder rate stays, about five times higher than the EU, enjoy.
    3
  915. Die Duitse wilde zwijnen willen gewoon een beter leven in Nederland, dit kunnen we toch niet maken #everzwijnlivesmatter
    3
  916.  @saudasmr9487  Russia didn't use modern slaves to build stadiums
    3
  917. Ffs show the footage if you report on something like this
    3
  918. +Elias Puolakka There's two ways of looking at it. The first way is to see Poland as brave and protecting Europe from immigration and the other is to see Poland as a traitor who refuses to help their brother European nations in dealing with the immigration crisis (while we give them bucketloads of our hard-earned money to rebuild their land, btw). Poland isn't brave, they are leaving us other European countries to deal with immigrants and makes the problem worse for us. Spreading 2.5 million refugees over the EU (500+ million population) should be easy and without trouble, but now there are hundreds of thousands or even over a million in ONE European country. Think about little a problem migrants would be if they were spread evenly over a 500 million population and think about how huge of a problem they are now.
    3
  919.  @sandykenuk  The division in the UK is quite unique and not normal in the slightest. I would agree that in the US the division is more frequent, but that is because they have a long term dysfunctional system. The entire system there is dysfunctional and always leads to conflict and one party blocking everything the other one does, as well as an impossibility for new parties to enter politics. It's been bad for the past few decades, I agree with that too, but in the UK that's mainly due to their own politicians. They vented it through Brexit, but the EU had little to do with it. They still had fair reasons for Brexit though, so I respect that. The UK will go back to normal after Brexit, it;s really just on this issue that parliament is divided. In the US the government has neglected any region outside of the big cities for decades. Mainly due to globalism and automation, jobs disappeared from the rural areas (factory jobs and such) and other jobs came back. Ultimately the US is richer, but the jobs that came back came mainly to the cities... The rural areas have been terribly neglected by every single administration for a long while. Trump promised to pay attention to them, but I think he won't be able to mend things. It's too much of a mess.
    3
  920. Goed idee. Boete voor de moskee en boete voor de persoon die de ander in het huwelijk heeft willen houden (dat zal doorgaans een boete voor de man betekenen). En als de moskee het aan de lopende band blijft doen, ook na verschillende boetes, dan moet dat verdergaande consequenties hebben.
    3
  921.  @tncorgi92  Wrong, Hans Christian Ørstead is not the discoverer of the element, he was the first to actually make aluminium. And since by this time aluminium was the dominant term in both European and even American science, he must have known it as aluminium. The discoverer of aluminium was Humphry Davy, but he failed to actually make it at the time. In 1808, he suggested calling it alumium. In 1812 he instead settled for aluminum. In the same year, another scientist reviewed his work and stated aluminium would be a more fitting name from a classical perspective. This then caught on in Europe and among scientists everywhere including America. Aluminum didn't gain traction in the US until the 1830's, because Webster for some reason chose to spell it aluminum in his 1828 dictionary even though it was aluminium literally everywhere, including among US scientists. US scientists continued to use aluminium while the general populace used aluminum. A century later, US scientists would also start using aluminum. So the reason for the US using aluminum is an 1828 dictionary misspelling aluminium. In fact, many different US spellings are caused by dictionaries (sometimes knowingly) spelling differently to the British counterparts. The British dictionaries took notice to the etymology of words and the history behind their sounds/spelling, US dictionaries were more simplistic. And sometimes... US dictionaries literally spelt words differently to the British just for the sake of being different, leading to nonsensical spelling differences. I wonder if this is such a case or if there's more behind Webster's choice.
    3
  922. +Jeff T So? Scared of WW3 happening soon and all trade connection with your European allies will be cut off (unlikely because you and the EU have the first and second most powerful navies)? Because that's the only situation in which this kind of move actually makes sense. As long as trade with the EU is available, your war machine can run cheaper than it would on your own more expensive steel. It is only when you lose your allies that you need to create the steel/aluminium yourself. So you're either preparing for the EU to betray you, for WW3 and a cut-off of trade routes between the EU and US or it's an excuse for something else. Face the truth: it's an excuse that Trump uses because he's mad about the huge trade deficit he has with Europe
    3
  923. +zbudda Oh boy, people want to immigrate to the USA so it must be impossible for it to commit any human rights violations, right? What kind of childish logic is this? "The USA is one of the largest human rights violators" "But.... people want to migrate here" How is that a proper response?
    3
  924. Ze bedoelen "passend bij de toekomstige tijdsgeest die wij graag willen zien". Als 70% en nu 55% tegen deze verandering is, dan is dat dus niet de "huidige" tijdsgeest. Dat is waar de publieke opinie heen gaat juist vanwege dit soort acties. Zij volgen dus niet slechts het publiek, maar leiden het publiek een bepaalde kant op.
    3
  925.  @bartvanriel6767  GDP per capita is nutteloos als het meeste bij de rijken komt. Ongelijkheid in Amerika is absurd groot. Zoek maar op wat de median wealth is van de VS. Dat laat zien wat de middenklasse heeft qua vermogen. De Nederlandse middenklasse staat op plek 6, Amerika op plek 21. Extreem rijke Amerikanen halen de gemiddeldes op, prik dat door en je ziet dat de Amerikaanse middenklasse eigenlijk helemaal niet zo rijk is en zelfs achterloopt vergeleken met andere westerse landen. Plek 21 is ongelooflijk slecht voor een land dat zo'n hoge GDP per capita heeft.
    3
  926. Found this only in my subscription box, even though I watched another one of your vids today and normally would have new ones recommended. Suppose it's time to hit the bell notifications
    3
  927. De enige opmerking van hem die ik totale onzin vond was die over euthanasie, maar hier legt hij dat op een manier uit waardoor ik het toch wel met hem eens ben. Het was nogal een ongelukkige formulering maar in ieder geval begrijp ik nu wat hij bedoelt.
    3
  928. De EU micromanaget te veel. Het zou veel beter zijn als we een sober maar functioneel Europa hebben dat actief is op de gebieden waar dat absoluut moet, maar de rest aan de lidstaten overlaat. We moeten die balans vinden
    3
  929.  @gorillaguerillaDK  Article 42 and following of the treaty on EU (TEU or Treaty of Maastricht) regulated the common defence of the EU. Article 42 under 7, it is stated that "If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power". There is a common defence strategy of the EU, which results in multinational training missions and EU military operations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_and_civilian_missions_of_the_European_Union The EU just isn't as active militarily, so this is often overlooked. NATO is still more important.
    3
  930. There are too many people on the planet. No we are not a cancer on earth (we are every bit as part of nature as everything else), but we should at least think about keeping nature healthy and balanced. Peterson just dismisses this because "how fast can we learn" and "tell it to a 4 year-old" and other non-arguments. His point of view is the only thing that is cancerous here: "we have been hard on the world but it has been pretty hard in return". What a hell of a thing to say... complete disdain for nature and even our own future. We should at least care
    3
  931.  @andersmembers1309  Ach donder toch lekker op. Je ziet er alleen racisme in omdat je het wil zien. De origine van zwarte piet is niet racistisch
    3
  932. Iran does have much to do with especially Yemen and also a bit in Syria, but you're right that Saudi Arabia and the US are equally bad or worse.
    3
  933. Maar "goed besteed hoor", zal hij zeggen als je 'm leeg terug krijgt
    3
  934. +TIH YDP You should never instantly discount someone's opinion (or in the case of my comment; a plain fact) on the basis of their nationality. It makes you look like a proper close-minded idiot
    3
  935. +TIH YDP Arguments are arguments, whatever the source may be. I know that if I would ever vote on the EU here, I might very well listen to what some Brits have to say on their experience leaving. I watched most, if not all big debates on British television and I saw both sides lie profusely. Remain lied about the "economic disaster" thing, pure fear mongering. In reality the UK can cope just fine without the EU, losing only some economic growth but no "disaster". Leave lied about the EU costing money (it earns the UK money, taking the single market into account) and the "EU bureaucrats telling the UK what to do" (pure lie trying to make the EU look bad, in truth the member states themselves are fully in charge). The benefits and downsides of the EU are much more subtle than what either side made it out to be. As to my nationality, I thought my clearly Dutch (or at least non-British) name coupled with the fact that I refer to the British as "you" and "they" would be enough to show it.
    3
  936. The British invented all kinds of cutting edge anti-sub technology and led the Battle of the Atlantic. It is the other way around. I actually remember reading somewhere that it was the British that took down two-thirds of u-boats.
    3
  937.  GodBAINS Yt . 6.1M views  Yes, if you put it that way I think calling the US production an underperformance is fair. Perhaps I should have said the US example of building a massive army from a hopelessly outdated one is not proof of a special performance of the US but rather of how quickly a war economy in any country can expand the military. I disagree with your assessment of the British army though. The British foreign policy always has been to focus on naval presence. They also kept up with advancements in the interbellum. The notion that the British military was small and outdated by the beginning of WW2 is wrong, they had an advanced and sizeable military but it focused on naval presence. Which is how they could succesfully blockade Germany. The US army was hopeless in the beginning of WW2, the UK military was in fact the most mechanised military in the world at that time and a force to be reckoned with. Its land based army size was by design, not a sign of neglect. In the US it absolutely was neglect. I do agree with the rest of your comment.
    3
  938. De titel weerspiegelt alleen wat die vrouw zegt. Het staat dan ook tussen aanhalingstekens. Maar ja, die vrouw is niet helemaal goed bij haar hoofd als ze hier een zwart tegen wit rassenstrijd in ziet. Dit is gewoon een bezopen wet. In Nederland mag je jezelf ook verdedigen, zelfs met een vuurwapen. Zelfs met een illegaal vuurwapen is het niet illegaal om het in zelfverdediging te gebruiken. Maar het grote verschil is dat we hier goed kijken of de actie absoluut noodzakelijk was of dat teveel geweld is gebruikt. Wij brengen de schutter naar het bureau en geven 'm een rechtszaak om te bepalen wat er is gebeurd en of zijn actie gerechtvaardigd was in die situatie. In Amerika kan de politie door deze wet niet eens ingrijpen en de schutter mag gezellig naar huis, zelfs met camerabeelden zo duidelijk als deze.
    3
  939. Omdat hun ideologie wordt gebruikt om terrorisme te verheerlijken, dan is het ook hun verantwoordelijkheid om te voorkomen dat leden uit hun gemeenschap daarvoor vallen. En als we kijken naar hoeveel moslimterroristen er wereldwijd zijn en hoeveel moslims zich aangetrokken voelden tot ISIS, zou ik zeggen dat die verantwoordelijkheid niet bepaald wordt opgepakt. Wilders pakt die verantwoordelijkheid door als leider van zijn politieke partij zich meermalen keihard uit te spreken tegen geweld, elke keer weer als zoiets gebeurt. Als jouw gemeenschap een probleem heeft met fundamentalisme, moet dat mede vanuit diezelfde gemeenschap worden bestreden om te voorkomen dat meer mensen dat soort ideeën krijgen. Maar dat gebeurt niet.
    3
  940. He takes a look at guns, why would he be demonitised? No controversial subjects, no swearing, no filming of dead bodies as I heard one channel did...
    3
  941. Zij kon hem af doen als ze dat wilde. Miljoenen moslimvrouwen wereldwijd kunnen dat niet, hetzij vanwege het strafrecht in hun land, hetzij vanwege zware sociale druk. Toch een verschil, hè?
    3
  942.  @wolfkipwolfkip9952  Typisch, gelijk mijn argument verwoorden. Miljoenen wordt opeens "alle", tuurlijk man. Misken jij dat er miljoenen moslimvrouwen zijn die geforceerd zich bedekken? Ik weet dat Maria haar sluier af kon doen omdat ze in een samenleving en sociale omgeving verkeerde waar vrouwen dat vrijelijk mochten doen. Dat leidt tot de conclusie dat in haar samenleving, het feit of een vrouw wel of geen sluier draagt afhankelijk is van de wil van de vrouw zelf. Makkelijk hè? Je hebt geen argument. Verdraai m'n woorden maar weer.
    3
  943. @Said Boudriz Dat verzin je ter plekke. Klimaatvluchtelingen is een fenomeen dat in de toekomst wellicht zal plaatsvinden, daar is nu nog geen sprake van. Of in ieder geval in zeer geringe mate.
    3
  944. @Said Boudriz Ook de EU importeert voedsel om de populatie te voeden, slimmerik. Weinig landen zijn volledig zelfvoorzienend.
    3
  945. I give the USA another 20-50 years at the most
    3
  946. +Badger0fDeath Everyone with a brain should support the EU. Together we are the richest economy in the world and the second strongest military in the world, able to be a superpower. Separated we are a collection of semi-rich countries that run behind the US (and the US has a track record of bad decisions and lack of respect for their allies). In terms of global politics, the EU is the only way forwards. The future is not necessarily good for Europe, with Africa's population booming and new future superpowers that will oppose our views, coupled with the decline of the superpower that has had the same interests as we did the last decades (more or less the same...). Only together can we ourselves become a superpower and defend our interests worldwide. In the form of the EU, we can affirm a strong position in the future. If you're sceptic of the EU, that's fine. But instead of trying to destroy the EU try to FIX it and turn it into something we can rely on. We should work together if we want to be strong, but this cooperation can have many forms. Let's find the form that's best for us. The EU can change into anything we need, even if the current EU has faults
    3
  947. +Gary Rumain Actually it does. Before 1924 America only rejected 1% of the migrants that came. One percent. You had completely open borders to everyone, these people want that to return apparently. The US has always been an immigrant country and the borders not being open is new to it. Strictly speaking Shuyu is correct.
    3
  948. The combined EU military is larger and more advanced than Russia's, plus we have a 5-1 population pool advantage and several times the production power of Russia. I'd love to see the USA sod off out of Europe, it's not like we need them. NATO/US only brought us trouble. Libya and Syria caused over 2 million migrants to come to the EU... Courtesy of our "ally" across the Atlantic. NATO is useless for anything other than fulfilling America's interests. The EU is capable of defending itself.
    3
  949.  @BreadWinner330  May I remind you that the UK was still 40% of the allied force on the western front.....
    3
  950. Napoleon stal tijdens de bezetting Nederlandse kunst die hij in onder andere het Louvre plaatste. Dit is ook in vele andere gevallen gebeurd in de geschiedenis. Moeten wij het Louvre ook maar eens leegroven? Dit is géén "blank vs zwart" ding. Ik ben voor het teruggeven van een aantal belangrijke culturele objecten die bepaalde Afrikaanse bevolkingsgroepen echt missen, maar de geschiedenis is nu eenmaal de geschiedenis en de huidige rechtmatige eigenaren zijn de musea. Niettemin vind ik dat ze toch wel een handreiking kunnen doen want in sommige gevallen zijn zeer belangrijke culturele objecten gestolen. Moet je je voorstellen dat de Nachtwacht of een ander zeer belangrijk object van cultureel erfgoed uit NL gestolen zou zijn. Ja die zou ik dan toch wel weer terug willen, maar we moeten niet uit principe elk object, belangrijk of niet, terug gaan brengen naar het land van herkomst.
    3
  951. Yeah they should boycot Facebook
    3
  952. An accusation is evidence, just very bad evidence. It can be called evidence, but it means little
    3
  953. Dutchie here and to all those Americans reading this: this is also true for most of Western and Eastern Europe. These policies should be no-brainers in a rich country like the US. It's not without reason that Social Democracies across the world consistently top all quality of life, happiness and similar ratings. It's a great system that respects the basic needs of all, while still benefitting from the merits of capitalism.
    3
  954. +Arron Whyte No matter how hard we lose on migration and healthcare, we will never even come close to the US' horrible record on either of the two. All the non-Europeans living in the continent of Europe combined (36+ million on 740 million population) are less than only the number of black people you have living in the US (40 million on 300 million population), and that is not even the biggest group of non-white people you have in America (that'd be South Americans). We're still 95% native, even with all this shit. You love to point to Europe in terms of migration, but you have 11 million illegals and counting, we have over 2 million of which 500.000 have already been sent back and more will follow (in due course... I'll admit the government is taking their sweet time in dealing with those illegals)
    3
  955. +Arron Whyte I'm not saying the US should have given anything for free. I'm just saying you shouldn't think that supplying someone for money is something special or gallant, which you seem to imply. It's not something you brag about. You got your money, the UK got their supplies. That's all there is to it. No "if we didn't help you, X or Y would have happened", it was just a pure business transaction, no "help". The UK paid dearly for it. The richest and largest empire of the world at the time was just about broke by the end of the war... Yeah the US really did fill their piggy bank during WW2, filled it to the brim. Good on the US, but nothing to brag about. I see a lot of people arguing that the US "was there for the UK" in terms of supplies, but all the US did was sign a very lucrative business deal
    3
  956. +BULLY HUNTER_77 I was enjoying the argument as well, until someone entered with "oh teh evil USSR invading countries for personal gain and the heroic US always invading for the greater good" nonsense. Honestly some of the worst nonsense I've read on the internet for a while, trying to justify every single invasion of the US and painting everything the USSR did black. Yes, stupidity triggers me.
    3
  957. Ik zou er maar niet om lachen, want hoe meer migranten hier komen, hoe rechtser we worden in Europa. En als het erg genoeg wordt komen we misschien zelfs in Nazi gebied terecht, politiek gezien. Elke actie heeft een reactie en het is dom om dit met Europa te doen. Je weet nooit hoe over 10 jaar gereageerd wordt... Stel dat er een tweede Hitler aan de macht komt die alle migranten wil "verwijderen". Hoe meer er komen, hoe dichterbij we bij die realiteit komen, want mensen willen nu eenmaal hun cultuur/land/volk beschermen van vernietiging. En dat moeten we niet willen. Hoe acuter de dreiging wordt, hoe extremer de reactie. En ja, geweld is de laatste en meest extreme optie waar je uiteindelijk terecht komt. Je ziet nu al de verharding, je ziet steeds gewelddadigere protesten tegen migratie...
    3
  958. +Molhedim That was before the migrant crisis. Merkel ruined everything in 2015. And are you blind? Joachim Löw and Merkel have the same haircut, you seriously think this is a coincidence? Merkel = Joachim Löw and football is deeply interconnected with the political situation in Germany. The last time Germany was out in the first round was.... 1938. Coincidence? I think not. Again, Germany will face a hard time in the near future.
    3
  959.  @hitoshiigarashi5350  Daarom denk ik dat voor verkiezingen, zoals nu, linkse partijen hoger in de peilingen staan. Pas wanneer de partijen op TV in debat gaan zien de Nederlanders de échte verschillen en échte standpunten van de partijen. Nu zien ze alleen op TV wat linkse programma's over rechtse partijen te zeggen hebben vanwege gebrek aan rechts georiënteerde programma's. Als DWDD en Pauw en zo de meest populaire programma's van NL zijn en de nieuwsbronnen van de meeste mensen alleen de NOS is, zullen ze een overwegend links beeld gepresenteerd krijgen van bijvoorbeeld de FvD. Dus ik denk dat de rechtse partijen (veel) meer stemmen zullen krijgen dan in de huidige peilingen.
    3
  960. +jdfreality To understand why the illiberal democracy is a problem you need to ask yourself but one simple question. You have the right to choose to not have certain rights for yourself, but do others have the right to take your rights away without your consent?
    3
  961. We could probably secure the Baltics in the long run, but invading Russia? Nope.
    3
  962. Ze filmden gewoon dikke mensen en zeiden dat Nederland steeds dikker wordt. Je doet alsof ze volop beledigingen naar hun hoofd gooiden of zo.
    3
  963. @Bhigr Bond First you research, THEN you doubt. You don't doubt first and go on youtube pestering people to do the research for you. So go on, do your research, come back and present why you think the consensus on this issue is wrong, THEN you may expect a response. That's how science works. The evidence is readily available, go look it up. And insofar you've already read up on the holocaust, still don't agree with the consensus, but come on YT simply saying you think it's wrong without evidence, I have another nice saying for you: That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
    3
  964.  Charles Lee Ray  There is a distinction to be made between culturally British and ethnically British. You're only a full on Brit when you're both, but when you're only culturally British you're still British, just less.
    3
  965.  @ottowokeninger9617  If you don't see that the US police has serious issues with excessive violence and undue killings, you're blind. I agree with you that the protestors instantly connecting this issue to racism is not necessarily fitting, but police violence is a huge issue in the US for white and black alike. Arguably they target black people more, other people say they don't and are liable to kill anyone, but the core idea that US police is really screwed up in terms of killing citizens is an absolute fact. Way too many die and this has been protested for literal decades so if you ask me we've arrived at the point where damaging government and/or big corporate property is justified to finally get the government to change. Personal property and small businesses ought to be protected, however. Always.
    3
  966. +jimmy johnson Because your tariffs hurt us too, plain and simple. Our steel industry makes very specific types of steel/aluminium that US companies can't even make (took our companies 7 years to develop the technique too) and the US is one of their most important trade partners. We don't like to see jobs disappear, even if that means more US jobs will disappear. And you can be sure more US jobs will disappear, since a hell of a lot more European products are actually made in the US than vice versa. So you are both attacking us and your own workers that we employ. We are only attacking you. In the end you will lose more. Ironically, the trade deficit means you're more susceptible to trade wars. You need our goods and you voluntarily raise the price on them. For us, we'll lose jobs in the industries that export to the US (might be able to compensate a bit with China and Russia, but we'll feel it). You will lose jobs in the industries that use the imported goods from the EU and lose jobs within the EU-owned factories in America and lose jobs from the countersanctions which are not designed to be blunt, but rather aimed at very specific industries that won't hurt us when doing badly but will cost you jobs. In the end we both lose, but you lose more. Add to that that the EU and China seem to be collaborating on this, because our policies are exactly the same: target very specific industries in red states. Don't think this is a coincidence
    3
  967. Op zich terechte herrie, want landen als Zuid-Korea waren eerder dan ons geraakt door corona, hadden minder tijd om voor te bereiden en konden al heel snel grootschalig testen. Volgens mij zelfs binnen enkele weken. Dus ja, we zijn hier gewoon echt laat mee.
    3
  968. Hetzelfde, Flor
    3
  969. Only because the USSR was in a sorry military state when the invasion happened. When the USSR war economy was up and running and the organisation was improved, the chances of Germany dwindled. They were outproduced by so much. Funnily enough the tables have turned today; the EU nations mostly invest as little as they can into the military while Russia has maintained a substantial force. But the EU dwarfs Russia so extremely when it comes to the economy, Russia has just about zero chance in any long term war with an active EU war economy. Even less of a chance than Germany had against the allies that outproduced them by a huge factor (the chance being close to zero). Like Germany in WW2, Russia's only decent chance would be a swift blitzkrieg, taking key adversaries down before they get a chance to properly organise and set up their war economy. But the chance of that being succesful is very low. What Germany did in WW2 was extremely impressive, really a one-off type thing because they had very effective and novel military strategies while the enemy was either completely and utterly unprepared (USSR) or stuck in WW1 tactics coupled with low fighting morale (UK, France). Russia can't mirror that succes today. I highly doubt that.
    3
  970. So with half the population they tried to equal the US defence spending. Noice.
    3
  971. Wrong. Destroyers are also vulnerable to submarines, very much so. Another European country once sank almost an entire carrier strike group with one submarine, including destroyers, command ships and the supercarrier they were supposed to protect. And other US submarines too, btw. And I believe it escaped to boot. Quiet submarines are extremely difficult to counter if the crew is highly skilled. The US only has more loud nuclear subs (essentially trading silence for excellent range). Destroyers aren't scissors, quiet diesel submarines are scissors to other, attacking submarines.
    3
  972. Play for your roots and go LIVE with your roots too
    3
  973. They're nominated by our national governments and then voted on by the directly chosen EU parliament, actually.
    3
  974.  @MerkkledingSchreeuwdArmoede  Vroeger sloeg men op potten en pannen, dus is vandaag de dag alle cultuur nutteloos en waardeloos. Ja, goed argument........
    3
  975.  @MerkkledingSchreeuwdArmoede  Het is abrupt/geforceerd als je gewoon normale veranderingen kan aanbrengen (bijv. lagere brandstapel, heel simpel) maar er tóch voor kiest om heel de traditie af te schaffen. Wat in Den Haag is gebeurd met de vreugdevuren is als héél Sinterklaas verbieden om Zwarte Piet in plaats van gewoon wat veranderingen aan te brengen aan Zwarte Piet zelf. Het is draconisch, onnodig en veronachtzaamt onze tradities op een onacceptabele wijze.
    3
  976. I think it is because these pieces of hearsay are an integral part of her forensic research. She has to quote hearsay to explain how she came to her conclusions. So basically this is a loophole to name hearsay as if they are facts, without interruptions.....
    3
  977. No, the UK wouldn't support a foreign force invading Europe...
    3
  978.  Good Krypollo  TIL we in Europe are absolute lunatics. *cries in higher quality of life*
    3
  979. +The Slim Reaper Nou niet bepaald. Ik geef toe dat een absoluut onpartijdige zender nagenoeg onmogelijk is, maar niet alles is propaganda. CNN is gewoon regelrechte propaganda in die zin dat de presentatoren/gasten continu hun eigen linkse mening keihard doordrukken, soms zelfs direct in strijd met de waarheid. De NOS probeert neutraal te zijn en dat waardeer ik, maar ik zie wel dat de mensen die daar rondlopen veelal links zijn. Dus bij mij zal de TV nooit op CNN staan, maar wel op de NOS. Ik weet gewoon dat als ik 'm aanzet, ze bijvoorbeeld inherent vrij anti-Russisch zijn, etc. en dat ik daar op moet letten. Maar het is geen propaganda. Die term wordt inmiddels door rechtse commenters gebruikt zoals racisme door extreem linkse idioten wordt gebruikt en dat vind ik jammer.
    3
  980. Dit is wel echt extreem...
    3
  981. Gewoon niet doen. De anti-zwarte pieters stoppen niet totdat er geen bruine veeg meer op het gezicht van zwarte piet te vinden is, ze zijn veel te onredelijk om mee te onderhandelen. Ze zien overal racisme in.
    3
  982.  @mniskin  You speak of an idyllic situation in which the owners of land are also the ones working the land. In that hypothetical situation I would agree with you. However, I am speaking of a situation in which there are landowners who themselves do nothing, but use their ownership rights over the land to employ others to actually work it for them. In theory they could even purchase land, leave it completely unused and forcibly remove anyone that wishes to use the land from it due to their ownership rights. I don't care how these owners became the owner. Whether a feudal king bought all the land he rules over or took it by force, feudalism inherently is a system of coercion. Therefore what matters is how owners can and will employ their ownership rights to dictate to others how they can acquire their needs. In ancapistan it is theoretically possible and permitted to buy up vast swathes of land and to literally implement feudalism there. And if theoretically almost all land is owned in this manner, and you only get to choose who your feudal lord is, you can impossibly escape this coercion. Any system which allows this cannot claim to not be coercive. Ancap allows coercion by private actors and even backs this up by force (enforcement of ownership rights). That is why I say that only a system in which ownership rights do not exist can be non-coercive. If it is legal for anyone to start using unused land, and illegal for anyone to forcibly take over land that is currently being used by another, only then is there no coercion. Only then is every land "owner" also the producer of food. Only then can you claim that in all cases, you either produce food yourself or you must exchange something to an individual who themselves laboured to produce the food. Only that is voluntary. Capitalism cannot exist without coercion because ownership rights inherently require coercion to enforce them. If I own a house but leave it empty and live elsewhere, squatters have to be forcibly removed and denied access to that home in order to protect my ownership rights. It does not matter whether the state or a private actor enacts this violence towards the squatter. The point is it requires (a threat of) violence, always. So ancap cannot claim to be non coercive. Any system with ownership rights cannot claim such. Or perhaps a system in which ownership rights only exist as long as you actually use the good you own, and expire after a set period of not using it. F.e. I can leave a house empty for a year before my ownership rights expire and the house becomes res nullius. By the way: I want to clarify that a mistake many make is thinking that capitalism = free market. No. Capitalism is only one specific TYPE of free market, which places emphasis on ownership rights and thereby enables use of capital to acquire ownership over anything and passively generate income. There are many ways to organise a free market because yes, even free market functions based on rules. And choices can be made in regards to those rules.
    3
  983. Daar zijn we weer hoor, een quotum invoeren om ongelijkheid op te lossen werkt niet. Als je meer vrouwen in de top wil, moet je kijken waarom het nu niet lukt en die problemen oplossen zodat in de toekomst vrouwen en mannen gelijke kansen hebben. Dat is een structurele oplossing. Niet nu een quotum invoeren, jezelf op je schouders kloppen dat er genoeg vrouwen in de top zitten en over 10 jaar erachter komen dat de gewone vrouw die streeft naar een toppositie alsnog tegen van alles aanloopt omdat je de échte reden dat vrouwen de top niet halen nooit hebt aangepakt. Quota zijn vrijwel altijd schijnoplossingen.
    3
  984. Het moet stoppen. Ik heb geen probleem met culturen die maagdelijkheid waarderen voor het huwelijk, maar het moment dat je daarvoor operaties gaat opdwingen aan je dochter wordt dat een schadelijke praktijk. Het is ook zo bekrompen. Als je dochter niet meer maagd is heb je dat te accepteren, hoe jammer je dat ook vind.
    3
  985. Zwakbegaafde, waarom zou je dat doen...
    3
  986.  @fluzzerr  In Wit-Rusland en Syrië hebben ze dictators waar je in feite niet tegen kunt stemmen. In Syrië wordt de oppositie letterlijk gemarteld. Dat betekent niet dat wij oorlogje moeten gaan spelen en veel meer chaos en leed moeten gaan veroorzaken dan eris onder die dictator, maar we moeten ook niet gaan doen alsof het daar allemaal oké en eerlijk verloopt
    3
  987. @moi ici Nee z'n gedrag zeker niet, maar de manier waarop hij praat wel
    3
  988. No, Italy is calling on the EU to end the crisis. It's the opposite of leaving: they're criticising the EU for not doing enough for them. They need help. And I agree with them
    3
  989.  @jaguarway5624  No, Russia is driven into a corner by NATO and does everything it can to at least have some buffer states. I don't condone what they do but they are not terrorists or even bad. They're just America-light right now, in terms of their military actions.
    3
  990. Indeed, it's pretty funny hearing this from the UK government considering that fact
    3
  991. +madmatt097 Hahahaha, you think European empires helped you because of shared beliefs? Not quite... we wanted to annoy the Brits. Your independence was a secondary result of rivalry between European empires. It's a plain fact that without especially French intervention, the Americans would have been very likely to lose, almost certain even. "Not because we needed it", sure You speak of terrorist attack but after France you have the most deaths due to terrorism lately. If we include non-islamic mass shootings and such you're number one. The US constitution was made on the basis of the Plakkaat van Verlatinghe (1581) and the English Bill of Rights (1689). Being anti-tyranny was not new, especially since it literally copies the Plakkaat van Verlatinghe in how it justifies the independence. "There is no country like it" ahahaha. That last bit is exactly my point; the US is protected against tyranny because the US army and other institutions are pro Bill of Rights, etc. and NOT because of the right to bear arms. As I said before, you need to make your institutions resilient against anti-democratic influences, NOT trust on armed civilians (a stupid idea from the very start). Your safety relies IN FULL on the willingness of insitutions to respect your rights. The moment they are corrupted, you're screwed with or without guns. It's not the guns that save you, it's the low level of corruptability of insitutions. You have proven only one thing in the US and that's how you can make civilians accept downright crazy things from the government if only you give them guns and tell them they're safe. You have the most corrupted government in the west. Your government spies on you. Your government can abduct and torture you without trial if you're a suspected terrorist. Your government cares only about corporations due to their "donations" keeping the current political parties in power in an artifial manner. You live in a country without proper representation and clamping to your guns will not change this. Try and set up your own political party and you'll find out how chanceless you are at voicing your own opinion in parliament. Does the US government truly represent the people if there is so little freedom to enter parliament and so little diversity in terms of political parties? The quality of the parties doesn't dictate how much seats they get; it's their capability of attracting the most corporate donations to invest it in campaigns. Lastly about freedom of speech, all you have to do is look at the core reason we have it. Voicing our opinions freely in a democratic society so we can have constructive discussions about the future of our coutry and rights. Where does hate speech and unnecessary personal insults fit in there again? That's right, it doesn't. It adds nothing of value to democracy AND damages personal lives of individuals. And hate speech can even lead to violence and disorder. Is riling up others with hate speech so they go on and commit violent offences a right? Is bombarding someone with personal insults a right? Should it be? Does it add anything at all to a democracy? There's more reason not to have it than to have it. Hate speech and personal insults/slander adds nothing but misery to a democracy. Voicing your opinion in a civilised manner does add to a democracy, as long as that opinion doesn't involve mass murder or something like that.
    3
  992. National Socialism was a form of socialism, just a special one. But economically is had both left wing and right wing aspects
    3
  993. LetsPlayPetrus  National Socialism hated communism, hated capitalism but itself employed both socialist and capitalist economic policies (being somewhat of a combination of both). It hated communism but was itself still a form of socialism, just a very different one. Strictly speaking it was neither socialism nor capitalism, but somewhat comparable to both. I don't think it is crazy to call it a (special) form of socialism
    3
  994. Wow, an American that is proud of her own country WITHOUT looking down on others. Not all seem to understand that those two don't have to go together
    3
  995. +dr mandora Re-read my comment. It was positive towards her. She loves her country but at the same time realises that this doesn't have to go paired with hatred for and/or feelings of superiority over other countries. That is a good thing
    3
  996. It's not about more land, it's about preventing NATO expansion up to Russian borders. And no NATO is not a neutral defence alliance, it is the long arm of US imperialism. Russia is countering this move with its own aggressive imperialism. And Ukraine is the victim.
    3
  997. Bold of you to assume they ever left spectator mode
    3
  998. Oh dear, she can't even fold her arms properly. She should adopt a healthier lifestyle instead of blaming others for the lack of loose clothing. Fat people are a niche market, so less clothing types are going to be available for them. I notice the same thing because I'm rather tall and need a size of clothing that is rarely available. It led to many clothing items I liked to not fit me at all. At least she can fix her body type to fit the clothing she wants, I can't.
    3
  999. *woof woof* Let me in, I'm a dog, I swear! A rare humanoid looking one that can talk
    3
  1000.  @dutchrednas  Kun je ook zinnige dingen zeggen of ben je zo'n NPC die alleen maar allerlei lege termen de wereld in kan gooien. "Racistisch!", "SJW!". Wat is je volgende respons, komt er zowaar iets inhoudelijks uit? Meestal zie ik NPCs met het linkse bestuurssysteem, maar die van jou lijkt alleen rechtse responsen te geven
    3
  1001.  @avatharbehemoth  Jij bent degene die dit fake news noemt zonder enig bewijs/argument. Deze video is volkomen logisch en niet anti-Trump of wat dan ook (je zou het zelfs een compliment voor Trump kunnen noemen). Dit is echt nieuws en als jij zegt dat dat niet zo is, moet JIJ met argumenten komen. Zo werkt dat. Een opmerking zonder onderbouwing, kan worden weerlegd zonder onderbouwing.
    3
  1002. Yen looks fine. Close enough. Her age is definitely a problem however... looks too young, despite being similar to how Yennefer is described in the books (with a little make up). Hopefully it'll work out and she'll look older on screen, but meh
    3
  1003. +tart70 It does exist as international law and that's why almost the entire world (the US is the only true supporter of Israel) recognises only the official UN borders and not areas Israel currently occupies. And everyone pushes for a two-state solution.
    3
  1004.  @DocRealTalk  There's no rabbit hole to be found here. Turkic peoples are not from Europe and the only reason the Turks own a piece of European land is because they conquered it. This is worse than calling the Russians "Asian" just because they conquered parts of Asia. Or calling Cypriots "Asian/Middle Eastern" just because technically Cyprus is not in Europe. At best one could say the Turks (not all Turkic peoples, just the Turks and maybe some Turkic peoples near Russia) are a Eurasian culture because they also have a history in Europe and spent time influencing and being influenced by regions in Europe, but that's it. Elves are not supposed to be humans, they are the spirits of our forefathers. Specifically our pagan hunter-gatherer forefathers. This is why their connection to and love for nature is emphasised, their affiliation with "magic" (as they were more adept at our ancient customs) and why they're often depicted as a dead or dying civilisation. It's why they live for extremely long periods of time (as long as we remember them, is the idea). And why they're depicted as knowledgeable, strong people, which comes from the ancestor worship elements of European paganism. Only the best fantasy out there gets these themes right, most are bastardisations. Tolkien depicted them beautifully. Yeah, most versions of elves today are just "humanoids with pointy ears", essentially. Only good fantasy gets the mythological themes right. Most fantasy is to mythological elves what Marvel comic book Thor is to mythology. By the way, elf in old Germanic means "white being". But I'd sooner say that's because of their spirit-like appearance than skin colour, which people back then didn't care about as much as we do today. If you put it that way, I agree.
    3
  1005.  @yousnooze  You wouldn't even have had radar without the British... They gave you a ridiculous amount of technology without which you couldn't even hope to fight Germany. All you ever had going for you is your population size and the ocean between you and the action.
    3
  1006.  @mikeb7615  Are you living under a rock? The EU is an economic and political powerhouse
    3
  1007.  @grtxyz4358  Vuurwerk niet echt, zwarte piet wel. Dat iets cultureel erfgoed is betekent niet dat het per se moet worden gehouden, maar wel dat je het alléén aanpast als daar goede reden toe bestaat. Dus voor het vreugdevuur betekent dat dat wat er vorig jaar gebeurde een goede reden is om te kijken naar wat er moet gebeuren, maar je eerst kijkt of een kleiner vuur mogelijk is voordat je heel bot gewoon andermans cultuur gaat verbieden alsof dat normaal is.
    3
  1008.  @aaroncarolan820  Against? A Serb killed an aristocrat, then Austria had extremely unfair conditions for Serbia and took on a very warmongering stance. Serbia is not responsible for the actions of one national, especially not to the degree that Austria held them responsible, but they did take a bullet during WW1 as the country was basically destroyed. Austria started WW1, absolutely. It was their warmongering behaviour that escalated everything and they forced Serbia into war by using the assassination as an excuse. They probably wanted to use the assassination to cause a war and take all of Serbia for Austria-Hungary empire but it escalated a bit further than they hoped.
    3
  1009. Zoals het nu gaat kun je eerder denken aan 21 miljoen
    3
  1010. Is jaren geleden ook eens bij ons gebeurd. Wel even schrikken, zeg
    3
  1011. Denk je dat als we allemaal in klederdracht en klompen rond een vuurtje gaan dansen de EU binnen komt vallen ofzo? Als we onze tradities verliezen dan ligt het aan onze eigen regering, de EU heeft daar niks over te zeggen. Ik heb ook schoon genoeg gehad van multiculturalisme en al die rotzooi, maar dat we dat hebben komt toch echt door onszelf en dat we in het verleden dachten dat wanneer men hier zou komen iedereen zou assimileren. Nu zitten we op de blaren. Het slaat nergens op om dan de EU de schuld te geven.
    3
  1012. "nO evIdEnCE whAtSOevER" He must've forgotten this exchange and the fact that the current head of the WHO had a very... interesting relationship with China while he was minister of foreign affairs in Ethiopia and received a bunch of Chinese aid. I don't agree with leaving it, but Trump is correct when he calls the WHO biased towards China.
    3
  1013. Je pakt de regeling JUIST aan door van Dijkhoff een voorbeeld te maken van hoe het niet moet. Politici moeten aangespoord worden dit niet te doen en dat doe je door ze in een kwaad daglicht te zetten als ze fouten maken.
    3
  1014. Nee joh dan moet je op hun hoofd gaan staan en ze op een bangalijst zetten
    3
  1015. Ik wacht nog steeds op de vergoeding van Engeland en Frankrijk voor het rampjaar.... en nog eens Frankrijk voor de Napoleontische tijd waarin wij min of meer een kolonie van ze waren. En uiteraard de Scandinavische landen voor al dat geplunder door de Vikingen, dat kon gewoon echt niet. Oh, en de Romeinen die ons zo lang bezetten en onze opstand neersloegen. En grote delen van Oost Europa mogen bij Rusland en Turkije aankloppen voor schadevergoedingen wegens bezettingen en moordpartijen in het verleden, alsook een lucratieve slavenhandel wat betreft Turkije. En Griekenland verdient een fikse vergoeding voor het verlies van Constantinopel aan de Turken... sterker nog, geef Constantinopel en omgeving maar terug aan de Grieken, stop de kolonisatie. Hoe zit het met zo ongeveer heel het Midden Oosten en het Ottomaanse Rijk? Als we daarmee beginnen, met het idee dat nakomelingen van slachtoffers vergoeding/excuses verdienen van nakomelingen van daders, dan openen we werkelijk pandora's doos aan schadeclaims en rectificaties. Ondoenlijk en ook onlogisch. Hoeveel jaar gaan we terug? Wat voor misdaden komen in aanmerking? Wat voor vergoeding/excuses is op zijn plaats? Hier moeten we gewoonweg niet aan beginnen. Het verleden was in veel opzichten vreselijk, laten we ervoor zorgen dat de toekomst beter zal zijn. Daar schieten we nog wat mee op. Een wereld waarin wij streven naar een mooie toekomst is een betere wereld dan één waarin we verwikkeld zitten in het rechtzetten van het verleden.
    3
  1016.  @hihoi6085  Recht op een beter leven bestaat niet. Een beter leven bouw je zelf op. Wij in het westen leven in samenlevingen waar wij elkaar enorm helpen met het opbouwen van een leven, dus ja het is makkelijker voor ons. Maar we kunnen niet iedereen helpen. Wat wij hebben is door onszelf opgebouwd, voor onze kinderen. En het moment dat iedereen daar gebruik (of eerder: misbruik) van wil maken stort hetgeen wij voor onze kinderen hebben gebouwd in. Wij geven wat onze voorouders aan ons hebben gegeven, door aan onze kinderen.
    3
  1017. The world would be a mess if everyone had access to food, water and education. We'd overpopulate the earth more than we already do and destroy it all
    3
  1018.  @A-Young-Philosopher  Ah the "freedom" to corrupt democracy... what a joke. It's so sad that corporate "donations" have such a mighty grip on US politics.
    3
  1019. Begrijp ik ook niet. Het was gevoelige vraag misschien, maar niets vreemds of kwaadaardigs.
    3
  1020.  @TheImperatorKnight  The cause is the aim for endless economic growth, not necessarily state intervention. Even without state intervention, bankers and investors are sure to create bubbles themselves in their strife for endless max profit. As long as we pursue endless economic growth instead of an economy that actually provides for people's needs and leaves it at that (which can and will include economic growth, but won't see growth as a goal in itself), bubbles will exist and pop. I feel you're putting too much of the blame on the state, as if they're the sole cause of this. In truth many different actors play a role in the creation and prolonging of economic bubbles, including the state. The root cause to me seems the aim for maximum economic growth, regardless of whether that is what society needs at that moment. I'm wondering if capitalism is possible witout this layer of growth-obsession.
    3
  1021.  @angelbarajas9180  It's not even only that. Fascism not only is anti-democratic but also anti-capitalist and extremely nationalist. And anti-marxist of course. A fascist wants a complete social revolution just like communists do, but instead of a marxist revolution they want a system of government in which the economy is completely organised to be in the interest of the nation. No free market, but a planned economy with class collaboration (which is by the way an important distinction from the communist planned economy with the proletariat; the fascists want to keep and even enforce the class differences but want the classes to work together in the interest of the nation as a whole). And a dictatorial government that holds the national interests at heart in a way that they see as more effective than democracy. Racism doesn't even have a place in normal fascism. That's something national socialists did; that was fascism with one small but ultimately disastrous difference; they believed nation = race. So instead of purging anyone that was against the interests of the nation, they purged anyone that was against the interests of the German race. Fascism is an entirely separate third option besides capitalism and communism/socialism. That's also how they presented themselves back then; the third option. The problem with the fascist (probably most are nazi's because they often mention race) strategy is that it brilliantly mingles with the "normal" alt right or even the normal right as such. It's extremely difficult to distinguish actual fascists from just alt right people and normal nationalists. And as Natalie points out, trying to make that distinction involves massive paranoia. How many dog whistles you see is entirely dependent on how many fascists you believe exist. It's impossible to distinguish whether someone is using a dog whistle or honestly expressing their beliefs. If you believe fascism is extremely popular, you might conclude that when someone makes a statement that can be understood as a dog whistle it probably is. If you believe fascism isn't that prevalent in society then you'd conclude that 99% of the time people making such statements are not a secret fascist using a dog whistle. It's just guesswork at this point.
    3
  1022.  @shmeet  That's just naive. Have you ever spent some time on reddit or some other internet forum with a leftist or right wing base? There are people who unironically think "real communism" was never tried and we need to give it a shot. There are people who unironically want to repeat the National Socialist horrors and there are people who "just" want fascism. They all exist and plenty of them do. Enough for them to be readily found on the internet. Enough for them to organise protests, enough to be a terror threat (christchurch, Anders Breivik, the mayor in Germany that got killed by Nazis a few months ago, if we stick to the right wing side). And again; whether there are many or not doesn't matter. You're either a hypocrite who first allows them to spread their ideology but when it gets too big you do a 180 and tell them they suddenly can't spread their beliefs anymore or you accept that if those ideas spread you will lose your democracy and your rights. Which is it? A hypocrite or someone who is okay with fascism or communism as long as enough people want it. I'm neither and that means I don't allow those views in the democratic discourse. Be it one lunatic supporting it or half the country. I don't care. You either allow those ideologies as acceptable ideas within your democratic discourse or you don't and oust them from the democratic discourse. All of the west, except you, has chosen the second option. You're just stuck in your old outdated views about democracy, as the US is on many topics... your system is not well protected against ill-willing agents that want to destroy democracy. All it takes is one major capitalist depression like in the 1930's to make a lot of people believe that other economic systems are better, usually either fascism or socialism. And then it's already too late. All it takes is a bit of social unrest and people will be looking for extreme "solutions". That's when those ideologies suddenly gain a lot of traction.
    3
  1023. ​ @angelbarajas9180  Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying; civic and even ethno nationalists are not fascists. But actual fascists/nazis do tend to mingle with nationalists and use dogwhistles to spread their ideas in a low key way. The problem starts arising when you need to distinguish fascists from just normal nationalists. The left nowadays pretty much assumes that every nationalist is secretly a fascist using dogwhistles (which is ridiculous and unduly tries to oust civic nationalism from the democratic discourse) and the right just thinks no fascists exist today (which is naive). Now ethno nationalism comes so close to Nazi ideas of a racially pure nation that I don't think it's a problem at all if they get ousted from the democratic discourse, but civic nationalism is a perfectly fine ideology that deserves its place in the democratic discourse. Especially nowadays, when the concept of the nation-state is under pressure. We should be able to think freely about whether we ought to preserve the nation-state or allow the current globalist tendencies to further undermine it and create a new way of organising countries. That's the transitionary period we're in now, roughly speaking, and it's ludacris to deny civic nationalism a spot at the discussion table under these circumstances. We need civic nationalists to be able to voice their concerns about what is happening to the nation-state.
    3
  1024.  @shmeet  These people are not going to "amend" the Bill of Rights. They're going to spread their ideology until it's just popular enough to stage a violent revolution in which they take the Bill of Rights and tear it apart. They don't care about legal or illegal, they don't care about our current system at a fundamental level. The law itself doesn't protect your system, at least not enough to stand against malicious ideologies seeking to subvert it. Once they get too popular; and this doesn't have to be the majority either (not even by far), it's over. That's why you have to be either accepting of those ideologies or against them. The middle ground is equal to accepting them. There is no middle ground on this topic, the middle ground doesn't always exist. Either you don't accept their ideology and fight it, or you do accept their ideology, knowing that if they ever pass a certain threshold they'll take away all your rights and freedoms. Legally or illegally, they don't care. Should you do the latter, know that the one and only thing saving you is that they're not popular enough to stage a revolution. I believe that's careless. To me, my basic rights and freedom are not up for discussion and nobody but myself can choose to take them away. Some tankie commie can't vote to take my democratic rights away. Some nazi can't vote that certain people should literally die. These things can't be voted for, so those ideologies can't be voted for. Do you think it's reasonable that within a democracy I can vote on whether you should live or die?
    3
  1025.  @shmeet  In Russia it took 4% of the population (5 mil of 125 mil) to usher in a Soviet revolution and the Russian Empire was much bigger than the US (bigger than Russia today). By the way, over 50% of millenials aren't really fond of capitalism as it's practiced now... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/26/a-majority-of-millennials-now-reject-capitalism-poll-shows/. What if capitalism fails again with another crisis and these people start gathering together, not just to oppose capitalism, but to propose a new system in which democracy and your rights are null and void? What if a Lenin or Hitler comes along promising to fix the system they dislike? No laws and systems are going to stop revolutionaries that take what they want by force. The only thing stopping revolutionaries is that there are not enough revolutionaries and how we ensure there never will be enough revolutionaries is to prevent them from spreading their ideas. (just as a side note, criticism on the failures of our economic system is perfectly fine within democratic discourse, but spreading an ideology that also seeks to overthrow democracy and disregard our human rights or conduct genocides are off limits). Again your argument boils down to "yeah but they're not numerous enough". The point of banning their speech is not whether or not they're capable of actually implementing them. The point is that those ideas are fundamentally against our current beliefs and rights and have no place in a decent democratic discussion. Therefore, why allow those ideas in the democratic discussion if they are never meant to actually flourish? You either accept that they flourish or you don't. The only question that is relevant here is this one: would you be okay with it if communists or fascists would democratically vote away your rights or not? If not, those views have no place in the plurality of ideas within your democracy. If you do, fine allow them to spread their ideology. What you're saying is "we won't stop their speech, we'll just wait until they're big enough to stage a revolution and then shoot them dead". Why allow them to grow big enough to start claiming American lives in the first place ? It's like saying you won't do anything against Nazis because "we'll just fight WW3 and win just like last time". When there is violence, it's already too late, whether they win or not. If we had your idea of freedom in Europe, there'd have been communist revolutions here long ago. I prefer the way it went; without bloody revolutions. We fought their subversion early. And so did you in America by the way.
    3
  1026. Denk je nu echt dat dit van enig belang voor de geschiedenis is? Alsof we het over een heropleving van de Tweede Wereldoorlog hebben of zo.......
    3
  1027. Hmm, and you don't think it's a problem that those that need psychiatric help can get a gun in the first place? Perhaps the world is not so black and white and we should loo at both...
    3
  1028. Fine, Matt. Here you go: women are humans with female neurological activity. Some biological men can have female neurological activity, causing a disconnect between physical body and mental identity called gender dysphoria (a recognised mental condition). These biological men might transition to have their body fit their neurological activity as much as possible, fully becoming women (which they mentally always already were). Truth is, trans women have the neurological activity of a woman, the hormonal make up of a woman, a lot of physical attributes of a woman (soft skin, breasts, f.e.) and more. Same for trans men. Neurological activity of a man, hormonal make up of a man, plenty of physical attributes of a man. Where they notably differ from biological women is: lack of female reproductive organ, and technically they still have XY chromosomes. Just look at the very trans man you are responding to and tell me that he somehow seems more like a woman than a man to you... that doesn't make sense. You're bullying people who have great troubles with identity, caused by a serious condition. Having a disconnect between your mental gender identity (actual measurable neurological activity) and your physical sex is terrible. And you're just making it worse for many people. So stop it, this actually is causing harm to people.
    3
  1029.  @trynitro_  Yes I have heard of all of those instances in India. Not as bad as the US. Indians are still there, their culture is still alive, they have their own country. The British did not intend to literally genocide the Indian subcontinent to the point where almost no Indians even existed anymore and the British basically replaced them as the main inhabitants of their land. That's a much higher level of evil than what the British Empire did in India, if you ask me. Native Americans are almost wiped out and today only own 3% of their original land, with a considerable amount of them also being pushed into extreme poverty and drug problems. The British oppressed the Indians, but they didn't go as far as the US has in its treatment of Native Americans. Intending to rule over a population brutally is always better than intending to wipe out that population and take their place in their own home.
    3
  1030. Why you think we spend so little on the military? We get free protection and the biggest trade surplus on earth, courtesy of the US.
    3
  1031.  @iustinianconstantinescu5498  Socialism is the working class seizing the means of production. Not "gubberment does stuff, the more stuff they do the socialismer it is". And I know this will blow your mind but what if I told you that free market socialism exists? It's a system in which workers control the company they work at, but those worker-controlled companies still compete with eachother on a free market. Yes, that is socialism too. Or how about anarcho-communism, which literally doesn't have a government and has as its only principle to abolish all oppressive relations (like upper class vs lower class)? They all have one thing in common: the workers seize the means of production. This has nothing to do with private vs public. If I work for myself, I as a worker have control over the means of production in my own company. Technically I'm then conforming to socialist principles since I own my own labour. If we have capitalism and change literally nothing except that workers must have control over their companies (by for example voting on subjects where normally the CEO would make a unilateral decision), that is already socialism despite there still being a free market. The government/public sector CAN take a role in socialism (you see this with authoritarian socialism like the USSR), but doesn't have to. Public means that society collectively owns something, which is not the same as the working class owning something. For example, if the government (representing society as a whole) takes control of something that is public. But if a company decides that its workers (not society as a whole, JUST the workers in said company) collectively own the company and control it themselves, that is still PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. The workers then own their company privately (like how shareholders can own a company privately in capitalism. That it's a group of shareholders owning a company does not make it public), yet at the same time that is in fact socialism because the workers own the means of production. The only principle of socialism is that everyone should own their own labour. This can be achieved through both public and private means. Socialism can be achieved by centralised public control of everything (USSR), but it can also be achieved by having all companies privately owned by those that work there (in this case, everyone owns their own labour and thus, it is socialism).
    3
  1032. Welke clown? De republikeinse of de democratische?
    3
  1033. Ja grappig, ik had gehoopt dat hij geen woord terug zou nemen, behalve dan dat Suriname een failed state is
    3
  1034. Yes, more intelligent in that he skillfully hides what he has been up to. If he comes back he'll get a 6 year prison sentence, which previously was put on his head by a judge for joining ISIS. Just 6 years... because we have no idea and no proof what he actually did back there. I don't trust him one bit. Just look at how he was trying to make the stoning seem not so bad "because the woman ran away and they told to stop throwing rocks". How he says he "lived a horrible life and is in no way a winner". It's disgusting.
    3
  1035. +Michal Niewiadomski And what can citizens with guns do? Are you going to defeat a modern army with some hunting rifles? Countries with armed populations and countries without armed populations are equally screwed if a fascist comes to power, whether you like it or not. It's a fantasy that a bunch of civilians can match a modern standing army, especially nowadays with body armour and equipment like tanks, armoured cars and helicopters. European resistance forces in WW2 were armed by the British with top-notch military firearms that matched what the Germans had, yet all they could do was harrass the Germans here and there and hide. And this was against a foreign invading force, not against a domestic fascist that would have support locally from other civilians and employ propaganda to brainwash the citizens. When a fascist slowly takes power, you have to question whether the citizens will even take up arms AT ALL. An intelligent fascist slowly takes power and makes sure the citizens won't want to revolt until it's already too late for that revolt to matter and/or will brainwash civilians into never revolting in the first place so that only those smart enough to withstand this will think of resisting. Germans, for example, at first thought Hitler was a good thing for Germany. Why would they take up arms against him at that point? Then he slowly took power and used propaganda against Britain and other European countries to shift focus from his power grab to the "foreign threat", distracting the civilians and hiding his ambitions for power. Any dissidents were dealt with before they could organise and resist. Fascism isn't a clear enemy of your rights, it's something that is slowly slipped in there. The point is that they take power without the civilians noticing and even with plenty of support. But let's assume the civilians get organised against a fascist government that has taken power already. Especially nowadays, those civilians would be crushed under a modern army. They'd arguably be even more helpless than European resistance forces were to overthrow the Germans by themselves. What are you going to do against a helicopter above you picking off the white dots on his thermal vision with his cannon? Here are some examples from history of fascism/communism taking power despite the citizens actually resisting and being armed. The Spanish civil war. The citizens for democracy fought the ruling fascists and were supplied so well they had tanks and airplanes (the difference was so small that the fascists had 290 tanks and the resistance 200. The fascists had 600 planes and the resistance 350). The fascists won regardless and oppressed the population. In 1956, there was a nationwide revolution against the Soviets in Hungary. Local people started peaceful protests against Communism. These protests turned violent after rumours about protestors being shot in other places. They overran local forces at first and started arming themselves, they even seized Soviet tanks. In the end, the government was overthrown, partly because the Hungarian military sympathised and generally didn't fight. Then... the Soviets invaded again and crushed the revolution. They imprisoned and internalised thousands and a couple hundred thousand fled the country. The communist party slowly gained control over Hungary again and after a few years things were back to "normal". This shows two things: an unarmed population is capable of arming themselves against an oppressive government and an armed population is equally helpless against a modern military as an unarmed one. In the end, an unarmed country with good legal preventions against fascism/communism taking power is better protected than an armed country without those preventions. Just imagine what would've happened with the Turkish sharia party I talked about in my previous comment if the party was never made illegal and instead was capable of taking power, but civilians took up arms to protect their democratic rights. There would have been a heavily divided country and a bloody civil war, with a higher percentage of the country actually supporting the undemocratic sharia party. Who was better protected, the militant democracy unarmed Turkey or the fully democratic but armed Turkey? Europe is better protected against undemocratic parties than gun-toting America is: fact. They trust their guns too much, equally naïve as Germans trusting their democracy in the 1930's. If the same instance as with that Turkish party would happen in America, the party would not have been made illegal and would be in government with a majority seat. The opposing citizens might take up arms and plunge the country into a civil war. One side would be a minority group of armed civilians and the other side would be the government plus the majority of civilians supporting them. I wonder who would've won... Your argument is invalid
    3
  1036. +Michal Niewiadomski It seems we actually agree on most points, except perhaps the significance of firearms. I'm also for gun possession, or more specifically; I support the status quo in most of Europe. 1. Yes, an armed population will make a fascist think twice when compared to an unarmed one. But an armed population pales in importance when looking at the possible legal and other possible preventions against fascism. As mentioned before, fascism is all about grabbing power under the radar and brainwashing the population into supporting you. The further they're brainwashed, the further the powergrab can go. The reason for this is that whether the population is armed or not, a nationwide revolution against the standing government is a huge problem. The point of fascism is to take your democratic rights away while having you cheer for it. Attempting to take such rights away from a population that doesn't want it, will inevitably result in that fascist failing. A fascist power grab is a delicate process and entirely dependent on the amount of people it can influence into supporting it. In short, in the early phase of fascism it's irrelevent whether the population has weapons. Any large resistance against the fascist would mean he's done for. In the later phase, where fascism is firmy in saddle and enjoys control over all institutions, things are different. An armed population is going to be in a better position, since the fascists at this point are capable of suppressing resistance. An unarmed population would need to arm itself first (á la Hungarian revolution). The unarmed population is far from helpless, but the armed one enjoys a headstart, if you will. However, in prevention of fascists coming to power, both populations are equally capable, since weapons and violence plays no role in that stage: it's about gaining support in that case. 2. I completely agree, in any scenario it's preferrable to own a gun. 3. At this point we seem to be shifting from domestic oppression to an outside invader. Yes, an armed population is more of a threat than an unarmed one, but is it a relevant threat? If Russia would be prepared to invade the EU, with all the deaths that'd come with it, would the fact that there's 80 million civilian owned firearms here bother them? The main defence of any nation should be the military. If the military is not enough to dissuade a foreign power from invading, neither is a collection of armed civilians, organised or not. An entity that decides to attack the US or EU is prepared to take millions of casualties and in fact risk the destruction of their own country by counterinvasion (not even considering allies of the US or EU aiding them). Armed civilians are not pivotal in such decisions, and if they are, that country has a pitiful excuse of a military. When Germany introduced the volkssturm (arming all civilians from young to old), the allies were more relieved that apparently the German army was on the decline than they were concerned about millions of armed civilians (under potent military command, mind you). When we're talking about invading countries and the casualties that can cause, the armed civilians and possible casualties they can cause are a side note. 4. This point I fully agree with. A society trained with weapons on that level would significantly improve the defence of a country. Civilians would de facto be incorporated in the military. This has the advantage of having a military that can be mobilised with incredible speed. There's a good reason Finland has 1.4 million reservists, and Switzerland also has a system that allows such rapid mobilisation. During the cold war, so did most European countries, in fact (not exactly like that though). 5. I believe in the same principles, but not in the ability to personally defend them with violence. That should be the role of a capable police force and military, in my view. The thing about violence is that it itself is also something that we are opposed to or at least deem unwanted in a peaceful society. This means that in order to protect values of society you sometimes need to breach other values of society. That is what using violence is in this context: protecting values by violating values. To keep the violation of values to an absolute minimum, we must make sure that only the minimum needed violation of one value (use of violence against citizens) is employed to protect the endangered value. Only a competent police force can do this properly. Entrusting protection of values to citizens will in every case mean that excessive violence is used to protect those values. For example: killing a robber is excessive violence, unless it was done to protect another life, in which case it was the minimum necessary violence to protect the endangered life. A society that entrusts civilians with the protection of values is a society with excessive violation of values. 6. If there was a robber in my house I'd want the most effective weapon to defend myself, being a gun. Gun possession should be possible, but not for the purpose of protecting oneself against anything. I believe in professionals that protect civilians with respect for everyone's rights. I don't want to live in a country where people can arbitrarily get shot for stealing a candy bar, as a matter of speaking. I believe that gun possession should be possible for those that have a proper use for a gun or simply are gun enthusiasts, but I fundamentally disagree with the idea that everybody should have guns for protection. At the same time, guns should never be taken away. Keep in mind that there actually isn't a dramatic difference between US and European gun laws in general. In the EU you have background checks (criminal record, mental health) for everything, more strict checks for more dangerous weapons (semi-automatic somewhat modern rifles) and can't own fully automatic guns. In America there is no checks that I'm aware of and fully automatic weapons are legal but very difficult to obtain (heavy background checks and more. The reason for the disparity in gun ownership manly lies in culture differences. If I want to get a gun, I can. I just don't feel the need to. As for shooting a rifle, I can't say I've ever shot a proper one. I have shot an air gun, but that's not a proper rifle. I've also shot blanks on a C8 (Canadian M4, basically), but that's no actual shooting. I do have to say that since not so long ago I've been quite interested in some WW2 rifles and hope to one day shoot the Lee Enfield, perhaps own one because of my interest in it. But that's been one of those things I want to do but never really come around to pursuing. I might own one some day
    3
  1037. Nee, inderdaad niet veel kans. Ze hebben nu eenmaal de weg geblokkeerd en dat mag niet. Helaas. Je moet wel heel dringende redenen hebben om zoiets te doen, wil je daar niet voor vervolgd worden. Ze zijn echter niet helemaal kansloos, dus we zullen zien hoe het verloopt. Ik hoop van harte dat ze er nog goed mee weg komen.
    3
  1038.  @shendshyti8973  The only weakness continental Europe has is its lack of oil. That is in fact the main reason Nazi Germany lost: after Stalingrad they didn't have the fuel to launch another large scale attack. They failed to hold on to Russian oil fields and after that point the war was pretty much lost. Germany imported their oil from Mexico before the war, but the British set up a naval blockade. It was that blockade that did Germany in. They either had to acquire Russian oil fields or pass through Turkey into the middle east (British had many troops stationed there, awaiting this). The Germans failed and after that point they were pretty much a crippled military running on fumes. In modern times, the EU can't be blockaded. Its combined navy is one of the most powerful on the planet and only the US would even have a vague chance at blockading the EU. The EU could import its oil from its middle eastern allies, from the US and/or from Africa. Only a naval blockade can stop that and Russia is completely incabable of setting one up.
    3
  1039. Lijkt me best een dom idee, avocadomayo. Er is bizar veel water nodig om één avocado te groeien en veel mensen zijn nu juist veganistisch vanwege het effect dat de veeteelt op het klimaat heeft. Dan wissel je het ene niet-duurzame product om voor een andere.
    3
  1040. +edgarallanpoe Norway and other EEC countries follow EU economic policy since they are part of the single market. What the US does is up to them
    3
  1041. Only at the start. Better western tanks were already developed and saw limited use on the front. Tanks that could more or less rival their Soviet counterparts. The USSR capability of victory lies only near the beginning of the war. If they managed to push away the Western allies quick enough and manage nother Fortress Europe, if you will, then I give it to the Soviets. But if the Western allies stood their ground well enough, limiting the advance, the Soviets faced an inevitable downfall. The Germans lost because of oil, lack of production quality and lacklustre supply capabilities. The Western Allies suffered from none of this. And they had fighting capabilities that the USSR simply wasn't prepared for. The British idea of essentially using long range bombers to decimate the industry of the enemy was highly succesful on Germany and Italy and when the US joined they also geared themselves to this kind of warfare. The western allies had options against the Soviets that the Germans could only dream of. Bombing Soviet oil fields near Stalingrad would be a piece of cake. Cities could be nuked. Maybe eventually the Soviet industry could be reached but if not the West should have air superiority (more and technologically superior planes) so them hunting down Soviet supply lines should be a serious problem for the USSR. The USSR would face naval lockdown and a trade blockade due to the West controlling the seas and most of the world. France would be mobilising (1.3 million men by 1945 and still mobilising....), as well as other liberated Western territories. Eventually one would wonder whether the Soviets would even have the numerical advantage (their only advantage) left.
    3
  1042. Ach, hoe zou dat toch kunnen...
    3
  1043. No.... collectivisation is not just any group owning the means of production, it is a huge group owning the entire means of production of a country. You can't compare the proletariat or the German race to bloody shareholders controlling a company together because "hurr durr both are groups". The shareholders are seen as the bourgeoisie under these systems. Under socialism there is collective ownership of the means of production and EVERYONE, from the owners/managers of the factories to the workers, has a share in it. Essentially it means the means of production are no longer used in the interest of generating profit for individuals (something both Marxism and NatSoc hated), but are from then on used in the interest of the working class or the German race as a whole. Shareholders employ the means of production for themselves, to generate profit, that is not socialism. Collectivised factories in the USSR are used to benefit the working class as a whole (both the managers and the workers), in Nazi Germany they were used to the benefit of the German race (both the owners and the workers), in fascism they were used to the benefit of the nation (both the owners and the workers). In all three systems, the government created policies directing how the means of production would be used and what all the wages would be, etc. The government decided what was in the interest of the working class/race/nation and the corporations followed that. In theory you can even have a fully planned economy, but if the government still employs the means of production to generate profit and not to collectivise the means of production for a class or race or whatever, it is still capitalism. Socialism is not "government does stuff" or "groups do stuff", it is about collectivisation and the eradication of the capitalist idea of individuals owning the means of production and using it to their own personal benefit if they like.
    3
  1044. Can the US invade the EU? For D-Day you might want to look at whether the US could pull off a naval landing in the EU today.
    3
  1045. That's a British invention though
    3
  1046. Anarcho communists are bae
    3
  1047. No truly neutral news channel exists, they all have their biases whether they want to or not. But I'd definitely say this show is one of the best available in the US. CNN is downright propaganda, as is Fox News and other such channels. These channels willfully bend or ignore the truth to sell you a certain narrative. Better channels only tell you the news with varying bias, but without downright propaganda. BBC is an example of a station that has discernible biases, yet isn't blatant propaganda like CNN. A perfect station doesn't exist, but don't lump them all together. Some are better or worse than the other.
    3
  1048.  @ricksanchez1909  Dat soort regels hebben wij al lang. Wij accepteren geen communisten, geen nazisten, geen sharia partijen en meer. In het verleden is ook een partij verboden die pedofilie wilde legaliseren. Partijen verbieden die tegen onze democratie indruisen doen wij al decennia, sinds na de tweede wereldoorlog. DENK is zo'n partij die op het randje zit. Wel ongelooflijk vervelend, maar nog net acceptabel.
    3
  1049. +John Johnson The particular reason for their inability to live together is irrelevant. They are both Muslims, but they kill eachother for no other reason than that they are Sunni/Shia. In fact, your reason only makes it worse. At least if it was about interpretation it would still be a relevant split to this day, but you say because a thousand years ago they couldn't choose a successor, so they hate and kill eachother to this day? That is insane. And if you want other examples of different interpretations of Islam killing eachother, terrorists and other interpretations of Islam kill eachother on a daily basis. And about those videos, you can post one or two instances of such hatred, but it comes nowhere near the hatred between Shia and Sunni or terrorists and other Muslims. Not even remotely close. Of course Christianity has hateful people like that backwards and horrible Westborough Church in the US. But with Muslims it's on a massive scale. Even terrorists alone outnumber all hateful Christians in this world, let alone the hateful Shias and Sunnis. Christianity lives at peace with any other interpretation and those that don't are rare (and moronic) individual cases that misunderstand the Christian message (but nonetheless they are Christians, I won't deny that).
    3
  1050. +Chris Taalman Tja, ik vind dat de minister gewoon gelijk heeft hoor. Een homogene samenleving heeft veel minder onderlinge spanningen dan een multiculti samenleving. Dat is gewoon logisch. En als je er over nadenkt proberen we al heel lang een homogene samenleving te creëren. Sinds een paar jaar wordt er flink ingezet op integratie. Een homogene samenleving ziet op een homogene CULTUUR, niet zo zeer op huidskleur (hoewel die twee wel verbonden zijn)
    3
  1051. You miss several important points. - Having a simple preference is valid, but very often this isn't about preferences. The response that these films get is not just expression of preference, it is deep crticism of and attempts to cancel the films. You cannot hide behind the argument that it's just a preference while at the same time trying to cancel films because they switch races. Then there clearly is more to someone's opinion than a simple preference. - secondly, who is criticising these films? It very often is NOT actual fans with nostalgia. You cannot tell me that a 30+ year old conservative guy on YT destroying the little mermaid is just expressing a preference as a true fan. They are deliberately targeting these films from bad faith and also ONLY changes to race, usually not other big changes that'd mess with nostalgia. He'll usually they don't even notice other huge changes, they deliberately cause outrage over non-white characters. This is inconsistent and hypocritical "criticism" from conservatives and it's a shame you do not recognise that. - you also misrepresent the argument for diversity. It is NOT based on the idea that one needs to look like you for you to identify with them. It is based on more general diversity. Seeing predominantly or even only white characters on screen can put damaging ideas in the minds of non-white kids, as they see a pattern of white always being the hero/main character while black is a side character at best and maybe once a hero main character such as Blade. Seeing these patterns puts wrong ideas about society in the heads of kids.
    3
  1052. I agree. We must have an EU that gets the things listed here done but at the same time respects the countries' autonomy on other issues.
    3
  1053. That it is flickering between places of worship historically doesn't mean it's okay that changes continue to be made. Its status as a museum was best and respected the full history, plus got Turkey a lot of money. And since there are mosques all around it, it makes no sense to turn Hagia Sophia into a mosque other than as a cheap political stunt. It's a bad move.
    3
  1054. The moment I saw the fire I knew we'd rebuild it no matter what. I only feared for its interior and any art/artifacts stored there, but those seemed to have survived. So all in all I think we can rejoice at the limited damage
    3
  1055. Tuurlijk... Trump voor Europa zou het ene kwaad verruilen voor het andere kwaad. Ik hoef geen idioot aan de macht hier. Ik vind dat Europa wel wat sterkere leiders kan gebruiken, maar iemand als Trump mag echt opdonderen.
    3
  1056. Yeah that was such a rude thing to do lol
    3
  1057.  @dhrvangeel511  Met voorbedachte rade betekent dat het doden van die burgers gepland zou zijn of tenminste dat ze hadden moeten weten dat die burgers daar waren. Dat was natuurlijk niet het geval.
    3
  1058. +Koen Als iets heel populair is onder Amerikaanse zenders dan komt het meestal ook op de NOS. De NOS zelf doet nauwelijks aan journalistiek buiten Europa. Ik denk dat er gewoon geen internationale aandacht voor is, dus dan zendt de NOS er ook niets over uit. En misschien komt dat omdat er in Zuid Afrika zelf niet veel aandacht aan wordt besteed? Ik weet het niet. In ieder geval verdient het zeker wel aandacht
    3
  1059. You are a disgrace to Jesus, who would NEVER kill gay people who were made that way by God (science tells us that gay is NOT a choice, therefore they were made this way). He is disgusted by your hatred towards your fellow humans.
    3
  1060. Yeah, the Nilfgaardian armour and Fringilla casting are very disappointing. But the rest looks pretty good, especially loving Cavill as Geralt and also really like the Ciri and Yennefer casting so far
    3
  1061. Biden is één grote grap. Bernie Sanders is de enige Democratische kandidaat die ergens voor staat en ook anti-establishment is. Trump zou Biden sowieso helemaal kapotmaken. Sanders tegen Trump zou ik nog wel willen zien, twee (heel andere) anti-establishment politici die écht ergens voor staan en niet slechts uitspreken wat hun donoren voorschrijven. Biden is Hillary 2.0: seniele editie.
    3
  1062.  @matty6878  I think they'll change their views on Koreans too. I'm a European, Dutchman to be precise, so I'm no expert but I occasionally see articles about how Korea does things like deny Japanese Navy entry to their waters because they fly the rising sun flag and other things like that. It seems like they are stuck in the past, always ready to be offended by something. Japan did a lot of things wrong in the past, including to us in the Dutch East Indies. My aunt was in a Japanese concentration camp back then but luckily survived. We can either get stuck in the past and constantly revive those issues or we can build a better future with a changed Japan. We did the same with Germany and it worked out great. But a lot of Koreans, including the government, always seem to be out for confrontation and escalation. If we always chastised Germany for their past we wouldn't have been such great allies today. We even have a shared tank division now with the nation that invaded us so many years ago. We chose the future, not the past.
    3
  1063. Alsnog beter dan dat ze er niet zijn. Er speelt zich elk jaar een Oostvaardersplassen in heel Nederland af omdat herten geen natuurlijke vijand hebben. Jaarlijks schieten wij 75% van de hertenpopulatie dood. Elk jaar weer een Oostvaardersplassen. Wolven zouden de natuur juist in balans houden zodat wij mensen dat (minder) hoeven te doen. Anders zouden we opeens allerlei uitgehongerde herten in ons landschap zien liggen
    3
  1064. Not far, it would struggle keeping a hold of relatively weak countries. Holding onto Canada and Mexico might be too much already, let alone the world. It's difficult to occupy countries, especially in this day and age.
    3
  1065.  @cratarata2278  EU allowed it to be shipped. The other way around, the UK did not allow any to be shipped to the EU. So.... now the EU does the same as UK but then the UK government suddenly claims it is wrong to do this.
    3
  1066. +Daniel Murphy Firstly, the 170 billion dollars was Iranian money that was frozen and then unfrozen, it was not "given to Iran". Secondly, Iran is confirmed to be living by the agreement nicely, meaning no nuclear weapons. The deal is not perfect because it doesn't cover everything it needs to, but it is all we had and Trump has destroyed it. Now we either get a worse deal (we used to have the leverage of having 170 billion dollars that belonged to Iran frozen, now they already have the money. We are literally going to negotiate the same thing while having LESS leverage over Iran, guess what will happen... a worse deal) or no deal at all (Iran walking away and making nuclear weapons). Both are worse than what we have now. How would Trump get a better deal out of a much worse negotiating position?
    3
  1067. Follow The Grow So if news isn't positive towards Trump you instantly reject it? And you seriously don't notice the flaws in that behaviour?
    3
  1068. Yeah, basically this. I always cringe when an "X American" thinks themselves an actual part of whatever country their ancestors were from while having no real connection to it at all.
    3
  1069. @01YAMAN You should force them to go back to safe parts of Syria then, not here. We don't want to deal with migrants and we have the power to keep them out. Sorry that you are not powerful enough to keep them out. If you continue this blackmail we may play around with your economy a bit, watch it crumble ;)
    3
  1070. I think it is, yeah. Russia's influence seems to actually be increased in certain regions of the world. That Russia was militarily active in Syria and also won is completely new, as normally the US would have had boots on the ground in such a situation. Obama left that open for Putin. And Armenia? Normally the US would be the one to broker peace (or at least deeply involved in the negotiations), but this time it was Russia and Trump left that one open for Putin. It's true that Russia is losing its grip over Eastern Europe with Ukraine and now Moldova and Belarus seeing pro-EU movements that directly counter Russian influence, but Russia still is a global player and actually increased its global presence over the past years rather than decreased.
    3
  1071. +Wim Hoe weet je überhaupt dat dit een crimineel was? Dit was waarschijnlijk een verwarde man met een mes die nu in een inrichting zit en er misschien ooit weer normaal uit komt. We hebben de rechter voor het vaststellen van de feiten en het opleggen van straf, niet een of andere agent die binnen een paar seconden even bepaalt of je dood moet.
    3
  1072. It's more that we spend the money on other things. Especially considering NATO. And the EU's foreign policy is almost exclusively based on its political and economic power rather than hard military power. Maybe some day we'll hit a wall and realise we should have invested more in the military, maybe we'll get away with it. Time will tell
    3
  1073. It´s illogical. Waiters have irregular income because of it and in my opinion it´s insulting, but that is of course just because of me being European
    3
  1074.  @lordcustard-smythe-smith9153  And what the EU is doing is called the law. Whether you secure vaccines for your own use via a contract or via the law doesn't really matter. In the end it's the same thing; you establish that the vaccines produced in a certain factory are exclusively to be supplied to yourself. Also, what you're saying is nonsense because in the early stages, the UK received vaccines from European factories because of production issues in the UK. Later on, it was the other way around and the EU had production issues. This goes directly against your narrative that the EU factories weren't set up at this time. Furthermore, the contract with the UK was signed 27th of august and the one with the EU the 26th of august. Not exactly months apart. I don't at all blame the UK for securing its vaccines back then, but it's just very strange to now lay claim to EU factories when the tables are turned.
    3
  1075. +Maria Pinto Nationalism should inspire you to improve your country and admit all its wrongdoings, not artificially keep your country a shithole by ignoring any problems it may have. That's the difference between shitholes and the countries that are on the top of everything. The latter are exceedingly self-critical and constantly improve themselves. Trying to defend your country at all costs is idiotic compared to accepting your failures and constantly improving your country.
    3
  1076. Alles is beter dan de Rutte-doctrine. Ervanuitgaande dat wij geen Kaag-doctrine krijgen straks
    3
  1077.  @emocowboy4684  The British fought in Northern Ireland for 30 years to get it under control. And they only ever got it under control because the border disappeared with the EU. You don't know what you're talking about, fighting an insurgency is much more difficult than you think. It is virtually impossible to occupy the UK and keep the insurgents under control in this scenario.
    3
  1078. Yes I want a video on Nigeria too
    3
  1079. Echt hoor. De helft stemde niet op hem en haat hem en de andere helft stemde grotendeels alleen op hem omdat hij niet Trump is. Hij gaat een extreem verdeeld Amerika leiden zonder enige echte achterban. Dat wordt wat...
    3
  1080. The fear of tradwives probably comes from two places; firstly even though it is their choice, it is in fact a choice that places a lot more power in the husband's hands, in the relationship dynamic. He has the financial power, earning the income of the household. This choice definitely creates a power imbalance in relationships, and to feminists this can be seen as inherently anti feminist, ESPECIALLY when promoted as a great choice towards other women without mentioning the negative sides. Plus, if tradwives become the norm, this not only has influence on the power dynamic between partners in a relationship, but on the power/influence of women in society in general. In this sense also, a feminist might see this trend as turning back progress despite being a choice. But as Shoe rightly points out, it is above all their own choice. Criticism of them painting a overglorified one-sided picture of what being a tradwife entails, could be valid though. Secondly, this trend very much seems to cement being a stay-at-home parent as an inherently feminine thing. That is an issue because this reinforces gender roles that we probably should be getting rid of. In each relationship, both partners will have to discuss how they will deal with kids and household chores. Usually this at least will involve one parent working less than the other (or not at all). It should not matter whether it is the man or woman that stays at home. We should separate being a household parent from being feminine, because this idea that they are connected pushes women into this role as a standard. It also prevents couples from coming to solutions that involve shared or alternate (as Shoe mentions about her upbringing) household roles, because pushing the woman into this role is seen as "natural" in society. This is wrong. A stay-at-home parent trend would be a lot better than a "tradwife" trend that portrays staying at home as inherently feminine and uses glorified imagery from a very patriarchal past. Knowingly or unknowingly they are reinforcing gender stereotypes. They can choose to live this lifestyle and enjoy it without falling into this unfortunate trap that may harm society.
    3
  1081. @The Wave Geen idee. Ik denk niet dat letterlijk elk lid van de NSB publiekelijk werd vernederd of de gevangenis is ging. Velen wel, maar zeker uit de de lagere gelederen van die beweging zullen meerdere personen waarschijnlijk met hun verraad zijn weggekomen. Ik schuif helemaal nergens mee. Ik heb gezegd dat Duitsers na de Tweede Wereldoorlog massaal werden gedeporteerd puur omdat ze Duits waren en dat is gebeurd. Dit stel ik helemaal niet ter discussie en dat kan ik ook niet want het is gewoon een feit dat dit is gebeurd. En bovendien wil ik nog zeggen dat ik het niet in dank afneem dat je hier impliceert dat de NSB "mijn politieke kleurtje" is, wat nergens op is gebaseerd. Ik zou graag bewijs willen zien dat Hiddema fascisme en genocide afschildert als een normale politieke stroming. Ik zeg niet wat moet of niet moet gebeuren. Ik zeg wat er is gebeurd en vergelijk dat met wat er nu gebeurt. Wat is gebeurd is dat na de Tweede Wereldoorlog Duitsers massaal werden gedeporteerd en NSB'ers, althans waar ze door de menigte werden gegrepen, publiekelijk vernederd werden of igv de hogere leiders binnen de NSB ofwel ter dood werden gebracht zoals Mussert, ofwel in de gevangenis werden gegooid. Wat mijn mening betreft ben ik geen fan van de doodstraf en publieke vernedering, maar vind ik gevangenisstraf voor verraad wel passend, misschien deportatie ook.
    3
  1082. +VCDC US cars to EU = 10% tariff. EU cars to US = 2.5% for regular cars and 25% for pick-up trucks, bigger trucks, MPVs and certain other vehicles. The 2.5% is not the full picture.
    3
  1083. Wow, so the Scottish have conquered themselves? They are Brits too, y´know...
    3
  1084. +Steve Parks The scenario may be realistic but the countries that are participating is by far not. The coalition is based on very strange assumptions that make little to no sense. A full EU, minus maybe one or two member states that would realistically not participate, has a lot more chance against Russia. The full combined EU military and the Russian military are about the same, with the EU having an edge. What Binkov did here is put Russia in a strategically superior position (which is fine) AND strip the EU of enough member states to have the remaining military be inferior to Russia's (this is an unrealistic coalition; Russia invades the Baltic states and a member state like Spain wouldn't respond? Sure. Even the UK is in the Baltic states as we speak to help protect them).
    3
  1085.  @baronvonlimbourgh1716  Hij is echt duizend keer beter dan Trump
    3
  1086. +yetlin Because I have never seen an orthodox Jewish woman in my life. Even when you google "orthodox Jewish women" you find almost only pictures of regular women dressing as they please. That's how rare they are even in the Middle East, let alone in Europe... Just admit it, Muslim women are told to wear Hijabs and influenced into doing so by social pressure because it's an Islamic rule. In the west we have no such rules. That is true freedom.
    3
  1087. +yetlin Not every woman is pressured. And even if you're correct; there are different gradations of pressure and Islamic women are right at the top in terms of pressure. In Europe, of course kids will want to wear what is "cool" at that time but the important difference is this; the woman is not explicitly told or suggested to wear certain types of clothing and all "fashion" is women seeing what other women wear and WANTING to wear it too. Another important difference is that if you wear something different, nobody will look at you strangely. Nobody is going to ask what you are doing when you're not wearing a bikini; everyone accepts your choice. Ask yourself, would a Muslim family not even utter ONE word if the daughter suddenly decides to take off her Hijab? In Europe you are free to follow fashion and free to follow a very personal taste, nobody will criticise you and nobody will try to convince you to do otherwise. There is no social pressure and even if there would be, that pressure would be very very light and easy to withstand.
    3
  1088. +Mc Kenna That's the purpose of this film: you are supposed to think the guy is absolutely crazy, excessive in everything and degenerate. Watching films like this I just wait for that sweet and inevitable downfall in the end. You say people won't understand why you left, but what I don't understand is how you could leave without watching him finally get what he deserves! Best part
    3
  1089. ​ @alanakafang6143  Thinking one of the greatest critics of mainstream media propaganda blindly fell into MM propaganda is a specially stupid take. This man understands MM propaganda down to the details and subteties. And what he said is not fake either. Trump does favour the rich with his policies and does show megalomaniac characteristics in how he tries to consolidate power in the US.
    3
  1090.  @brocklesnar7941  That is what I meant. They did good protecting their culture and lives against Christianity and disease. The missionary was a threat to their lives and their culture. The threat has been eliminated, though maybe they are already infetced which would be very sad.
    3
  1091. Özturk is hier de gluiperd. Hij komt met smaad aanzetten en kruipt vervolgens in de slachtofferrol. De PVV kun je aanpakken met goede argumenten, niet dat soort walgelijk gedrag.
    3
  1092. +AC.507 N True. For like 80% of the war, the US was either not present or a minor contribution to the war effort in Europe. North Africa saw 36.000 dead British (not even Commonwealth, just UK), 16.000 dead French resistance and 2.700 dead Americans for example. Even a resistance force did more than the US professional army in North Africa, significantly more. In Italy, US forces made up a little more than one fourth of the total forces. British Commonwealth forces made up roughly three fourth, the Poles were there too as well as other Europeans. Poland alone was about half the size of the US presence, despite being just a resistance force at that point. The truth is that until D-day, America was one of the minor armies that supported the British Commonwealth, comparable to Poland. After D-day, the Americans came in numbers and were part of the main force. They had roughly 3 million men all over Europe in april 1945, the British Commonwealth roughly 1.1 million in North-West Europe only. In Italy there were roughly 1.3 million men by then, of which the grand majority were British Commonwealth. So let's say about 3.4-3.5 million Americans overall and 2 million British overall. This includes Americans stationed in Britain btw (doing nothing), but excludes British military stationed in Britain (also doing nothing). So 3.4 million Americans stationed in Europe, fighting or not fighting. 2 million British Commonwealth fighting at the front. Not the huge difference people like to imply it was, even if we assume 100% of the stationed Americans actually fought (which they didn't). And if you count the French, which had 1 million men fighitng again in 1945... The British military alone did WAY more fighting in Europe than the US, let alone all European allies combined. The US, in turn, did more in the Pacific
    3
  1093. Nah, most of Biden's part in this debate was just shitting on Trump rather than actually telling us why to vote for him. His campaign seems to be focused mainly on the fact that he is not Trump. On one thing we can agree; it was a shit show. I didn't see much policy at all.
    3
  1094.  @rogiermerlijn  De term "dogwhistles" wordt crimineel vaak gebruikt. Wat je eigenlijk zegt is dat allerlei mensen stiekem Nazi zijn en dit vehullen met eufemismen die alleen andere Nazi's zouden begrijpen. Je moet compleet wereldvreemd zijn en een neiging naar samenzweringstheorieën hebben om te geloven dat er zoveel Nazi's zijn die ons land over willen nemen. Je ziet spoken. De term dogwhistle is alleen relevant bij HOGE uitzondering, voor échte Nazi's. Dit is niet iets dat op brede schaal gebeurt. En ik vind het ronduit walgelijk om op basis van zulke dubieuze opmerkingen een hele partij als "fout" te bestempelen. Als rechts dit ook zou doen zou men zeggen dat Groenlinks en SP "communistisch" zijn, want er zijn genoeg opmerkingen van die partijen die je compleet uit hun verband kan trekken en als "dogwhistle" kan aanvoeren voor communisten. En dit gebeurt ook in Amerika, waar mensen als Bernie Sanders als communist worden bestempeld.
    3
  1095.  PIMP PRIEST!  Het is blank, dat is de term die altijd is gebruikt daarvoor en de term die gebruikt hoort te worden. Dat blank ook andere betekenissen heeft staat daar totaal los van. Je kan niet eenzijdig de taal veranderen. Zowel wit als blank zijn correct. Ik ben zelf ook gekleurd maar je moet wel heel fragiel zijn om je beledigd te voelen door het woord blank. Bovendien is er geen relatie tussen de andere betekenissen van blank en de verwijzing naar huiskleur en wordt ook de term wit historisch gezien in verband gebracht met 'rein' en 'zuiver'. De termen zijn min of meer synoniemen en beide termen zijn duizenden jaren oud en kunnen dus ook niets met racisme te maken hebben. Ik heb het over zijn boeken omdat hij zo veel heeft geschreven en zo veel heeft gedebatteerd, maar mensen als jij dat allemaal negeren ten faveure van een samenzweringstheorie gebaseerd op één woord. Ik vind dat belachelijk en oneerlijk. In een democratie luisteren we naar elkaars argumenten, het is niet de bedoeling dat we ons reduceren tot het gebruiken van stropopredeneringen. Het is fout om dit te doen. Iedereen moet op basis van zijn/haar argumenten en acties beoordeeld worden, niet op basis van één woord met een neutrale betekenis die in het verleden door anderen op een negatieve manier zijn gebruikt. Het zijn geen "punten" waar je hem aan vast pint. Jij pint die punten zonder enige aanleiding aan zijn woorden vast en legt vervolgens hem woorden in de mond. JIJ deelt hem een mening toe die hij nooit heeft uitgedragen én waar hij openlijk en herhaaldelijk afstand van neemt. Voorts kloppen die verzonnen ideeën niet met de historie van Baudet's schrijfwerk, toespraken/debatten of voorgesteld beleid. Het is gewoon onjuist en oneerlijk om zo met mensen om te gaan. We hebben geluk dat dit maar bij hoge uitzondering gebeurt want anders zou deze hele democratie naar de knoppen worden geholpen omdat er geen inhoudelijk debat meer mogelijk zou zijn temidden al die stropopredeneringen.
    3
  1096.  PIMP PRIEST!  Je doet alsof Baudet nooit heeft gereageerd op die twee punten... Hij heeft al duizend keer gezegd dat hij met boreaal slechts de letterlijke betekenis bedoelde en dat hij het betreurt dat men ervoor kiest om dat op zo'n raciale manier te interpreteren. Over dat intelligentieonderzoek, dat is niet door Baudet naar voren gebracht maar iemand anders binnen de partij die inmiddels eruit is gegooid en alles wat Baudet er ooit over heeft gezegd is dat hij niet weet of dat waar is. Hij wordt continu aangevallen op het feit dat hij niet uit morele overweging een wetenschappelijke conclusie wil trekken, wat nergens op slaat. Moraliteit en wetenschap staan los van elkaar. Ik wil niet dat ethniciteiten verschillende niveau's van intelligentie hebben, maar dat ik dat niet wil betekent niet dat dat ook wetenschappelijk zo is. Ik kan geen uitspraak doen over of een wetenschappelijk onderzoek waar is of niet, zonder daar zelf onderzoek over te doen ofwel een ander onderzoek te lezen dat het ontkracht. En achteraf blijkt Baudet in het gelijk gesteld: je moet geen standpunt innemen over de wetenschap zonder bekend te zijn met de materie. Dat hebben andere politici wel gedaan en daarmee gingen ze direct tegen de wetenschap in. Zie hier de waarheid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKtgausyhco Ik vind het ongelooflijk hoe jij Baudet aanspreekt op "boreaal" (=noordelijk, maar ook in het verleden door Le Pen gebruikt in een racistische context), terwijl jij zelf spreekt over "wij zwarten" en "het beschermen van onze zwarte kinderen met ons eigen bloed". Dat is tien keer meer racistisch gepraat dan één dubieus woord. Dit soort gepraat verwacht ik van zo'n extreem rechtse samenzweringstheorist die gelooft in die "omvolking" onzin en zegt hoe "wij blanken onze kinderen met ons eigen bloed zullen beschermen". Echt, je moet eens zien hoe ver heen je bent. Je hebt het over een soort rassenoorlog hier en spreekt van "zwarten" alsof het een homogene groep is of zo. Alsof "wij zwarten" samen gaan komen op basis van ras en gaan vechten tegen "de blanken". "De blanken die samenzweren om het zwarte ras om te volken" zeker, omdat iemand een keer "boreaal" zei? Belachelijk. Doe even normaal, zoiets gaat niet gebeuren, stop met die samenzweringstheorieën.
    3
  1097. +Just_guy_stuff Oh just drop this stupid meme. Does the citizenry of the US have an equal amount of tanks and fighter planes as the government? Well they did in the Spanish Civil War and still lost to the fascist government! Do you also think that the US citizenry is better equipped than military grade weapons that the US supplied to Syrian rebels plus the military vehicles they had access to? No, because many of those weapons are illegal to own in the US, they were still destroyed by the government (with less developed and less numerous equipment than the US military). Not only are you hopeless in the face of a modern army, but you are considerably less equipped than citizens that have failed in the past, while fighting a considerably better equipped enemy . Your safety against tyranny is 100% dependent on the government and its military
    3
  1098.  @Joker-yw9hl  The opposite actually. He completely ignored that in an all out war the EU would activate a war industry and produce tanks and planes in the thousands. It's very negative for the EU to assume it will fight out this war with its current military, which is quite underfunded
    3
  1099. +That Internet Browser Incognito Guy Destroying our own civilisation is not the same as invading someone else's land, butchering them and replacing their way of life with your own. You have the right to change your own civilisation, your own way of life. We thought industrialisation was the way forward, so we changed our way of life. We can change it again if we so desire.
    3
  1100. Dit gaat niet om Hennis forceren hoe ze zich moet kleden, het gaat om het signaal dat ze hiermee afgeeft en of dat gepast is of niet. Wereldwijd worden miljoenen vrouwen geforceerd om zich te bedekken, op straffe van gevangenisstraf. In zo ongeveer elke islamitische gemeenschap wereldwijd bestaat sociale druk om je te bedekken als vrouw, waarbij je in fundamentalistischere gemeenschappen zelfs huiselijk geweld of sociale excommunicatie kan verwachten als je niet voldoet aan de sociale verwachting van zelfbedekking. Dat is geen grap. Ik vind het ongepast dat Hennis zich op deze manier kleed terwijl islamitische bedekking zo politiek geladen is. Ik zou zelf zeggen dat een hoofddoek in de stijl van Iraanse vrouwen die ze zo laag mogelijk dragen en toch haar laten zien het meest gepast is. Daarmee laat je zien dat je de geleerde respecteert, maar tegelijkertijd dat het een grens heeft. Dat volle gewaad van Hennis spuugt op de problemen die zo veel moslimvrouwen hebben met bedekking. Vreselijk.
    3
  1101. Dit is wat er gebeurt als er geen politie zou zijn.
    3
  1102.  Ajax 4Life  Het economische deel van de EU heeft zeker ervoor gezorgd dat we geen oorlog in Europa hebben gehad. De NAVO heeft vooral oorlog tussen de Sovjet Unie en de rest van Europa voorkomen, niet zo zeer oorlog tussen West-Europese landen. En het politieke deel is vooral handig om als Europa een onafhankelijke en machtige plek te vergaren in de wereldpolitiek. Anders zijn we plat gezegd het schoothondje van Amerika. We moeten voorkomen dat de EU zo ver gaat dat het een superstaat wordt, maar de EU is wel echt waardevol voor Europa. Samen zouden we een onafhankelijke supermacht kunnen zijn, maar we moeten een manier vinden om dat te doen zonder te veel soevereiniteit van de lidstaten weg te gooien.
    3
  1103. @Sandjah Nou de VN heeft wel heel veel invloed gehad als het gaat om vrede. Niet omdat de VN actief iets doet, maar wel omdat de VN een platform is waar landen diplomatiek hun geschillen kunnen beslechten die voordat de VN bestond gewoon dmv een oorlog zouden worden uitgevochten. Daardoor zijn heel veel geschillen die normaal een oorlog zouden zijn, mondeling opgelost. Maar aan de andere kant heeft de VN totaal geen slagkracht. VN vredesmissies zijn echt voor de bühne en doen gewoon niks. De VN kan ook niet echt iets doet als een land niet zou luisteren. Dus is de VN zinloos.... ja en nee. Als diplomatieke ontmoetingsplek voor landen heeft het veel gedaan, maar ja da's niet zo bijzonder en heeft ook niet echt iets met actief handelen van de VN te maken.
    3
  1104. Ik moest hierom lachen totdat ik me realiseerde dat veel kiezers dat gewoon zouden geloven en wéér VVD gaan stemmen
    3
  1105. The difference is that previous tariffs were agreed upon by both sides and balanced out. For example: US cars to EU = 10% tariff on all. EU cars to US = 2.5% for regular cars and 25% for pick-up trucks, bigger trucks, MPVs and certain other vehicles. We protect the regular car market because that's where our industry lies, the US protects its trucks and other typicall y American big car manfacturing field. It was balanced, but now Trump suddenly wants more US cars sold in Europe
    3
  1106.  @GeroG3N  Because humans are OP
    3
  1107. Nee, maar wel als je zegt dat de elven van de kerstman lilliputterslaven zijn en dat echt niet kan haha
    3
  1108. +Marius Vorster You completely bypassed my point there, but I guess that was exactly your intention.
    3
  1109. If it's a beneficial truce to the USSR and it allows the USSR to rebuild and maintain a massive army, it's a pretty good truce even if Germany attacks again. The USSR outproduced Germany by a lot, so they could afford it
    3
  1110. Eet de sprinkhanen dan, die dingen zijn echt super lekker én voedzaam. Als ze nou massaal gevangen zouden kunnen worden compenseert dat wellicht voor het verloren voedsel
    3
  1111. @Mocro Lion Nee dat gaat niet gebeuren. Denk is een veel te domme partij daarvoor. Alleen maar geschreeuw en gedraai. Als die partij meer zetels krijgt zegt dat veel over de kiezers...
    3
  1112. It's incredibly frustrating, I agree. Mindnumbingly so.
    3
  1113. De vraag is, wil je daar nog werken als je na een jarenlange rechtszaak hebt gewonnen? Bovendien kunnen ze je nog altijd wegpesten als ze verliezen. Ze vinden wel een manier om je weg te krijgen als je ongewenst bent. Hoe dan ook blijft de fundamentele islam dus een probleem.
    3
  1114. Yeah, I'm for abortion myself, but only with a strict time limit of 20 weeks max and only when it is approached with sufficient gravity and not just done for the hell of it. This sickens me.
    3
  1115. Uninformed. We're not weak at all. Just look at the kind of shit our football hooligans do, for example. Look at the anti-Muslim things that have been going on. Won't see stuff like that in America, but nobody calls them weak. At worst you'll see some antifa pussies on the streets there. It's not something to be proud of, but that's definitely not something you can call weak. We have the bloodiest history of any region and spent most of our history either killing eachother or pillaging other countries. Do you really think that those soldiers the Germans sent to war in WW2 weren't just 17 year old farm boys who would otherwise have been exactly like we are today? Do you think those soldiers the British got in their trenches in WW1 were somehow "tougher" than we are today? No, before they were sent over they were no different from most of us today. Just normal kids. You send today's 17 year old to war and train them the same way you get the same results
    3
  1116. ​ @KayO199X  I subscribe to a variety of news channels so that I don't have tunnel vision. It has nothing to do with how (non-)violent I think Russia is. And I was referring to how the US came to existence, not the things it has done since its existence. The grand majority of countries have societies that have lived there for tens of thousands of years. Perhaps fighting other tribes/countries, perhaps fighting internally, but not invading land halfway across the world, massacring the natives and replacing them as the main inhabitants of their land. That is the uniquely disgusting past of the US. And no, Australia wasn't the same. In the US, westward expansion was forbidden by the British and while the East was settled with the usual violence, the British left the natives in the west alone and merely traded with them. While many aboriginals died of disease and war in the east of Australia, there was no westward expansion and today, one third of Australian soil is owned by Aboriginals, which is a huge patch of land. And luckily their populationis back to the level it was before Europeans came (primarily the diseases were hard on them). After the American revolution (and westward expansion was partly the motivation for the revolution, among other things), the westward expansion and manifest destiny saw Americans butcher the natives en masse and eventually replace them as the main inhabitant of the US. You even had sterilisation campaigns for native women well into the 1970s . Genocide on this scale is rare and particularly nasty, possibly even the worst kind of genocide that ever took place. Can't think of a comparison, not even the holocaust
    3
  1117. Ahaha so many poeple trying to come up with excuses
    3
  1118. Something similar happened in the Netherlands a few years ago. That attempt failed and they were shot. Criminals like this are very bold
    3
  1119. Ach, wat schattig. En de volgende dag de keel doorsnijden in het slachthuis. "Eind goed, al goed". Wat een grap.
    3
  1120. Je bedoelt zoals Denk het stemgedrag van specifiek allochtonen vastlegde en ze als verraders afschilderde? De enige partij die etnisch onderscheid maakt is Denk zelf. Zelfs de PVV is hoofdzakelijk op de islam en dus niet op ras gebaseerd.
    3
  1121. ​@Simon T The constitution is not a clear-cut yes or no kind of law, especially not in the UK, where the entire constitution is essentially unwritten customs. Constitutions are the most complex laws of any nation, right at the heart of the functioning of the state and the basic rules of society. A judge can't decide for parliament how to fill in those constitutional principles. And indeed, if we investigate the REASON the judge allowed Boris' measure, he stated: "This is political territory and decision-making, which cannot be measured by legal standards, but only by political judgements”, therefore he didn't step in to stop it. However, parliament itself DID step in and stop it, confirming that it was not only constitutionally questionable but also constitutionally wrong. Boris broke constitutional convention by doing what he did. Sidelining the parliament in such an important issue breaches the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and goes against democracy (but you could argue that he did so with a direct democratic mandate from the referendum though). As for the rest, I mostly agree. The way parliament deals with this is problematic to say the least. The government can't make any deal with the EU when they can't threaten a no deal. Boris would be the EU's playing ball if they know that he can't return without a deal and will bully him into a bad deal, nothing he can do about it because he'd have zero leverage. So I understand why he thought it necessary to break convention by sidelining parliament. But he'll have to find a way to solve this with parliament instead. The mess continues and parliament is wholly responsible for it
    3
  1122. If they know they will be brought to a country like Tunisia, the migrants will stop coming in the long run. I thank Tunisia for helping us.
    3
  1123.  MICHAEL CALLAHAN  Bernie wants to do what has already been done in countries like Norway, the Netherlands.... etc. Countries that are still capitalist, yet have some socialist policies that has resulted in them being the absolute top in quality of life and happiness lists, consistently beating the US. Bernie stands for something better . You're not only wrong when you call it communism (social democracy = capitalism with social policies), but you're also more obsessed with what something is called than what it can mean for you and how it can improve your and others' lives. And that last thing says something about your argument; it's red scare bullshit.
    3
  1124. +Evy D Dus Germanen van pakweg 2000 jaar geleden waren al racistisch zonder ooit een Afrikaan te hebben gezien? Volgens een Romeins historicus schminkten Germanen hun gezicht namelijk zwart om een figuur na te spelen in een decemberfeest dat overeenkomsten vertoont met Sinterklaas... Dat heeft gerenommeerd Romeins historicus Tacitus omstreeks het jaar 98 geschreven. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilde_Jacht Er is duidelijk iets misgegaan in de 19e eeuw met het Zwarte Piet figuur, maar de origine (die we amper kennen, zo oud is die) is zeker niet racistisch. Ik ben het met je eens dat het weghalen van de dikke rode lippen, etc. genoeg moet zijn
    3
  1125. Yeah, such a shame that we have the highest quality of life on the globe. I surely would love to spend insane amounts of money on the military just so we can be as much of a shithole as the US, but be able to win theoretical wars that never will take place. Also, you ever heard of this thing called the war economy? You switch it on when there is war and then it doesn't matter anymore you didn't spend so much money on the military in the past because now we're producing thousands of Leopard tanks a month and conscripting millions in to the military. Spending too much money on the military is stupid. A standing military should be prepared to stave off any intitial invasion for a few months or so, but in the long run it's the war economy that matters most as you produce insane amounts of tech. You know, like how Russia was losing against the Germans in the beginning of WW2 because they had a terrible military but in the end switched on their massively superior war industry and won anyway. Your standing army is only useful to provide the initial defence against an attacker, holding them off long enough for the war industry to pump out huge amounts of tanks etc.
    3
  1126.  Jan Jansen  Het verschil is dat een sociaal democraat nooit zou roepen dat rechts "als een kankergezwel uit de samenleving moet worden gesneden" of "kapotgeschoten mag worden". Dat soort dingen zeggen alleen ideologen die tegen de democratie, tegen vrijheid, tegen de rechtsstaat en voor de moord op "ongewensten" zijn. Kies maar welke ondemocratische ideologie je aanhangt, maar het enige wat telt is we mensen als jij verafschuwen en onze democratische rechtsstaat tot het einde zullen verdedigen tegen moordenaars als jij. Wie weet wie jij allemaal "chirurgisch uit de samenleving zal verwijderen" als je aan de macht zou komen. Misselijkmakend... en jezelf dan ook nog superieur durven noemen na dat soort uitspraken. Werkelijk walgelijk.
    3
  1127. +The Plastic Paddy What people should do is identify with others regardless of their race. Needing other people to look exactly like you in order for you to identify as them is just a sign of you not feeling comfortable with your own identity or even feeling different than the rest. In principle, one should be able to admire and identify as anyone, regardless of race or whatever.
    3
  1128.  @Starfishtroopers  Zij hebben voor ons gevochten, ruggensteker. En het enige wat de VS daar deed was aanwezig zijn zodat Turkije niet zou binnenvallen, niet vechten. Oftewel niet meer dan geld uitgeven. Dit is een mes in de rug van de Koerden die ons hebben geholpen IS te verslaan. Walgelijk. En dan maar zeggen dar het niet ons probleem is. Eer is een compleet onbekend concept voor mensen als jij, een vuile vlek op de Europese cultuur. Ik vraag me af of in vergelijkbare situaties dit soort groeperingen of andere landen ons weer zouden willen helpen, met ordinaire verraders als jij en Trump die ze meteen laten vallen wanneer zij hun deel hebben gedaan. Oneervolle ruggenstekers zijn jullie.
    3
  1129. +Green Eggs and Ham If you leave islam alone and refuse to import muslims the violence will be contained. If you leave America alone it will still find a way to bring a war to some country that never asked for it.
    3
  1130.  @michaelodonnell824  I don't quite remember exactly what I was taught, but I do remember this; Slavery was covered (including the horrors of their treatment, like how slave owners abroad would hang them up by a metal hook in their sides if they did anything wrong). Colonial trade was covered. And I remember having to read a book from the 1800's that described what we did with Indonesians in the Dutch East Indies and is a famous criticism of our actions there. That book is considered one of the best pieces of literature of our country. Probably the best even. Overall from what I remember it was okay but a bit barebones. Nothing that went really far in depth, but that is a broader problem with our packed history curriculum. A recent study shows we pretty much spend the maximum amount of time on slavery we can without sacrificing topics like WW2 (obviously more important). We already spend almost no time on WW1, since we were neutral anyways and we can afford not covering that too much. So it's not glossed over, but it can be better. Most of what I learned is probably from after school, from documentaries on the public broadcasting channel and other instances of national attention to our history.
    3
  1131. Nee, je moet als land eerst een migrant opnemen, dan checken of hij recht op asiel heeft en dan mag hij of blijven of hij wordt teruggestuurd. Dat is de procedure volgens internationaal recht. Dat werkt normaal zoals het hoort, maar in een migrantencrisis... Ik begrijp Griekenland ten volle en ik zou zeggen dat het internationale recht eens gemoderniseerd kan worden, want zo'n soort migrantenstroom hadden we toen natuurlijk niet in gedachten. De procedure werkt gewoon niet onder zulke omstandigheden. Iedereen ziet door de vingers wat Griekenland doet en terecht.
    3
  1132.  @katiaharvey5244  I hope you manage to revive it, it would be a tragedy to see it lost
    3
  1133.  @certtunlyhere6351  Trump has no trouble speaking, he just speaks in a very simplistic and boorish manner. He in fact loves speaking in front of a big audience.
    3
  1134. +The legend of சமையல்காரர் Dit meen je niet... ga je nou anderen vertellen dat ze niet weten wat er is gebeurd terwijl het juist die vrouw is die NIKS weet van die man, maar onmiddellijk roept "HIJ GAAT DOOD IN AFGHANISTAN"? Die vrouw had haar mond moeten houden, niet totdat ze alles wist over de man, alles over zijn situatie en alles over Afghanistan. Je weet wel... de informatie die de Zweedse immigratiedienst hadden toen ze besloten hem uit te zetten...
    3
  1135. Even if the US is involved, local EU forces will play a bigger role in the war.
    3
  1136.  @TonyMezaXD  The EU is just a project to unite the power of European countries so that they can finally reclaim their place in the world as a global (super?)power. In essence it's just a United States of Europe, but it doesn't go as far as being a country (yet. Some people do want this to happen in the end, many others do not). Nothing New World about it, though I understand why people may think that, as the EU might look like some prototype world government or something. But in reality the origin of the EU is not globalism, but pan-European nationalism. Nowadays its politicians are pretty globalist, but the EU project itself actually isn't.
    3
  1137.  @miriamichai158  It turned up in my recommended list, since I like eurovision. My opinion is that there were a lot more skilled musicians and many better songs in the last contest. I feel like Toy won for the sole reason of the political message it sent against bullying. Things like this is why countries no longer focus on quality, but they want a political message for an easy win. Another example is the bearded woman a few years back. The Dutch song was in my view clearly better and more original as well, but it came second solely because Austria had a woman with a beard making a statement. I just don't like when politics and Eurovision get mixed. Nor do I like this particular song simply because it's not my taste
    3
  1138.  @spinoza3673  Honestly, even that seems strange to me. Like Americans with 10% Norwegian heritage calling themselves vikings and Norwegians. They really aren't Norwegian. And by that logic most African Americans can claim European heritage because most to have a certain amount of admixture. I think only when you have a certain significant percentage, you can claim certain heritage. Like maybe 50% or so. What mainly defines identity to me seems culture and not genetics. Compared to an immigrant that assimilated perfectly into Dutch culture, an American even with 100% Dutch heritage will seem like a serious case of "how are you doing, fellow kids?", unless that American is well versed in Dutch culture as well.
    3
  1139.  @LalienX  That's what a pyrrhic victory means. A "win" that came at such great cost that it is not really worth the victory.
    3
  1140. It's never enough for those human rights groups, they were against the Turkey deal too I remember. If it was for them we'd not only have the African stream, but the Middle Eastern one as well. There are no perfect solutions, the disembarkation platforms seems like a solid idea. I also don't care much for the "Europe has less migrants compared to other countries" argument. In the 1990's we took in just about all the former Yugoslavian refugees. If something happens in Europe we'll take them, if something happens in Africa or elsewhere the countries in the region can take them just like we do ours. Seems hypocritical to expect us to take in extra if something happens abroad while if something happens here we take them all in anyway without relief from abroad.
    3
  1141. Als je het debat kijkt ipv deze compilatie zul je zien dat hij zijn standpunten onderbouwde. Dat hebben ze er hier uitgeknipt om het kort te houden
    3
  1142. Dat is één kind te veel en ik zie niet hoe het belangrijk is dat de vrouw amper Nederlands kan. Ironisch genoeg riekt je comment naar pure discriminatie. Dat er zelfs een kind aan het huilen is gebracht laat zien hoe vervelend en stressvol die demonstranten zijn voor kinderen.
    3
  1143. Hij zegt het zelf al: een quotum lost niet de achterliggende redenen waarom vrouwen de top niet halen. Dus... wat is het nut van een quotum anders dan discriminatie? Als de reden dat vrouwen de top niet halen bijvoorbeeld is dat ze heel vaak parttime werken, dan is dat het obstakel dat vrouwen tegenhoudt de top te bereiken in gelijke getale als de mannen. Maar dan moet je je nog afvragen... is het überhaupt een probleem dat in een vrije samenleving vrouwen er zelf voor kiezen deeltijd te werken en daarmee hun carrière (deels) opofferen? Als je het mij vraagt niet. We leven in een vrije samenleving waarin iedereen zelf keuzes moet kunnen maken mbt wat ze willen worden en iedereen gelijke kansen moet hebben die ambities ook waar te maken. Onderdeel van zo'n vrije samenleving is dat niet iedereen dezelfde ambities heeft. Niet omdat ze niet capabel zouden zijn, niet vanwege ongelijke kansen, maar omdat ze het simpelweg niet willen. Als ik als man een minder hooggegrepen baan kies omdat ik liever een mooie balans tussen familie en baan wil dan gaan voor honderd procent carrièretijger, dan is dat mijn keuze. Dat is niet "slecht", dat is hoe ik mijn eigen leven wil inrichten, hoe ik gelukkig ben. Dat geldt voor elk individu, of ze nu vrouw of man zijn. Hoe veel van welk ras of gender of wat dan ook aan de top zit is irrelevant. Het gaat erom dat elk individu, ongeacht hun ras, gender of wat dan ook, die top kan bereiken wanneer ze daarvoor kiezen en capabel zijn. Dát is een gelijk speelveld. Politici moeten het verschil tussen die twee soms even leren.
    3
  1144. The BBC is not biased per se and especially not propaganda as some lunatics would claim, but it does present the news through a liberalist and generally western lens. Very much so, in fact. It could be better, if you ask me.
    3
  1145.  @naynay1139  You can't ignore politics when this guy ships your job abroad in the name of free trade (read: corporate profit). Politics affects our lives in many ways and ignoring it only makes sure you can't influence it to become a force for good.
    3
  1146. ​ @hamcatjones8028  Did you even read my comment? Most was about how Christianity completely destroyed European religion, traditions and general culture and took their place. Yes, obviously there are many holidays dedicated to Christianity and what makes it worse is that 90% of those holidays used to be pagan but had their meaning erased and replaced with Christian themes. Europe experienced WORSE than Maoris, we experienced a cultural genocide that was one of the most severe that any culture had to endure. And of course you see the remnants of that throughout history and today. And is there a Roman holiday? No, but Romans are mostly regarded in a positive light as the ones who brought us civilisation. And Christianity is also often seen in a positive light and by the odd ignoramus even as part of our real original culture. The truth is that our traditions were destroyed by Romans bringing civilisation and NO practitioners remain, unlike Maoris who do still have many traditionalists. And Christianity completely and utterly did its best to genocide every last bit of our culture and to a large degree succeeded to the point that many don't even KNOW of our pre-christian traditions and culture. Do tell me how what the Maoris experienced is worse than that. It's mild in comparison. They were allowed to persist even though subjected to colonisation (to compare, practicing European traditions/religion was punishable by DEATH in the christianised Roman Empire and in no way allowed). They are today respected and honoured (another comparison, our pre-christian ancestors are still viewed as dumb violent barbarians with inhumane and satanic beliefs. And funnily enough, that is how we at the time viewed other traditional peoples as well so the Maoris were victims of this bullshit world view too). None of this justifies what was done to Maoris, but the point is that almost every single culture had to experience something like this in the past. It was unfortunately the norm throughout history to conquer and pillage others. There are several noteworthy exceptions that were worse than anything else and some examples of that would be the genocide of Native Americans, the mass murder (for a large part by disease, but still) of South Americans, the cultural genocide of Northern Africa by Islamists and the cultural genocide of Europe by Christians. All of these were evil on a VERY large scale and practically destroyed an entire culture to be replaced by their conquerors.
    3
  1147. Hij heeft het over buitenlanders die wél wat doen. Of ik moet eigenlijk zeggen die niet iets doen: integreren.
    3
  1148.  @hackman669  In this case the British would not have a strategy of small army and big navy, but instead be one of the large armies of Europe. Probably would have curbstomped Germany very early on with France, intervening full on as early as Fall Gelb because then the Netherlands would be Britain's bufferstate between them and Germany. Not really beneficial to Germany unless Doggerland magically appears after the Battle of France.
    3
  1149.  @vilecrocodile9171  It's entertaining, can't deny that
    3
  1150. +Claudia Trumpsta Wat de media allemaal zegt boeit mij niet zo veel. De feiten zijn dat Europa de NAVO helemaal niet nodig heeft voor defensie. Als wij aan de 2% komen is het gecombineerde leger van de EU beter dan dat van Rusland. Ik weet nog dat Willem-Alexander een paar jaar geleden nog met Poetin zat te lachen met een glas vodka erbij. Rusland is onze vijand niet, we kunnen de huidige problemen oplossen zodat we weer door één deur kunnen. Dit is niet de Koude Oorlog. Ik zeg dump Amerika, laten we onszelf verdedigen en ervoor zorgen dat we als normaal met Rusland overweg kunnen inclusief handel én handel in gas/olie. Over de tweede wereldoorlog: ik zal even de drie meest belangrijke actoren in Europa noemen, van groot naar klein. Rusland. Het Britse Rijk. En dan pas Amerika. Zo. De eerste wereldoorlog is nog erger. Een klein land als Servië heeft drie keer zoveel militaire doden als de VS in die oorlog. Roemenië 3 tot 4 keer zoveel. Italië 4 tot 5 keer zoveel. De grote landen hebben allemaal rond de 10 keer zo veel militaire doden. Laat me niet lachen, de VS heeft geen bal gedaan in de eerste wereldoorlog. Ze hebben amper het einde gehaald, zo laat waren ze. En zelfs in de laatste gevechten waar Amerika bij was hebben Frankrijk en het Britse Rijk beiden significant meer doden dan Amerika. Bovendien is het 70 jaar geleden en het boeit me niet zo veel wat Amerika of wie dan ook toen heeft gedaan, zelfs al waren ze de belangrijkste actor. Het gaat om nu. En nu is Amerika een "bondgenoot" die zo weinig om ons geeft dat ze in Syrië, een land dat een grens heeft met de EU , een burgeroorlog ontketenen vanwege eigen interesses in regime change. Syrië, een land waarmee de EU een deal had om migranten tegen te houden in ruil voor economische investeringen. Precies hetzelfde geldt voor Libië. De waarheid is dat de VS/NAVO twee landen die cruciaal waren voor het EU-beleid rond de mediterrane zee compleet plat heeft gegooid. En we kennen de resultaten. Maar goed, blijf maar geloven dat de hele migrantencrisis kwam omdat een of andere vrouw in Duitsland zei "kom maar" :) Ik quote Tusk nogmaals: "With friends like this, who needs enemies?". Denk daar maar eens over na. Amerika mag opdonderen, of ze nou Obama of Trump als president hebben. Zij, onze meest gewaardeerde "bondgenoot", zijn de grootste bedreiging voor de veiligheid van Europa. Wat zij hebben gedaan in 2011 is vergelijkbaar met de EU die eventjes een burgeroorlog in Mexico aanwakkert en vervolgens stomverbaasd is dat Amerika wordt overspoeld door migranten. "Oeps". Dat zijn dan onze bondgenoten. Wie heeft vijanden nodig met vrienden als Amerika?
    3
  1151.  @NoeraldinKabam  Wat zij wil is dat we een bord erbij zetten over hoe racistisch die karikaturen wel niet zijn. Ze wil er één grote guilt-trip van maken. Ik wil daar neutrale borden bij die gewoon uitleggen wat de achtergrond ervan is. Zij wil geschiedenis in de moderne context plaatsen, ik wil juist de context van de geschiedenis uitgelegd hebben op een objectieve manier.
    3
  1152.  @marikeaerts1667  Zo werkt geschiedenis niet en dat "geschiedenis is geschreven door overwinnaars" (een uitspraak die je steevast onder elke YT video met enigerlei geschiedenis erin) is kolder. Het beginpunt van geschiedenis zijn objectieve feiten uit het verleden. Je kan selectief feiten daaruit halen om een eigen verhaal te vertellen, maar je kan ook zo veel mogelijk nuance aanbrengen en zo dicht als je kan op de objectieve feiten blijven om een accuraat verhaal proberen op te stellen. Dat laatste is neutrale, objectieve geschiedenis, of ten minste zo neutraal als geschiedenis kan zijn (perfecte geschiedschrijving bestaat niet, zeker naarmate je terug in de tijd gaat. Dat betekent dat geschiedenis altijd enigszins gekleurd kan zijn door hetzij de gekleurde natuur van de bronnen uit die tijd, hetzij de afwezigheid van concrete bronnen waardoor de moderne geschiedschrijver bepaalde dingen moet aanvullen naar eigen inzicht). Maar "geschiedenis is geschreven door overwinnaars" is en blijft absolute kolder. Perfect neutrale en objectieve geschiedenis is ook niet realistisch, maar er bestaat wel een onderscheid tussen objectief naar de geschiedenis kijken (en aldus een zo goed mogelijk beeld verschaffen van die tijd) en subjectief feitjes plukken uit de geschiedenis om een gekleurd verhaal te vertellen. Jij doet alsof geschiedenis op zichzelf al ALTIJD dat laatste is, maar dat klopt niet. Als Congolezen en Belgen beiden de volledige, objectieve geschiedenis proberen in kaart te brengen, zullen ze ongetwijfeld tot vrijwel dezelfde uitkomst komen en dat is een feit.
    3
  1153.  @marikeaerts1667  Ok mooi. Ik vind het altijd zo jammer dat de reactie op eenzijdige geschiedenis doorgaans is om de radicaal andere kant op te gaan en wéér te eindigen met eenzijdige geschiedenis. Ons koloniale verleden bijvoorbeeld werd eerst als iets moois en inspirerends gepresenteerd en nu als het absoluut tegenovergestelde door ons een soort schaamte aan te praten. Zo verliezen we echt alle nuance, we kunnen beter de brute én de mogelijk positieve kanten van ons verleden belichten. We kunnen ten minste proberen een objectief beeld te schetsen
    3
  1154.  @marikeaerts1667  Ja, helemaal mee eens
    3
  1155. USA would lose very hard. The US would lose against the continent of Europe alone (EU + Russia, ouch). What would be more interesting would be the US vs South America, Africa or the Middle East. Whether they could conquer those areas.
    3
  1156.  @timewave02012  Don't think you could. The entire world outproduces you by a very very wide margin. At some point you're just overpowered. The rest of the world holds all the cards and after a few years you'd be so ridiculously outnumbered that there is no hope.
    3
  1157. Very well TIK. I'd describe myself as a socialist. A libertarian market socialist specifically. After I shortly explain my views, I'll tell you what you have to do to win me over. I like the free market, I just don't like the capitalist framework in which it functions (my main issue is the ability of capital investors to gain permanent ownership of a company, and a passive right to a portion of its profits even if they contributed nothing other than a one time investment). I think authoritarian states are abhorrent. Biggest lesson from the 20th century is that authoritarianism is ghastly and planned economies do not work. I accept the subjective theory of value, that's just basic economics. I think free market economics do a great job of allocating resources where they most efficiently meet the demands of the market(/society). And most importantly, a free market WORKS on a fundamental level. I'm in favour of a free market in which businesses ONLY distribute profits among people who actually directly contribute to it (i.e. workers, including the people at the very top of the business). And I'd like this distribution to be reasonably linked to how important the contribution of a person is (I say reasonably because it's rarely possible to put an exact number as to the value of someone's labour, since value is subjective after all). This way, if the business runs well, everyone who made this happen receives the fruits of it. If a business doesn't run well, there is no profit distribution and perhaps even a cut on the wages of that month. Everyone in the business shares in both the profit and the losses. NO third party can gain ownership of another's business. Third parties may loan businesses capital for interest (reasonable interest) and other means of for-reward capital investments, as long as the reward enjoyed is reasonable and NOT permanent. Beyond this, the worker-owned businesses compete on a free market in the same way they do within capitalism. One important element is taken out: the concept of a shareholder does not exist. Only those within the business itself are entitled to the profits of their labour. So.... tell me this one thing: why is the extreme emphasis that capitalism puts on rewarding capital investors NECESSARY for a functional economy (I call the idea of a one time payment entitling someone to a PERMANENT right to a part of the profits of others' labour extreme)? Or in other words, why can't a free market be organised in such a way that wealth is more evenly distributed? Why does a market supposedly collapse the moment you tinker with the ability of third party investors to grab a piece of the profits of a business? I'm open to arguments, if I think you're correct I'll watch the entire economics in one lesson video you proposed and seriously consider becoming a capitalist.
    3
  1158.  @blackbirdfrost  Russia is geographically, culturally, historically and ethnically European. It;s absolutely ridiculous to call them non-European. They are Slavic people that conquered parts of Asia.
    3
  1159. This is what we need. At least our governments got a hard slap in the face with the migrant crisis and now they see migration needs to be stopped and are working on it.
    3
  1160. This is a factual report. Everyone with a brain immediately recognises that the US does the same and much worse too, but that doesn't mean this is propaganda against Russia. Facts are facts.
    3
  1161. +jordan ferdinand I personally liked the dress. I also prefer a more traditionally ornamented dress, but the modern more minimalistic look did suit her well.
    3
  1162. Non-existant, as it should in any country
    3
  1163.  @DFenV  Zoals het hoort ja, want de Kamer is het hoogste orgaan binnen onze democratie. Als je het instabiel noemt dat voor belangrijk beleid een debat nodig is in de Kamer en een uiteindelijke meerderheid ipv dat de coalitie het er gewoon doorheen jast op basis van een coalitieakkoord dat jaren eerder is vastgesteld dan noem je wat mij betreft de democratie zelf onstabiel.
    3
  1164.  @kareldekale4987  Eens, ik word doodziek van al die apologisten. De Rutte-doctrine icm dikke coalitieakkoorden breekt onze democratie af, "maar Rutte lacht zo leuk".
    3
  1165. If China, Russia and the EU stick with the deal, the US will be forced to stick with it as well because otherwise it will de facto impose sanctions on its biggest trade partners... Any EU business trading with Iran would be barred from trading with the US, but the US economy can't take that hit if the EU and China stick with the deal. It would cost so much and in the end not be worth it for the US. Plus it might spark a trade war between the EU and China on one hand and the US on the other. Nobody wants that. So if everyone else sticks with it, the US will only shoot its own economy in the foot
    3
  1166.  @charly4912  Rutte is de Judas die Omtzigt heeft verraden. En met de Rutte-doctrine zelfs onze hele democratie heeft verraden.
    3
  1167.  @charly4912  Ik schaam mij diep voor mensen als jij, die staan achter een megalomaan die het de normaalste zaak van de wereld vind om de Kamer structureel voor te liegen, informatie achter te houden en over het algemeen de Kamer buitenspel te zetten. Rutte is een regelrecht gevaar voor onze democratie. Alle schandalen zoals de toeslagenaffaire zijn een symptoom van Rutte's leiderschapsstijl. Zijn anti-democratische leiderschapsstijl.
    3
  1168. Zwarte Piet is zo oud dat Romeins historicus Tacitus omschrijft hoe een Germaanse stam hun gezichten zwart schminkt voor een duizenden jaren oud decemberfeest dat overeenkomsten toont met Sinterklaas. Dat was in het jaar 98. Het zwarte gezicht heeft niets met slavernij te maken (kroeshaar, rode lippen, oorbel, etc. mag van mij weg). En een duizenden jaren oud gebruik veranderen voor een paar roeptoeters in 2018? Over mijn lijk. Zie hier voor de traditie waar ik naar verwijs en zie het tussenkopje "oorsprong" voor wat ik bedoel: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilde_Jacht
    3
  1169.  Abu Troll al cockroachistan  Nah, Finland is EU and the EU has "attack on one is attack on all" articles like NATO does. Russia can't take Finland, they would immediately face all of western Europe and possibly the US would join in too.
    3
  1170. +GamingLegendary Hurr durr, when America does something positive it's Americans and when it does something negative the European settlers did it. Part of the reason for the revolution was to expand westwards, which the British did not want to do.... Europeans never genocided native populations like the US did AFTER the revolution. Europeans set up trading stations and conquered part of the land and traded with native populations. Yes, with a lot of violence and cruelty, but no not with all out genocide. Later on, Europeans took control of full countries too and ruled over native populations, but again not with genocide. What America did was murder all of them and replace them as the main inhabitant of that land. The ONLY European territory where settling could arguably be called genocidal is Canada, and generally people do NOT refer to what happened there as genocide. What the Canadians did was force native children into education so they would grow up as part of western civilisation. Some call this cultural genocide (they educated the children, but in doing so also caused their own culture to die out). This is the closest any European territory came to genocide. YOU wiped the native Americans out, not "European settlers". YOU wanted to expand westwards and even fought against your European leadership to be able to do so. Britain wanted to keep the coastal areas trade with inland natives, YOU wanted absolute destruction and full control.
    3
  1171. A better question is where the hell you conjured up pool from. We call it biljart in Dutch and upon a quick google search the Latin languages have a variation of billiard, Slavic languages have a variation of billiard, Germanic languages (English excluded) use a variation of billiard... and Arabic, Japanese, Hindi... the only languages I found that use another term are Chinese and Korean, and those don't use pool either.
    3
  1172.  FLAG BANDIT  The math checks out. And his plans are far from "revolutionary", he simply wants what we in Europe have had for decades already. It's proven policy, objectively superior to what you have now. You pay MORE than we do for LESS coverage. The current system is bankrupting the nation, not Bernie's proposal. Right now you pay for costs of healthcare, salaries of people involved, the part of profit that is reinvested into the company and/or innovation and.......... the massive profit that goes in the private pockets of shareholders. In a public system you pay for the costs of healthcare and the salaries of people involved... an efficient public system is always going to be cheaper because you take the profit out of the price. You pay ten times as much for certain drugs, you pay maybe double the insurance premiums for half the coverage. It's a terrible system that is mostly designed to enrich the 1%. I know it sounds crazy at first, but a public system is cheaper and better at the same time. It only leaves the 1% in the dust, but they'll find other entrepeneurial adventures, I'm sure.
    3
  1173.  @rachida7235  Mensen als jij zijn de reden dat Christchurch is gebeurd. Ieder ziek mannetje als jij doet er weer een druppel bij in de emmer van een of andere extreem rechtse radicaal, totdat de emmer op een dag overloopt en hij een moskee binnen loopt... Tyft een eind op met je polariserende gedrag
    3
  1174.  @walterheisenberg6204  The US caused the migrant crisis from Libya and Syria, nobody likes your "free world" anymore. The EU is already making moves to become more independent from the US. It's over.
    3
  1175.  @mrlassotool  You know what liberalism means? Liberalism would support the status quo in the US more than anything and if it got hold of us here in Europe most of our national health services probably would be deconstructed in favour of the free market. It is not strange at all that a liberal would be for the liberalist idea of letting the free market do its thing.
    3
  1176. Zij geloven dat hij een anti-democratisch en autoritair bewind zou voeren waarin iedereen behalve de blanke Nederlanders onderdrukt worden. Oftewel zo ongeveer het absolute tegenovergestelde van zijn eigenlijke standpunten
    3
  1177. +TIH YDP The specific example I gave wouldn't be classified as hate speech (unless you turn it into something like "all blacks should die because they all steal"). I just gave a random example of a fact being exaggerated. Hate speech goes way further than just exaggerating some facts; hate speech comes close to portraying people as worthless or less than human and in many cases also inciting violence against them. I don't see why such remarks should ever be accepted. Your example is different; that is just a fact that is bloated up and applied to all Pakistanis. Not saying that should be illegal. If you want to make huge assumptions when you see a Pakistani man, go ahead. It's just an extreme version of better safe than sorry.
    3
  1178. @RS Martinez It literally means below the Sahara desert. It's a term used to distinguish the mostly Arabic Northern African cultures from the different cultures below the Sahara.
    3
  1179. @RS Martinez If I have it wrong, please do explain it to me. All I know is that it's a distinction between North Africa and Africa below the Sahara desert. The most logical reason as to why seems that North Africa historically was conquered by Arabs and assimilated into an Islamic Caliphate. The descendants of those people still live there today and the original indigenous populations of those areas barely exist anymore. Below the Sahara there's also been Islamic influence in many areas, but nothing comparable to North Africa's history. So Historically North Africa has been very linked to the Middle East despite geographically being in Africa, distinguishing them from other African regions below the Sahara.
    3
  1180. ... but the accompanying carrier strike group is. It failed
    3
  1181. De EU is voor allerlei dingen goed. Handel, internationale invloed, vrij reizen... Maar tegelijkertijd ook op een aantal punten slecht. De geldstroom naar het Zuiden, gebrek aan daadkracht (zie hoe moeilijk het voor de EU is de migrantencrisis eens een keer op te lossen), gebrek aan goede representatie (ja, het Europese parlement is er, maar wie voelt zich daardoor vertegenwoordigd? Ik niet)... Maar als we nou de minpunten proberen op te lossen, bijvoorbeeld door de Euro op te splitsen in een munt voor Noord- en Zuid-Europa, door de EU institutioneel anders in te richten, etc., dan zitten we op winst. Het grote obstakel is niet de EU zelf, maar de landen die zich negatief opstellen jegens verandering. Als we langs die politieke barrière komen dan kunnen we van de EU maken wat we willen.
    3
  1182.  @curlyg3189  Kaag wil premier worden. Ze wil geen nieuwe verkiezingen, maar wel dat Rutte opdondert. Dan is de weg voor haar waarschijnlijk open. En het ziet er op dit moment naar uit dat zij krijgt wat ze wil straks, desnoods met een minderheidskabinet
    3
  1183. The anti-imperial nationalists sided with Axis against the Empire, yes.
    3
  1184.  @IskenderSimsek  Als jij denkt dat het enige wat de Nederlandse samenleving is je aan de wet houden en geen uitkering trekkende parasiet zijn is, dan heb je echt oogkleppen op. Wij zijn één samenleving en één cultuur. Wij nodigen iedereen uit om onderdeel te worden van die samenleving en cultuur. Dit is geen Amerikaanse melting pot waar je allerlei culturen hebt die naast elkaar leven en geen bal om elkaar geven. Het enige wat daar geldt is bijdragen aan de economie, maar hier geven we om meer dan alleen geld. Integratie is belangrijk hier.
    3
  1185. +Laszlo Gotje Meningen zijn irrelevant. De Oeigoeren begonnen een gewelddadige separatistencampagne in 1968 en terreuraanslagen door Oeigoeren vinden al sinds ten minste 1992 plaats. De kampen kwamen ongetwijfeld later. Dus de kampen zijn een overdreven reactie op terrorisme.
    3
  1186.  @thejourney559  Gebaseerd op multiculturele groepen... wat een slechte grap. Dit beleid voeren we pas een paar decennia en in die tijd is het serieus misgegaan. En multi-etnisch is niet multi-cultureel, trouwens. Integratieproblemen hebben we niet omdat er mensen met een ander ras binnen komen, maar mensen met een radicaal andere CULTUUR. Als iedereen goed integreert in de Nederlandse samenleving/cultuur zijn we een verenigd, monocultureel land. Het probleem is juist dat dat niet lukt. Multiculturalisme = conflict tussen culturele groepen. Radicale islam, extreem rechts... het wordt waarschijnlijk alleen maar erger. Hoe meer multiculturalisme, hoe meer cultureel conflict en hoe meer cultureel conflict, hoe meer geweld. Er zijn al dreigingen gekomen vanuit radicaal islamitische hoek dat er een tegenactie komt. Het loopt allemaal uit de hand en dit soort geweld zouden we niet zien als wij niet dit kutbeleid hadden gehad. Multiculturalisme is gefaald, en hoe. Polarisatie, geweld, terrorisme, culturele botsingen. DANKJEWEL. We moeten stoppen.
    3
  1187. Exactly my opinion on the matter. I find it baffling that their response to gender stereotypes being social constructs is to create more genders for themselves. The correct answer to the notion that gender stereotypes try to tell men/women how to behave even if they aren't like that is to say genders are meaningless and oppressive social constructs that need to be thrown in the bin. Address people by their biological sex and then allow all to develop their own personality freely, that's it. Being a man with feminine personality traits does not make someone "non binary" or even worse; gender fluid (a different identity depending on how they feel that day.... absurd). It makes one no more than.... a man with personality traits that we typically consider "feminine". There is no need to place all this in boxes. There is no such thing as being inbetween man and woman, spare for some extremely rare cases of people born without a determinable biological sex. Personality is just personality, nothing more. Being a man or woman (or in rare cases inbetween) is about biology. Now transgenders are a special case, since their identity issues are not (only) based on gender stereotypes, but on biological sex. They feel a strong need to become part of the opposite sex. The best solution for men with those issues seems to support their transition and treat them as if they are a woman. But an actual biological woman they will never be. If transitioning solves their identity issues, that should be supported. There is a big difference between treating them as though they were a woman and actually stating they are a woman, though. The first is an act of compassion to help them cope with their issues, the second is an active distortion of reality to fit someone's fantasy/ideological view of the world. They will always be biological men wanting to become women or vice versa, not actual women. I think a lot more people would actually accept transgenders if they weren't so hellbent on distorting reality. We get your plight, we want to help you, but that goes too far. Reality is reality. I think socially treating them as though they are women is the morally correct thing to do, but it ends there.
    3
  1188. A battle including the EU would be great! Against Russia or a US invasion would be interesting
    2
  1189. The M1 Abrams is literally British armour with a German gun... I don't see much American in it
    2
  1190. We hebben weer tanks hoor, en daarnaast vormen we nog een aantal Nederlands-Duitse tank divisies
    2
  1191. +discodench By giving everyone the right to self defence you create a chaotic society in which everyone uses violence when they see fit. By granting the government the monopoly on violence, you create a police force that protects the citizens and only uses violence where it's absolutely necessary. In this type of society there is no chaos and the least possible amount of violence is applied. It's a much safer society. There is no reason to give everyone a gun when there's better ways of keeping society safe. The police applies less violence and when it does it applies it proportionally and also consistently. There is no random application of violence, like when citizens are allowed to protect themselves. Why should the government not have a monopoly on violence?
    2
  1192. I hope India will develop its economy and increase living standards when they're a superpower, instead of wasting money on military like the US
    2
  1193. Dat komt omdat de boeren (zoals de rest van de economie) hun productie afstemt op maximale winst en niet op wat wij nodig hebben of wat de natuur aankan. Niet alleen de boeren, maar heel NL wordt geteisterd door economie-centraal denken waarbij andere belangrijke factoren zoals de natuur totaal vergeten worden of slechts als voetnoot gelden. Het is een volledig éénzijdige instelling die tot talloze problemen leidt.
    2
  1194. @MX Omdat ze wapens kopen en olie verkopen ja. Oftewel we laten ons omkopen. Saoedi Arabië toelaten om hun verachtelijke ideologie te verspreiden en scholen/moskeeën in Nederland te financieren en beïnvloeden is alsof Nederland gedurende de Koude Oorlog toe zou staan dat er verdomde communistische scholen zouden bestaan die kinderen direct leren een revolutie te ontketenen, alleen omdat de Sovjet Unie de Staat in ruil daarvoor wat geld oplevert. Het is gewoon dom. Dit gaat niet meer om geld. Dit gaat om een buitenlandse mogendheid die actief eraan werkt om een anti-democratische, onrechtsstatelijke en hoog gewelddadige ideologie te verspreiden die onze manier van leven direct ondermijnt. Die Saoedische wapendeals en olieverkoop kunnen me gestolen worden als het het radicaliseren van vele moslims wereldwijd tot gevolg heeft. Saoedi Arabië is onze ideologische vijand. Maar omdat ze onze economische vriend zijn, komen ze daarmee weg.
    2
  1195. @Biggen Kaas Zal ik ook zeggen als extreem rechts het over het terugbrengen van concentratiekampen heeft. Gewoon edgy zeker. Dit soort dingen zijn geen grap, dit is super gevaarlijk en heeft in het verleden écht iemands leven gekost.
    2
  1196. Dus toch zijn wij het weer zelf die dit direct veroorzaken... We denken alleen maar aan de economie. Geld, geld, geld. Maar een beetje normaal omgaan met de natuur en onze eigen leefomgeving? Ho maar, tot het uit de hand loopt en we de gevolgen eindelijk eens op ons bord krijgen. Steeds maar weer hetzelfde, ik vraag me af wanneer we het zullen leren. Wat landbouw betreft moeten we omschakelen naar een circulair system en misschien zelfs een volledig zelfvoorzienend systeem als permacultuur. Maar ja, dat is niet optimaal voor de markt, dus boeren die dat proberen zullen het lastig hebben. De markt vraagt om grootschalige productie, zo snel mogelijk. Dus dan doen we dat. Misschien wordt het eens tijd dat wij de markt niet meer op de eerste plaats hebben, maar veel breder gaan nadenken over hoe wij onze voedselproductie (en meer) inrichten.
    2
  1197. I don't agree that the romantic Paris is a thing of the past, but it sure is less romantic than it used to be...
    2
  1198. +FrozenHeavens It's not about the fact that they are there, it is about how many there are.
    2
  1199. Zo, ik ga deze vakantie toevallig eens hunebedjes kijken in Drenthe dus dat komt goed van pas
    2
  1200.  @duransayili3392  Ja, Rico dus...
    2
  1201. Well an 88 would likely be able to get a Leo 2 from the sides, perhaps even on the weaker spots on the front. It'd be like facing a Tiger II in a 76mm Sherman, except the Tiger II is twice as fast as the Sherman lol
    2
  1202. In Amerika is de politiek al decennia compleet gestoord. Links of rechts maakt niet eens meer uit.
    2
  1203. You sure about that? 40% of the highly educated not having children doesn't sound like the best situation to be in...
    2
  1204. +Nate Smith If the west survived because the church kept pagan documents, and those pagan documents made the West, then it isn't judeo-christian values that made the West, now is it? Your logic makes little sense. At best we could be thankful to the church for collecting and preserving pagan knowledge. You know... despite having destroyed the civilisations that actually created that knowledge and preventing them from creating any new knowledge.
    2
  1205. Is it a scam though? What if it isn't and we're suddenly on a planet too far gone for saving? And is being carbon neutral really a bad thing for our countries anyway? Could it even be good for our economies to become world leaders in green energy?
    2
  1206. +Greeny202a So the UK can have a "special relationship" with the US, with an ocean separating Europe and North America, but not the exact same thing (intelligence wise) with other European countries? Militarily, the EU and UK are the West's first defence against Russia. Do you really think we are going to scrap our standing strategy of European defence just because of Brexit? We will continue to be stationed together in the Baltic states, we will continue to train together and we will continue to have the exact same collective defence strategy. It would not make any sense whatsoever to do otherwise.
    2
  1207. Yes be proud. Japan, China and more also made it
    2
  1208. So did the British and the latest is France in 2015 or 2016 (with a 1980's submarine lol). Everyone and their mother sank a US supercarrier lmao
    2
  1209. Hello TIK, thank you for clarifying your viewpoints. I understand them better now. Still, I have a few issues with your position that I will share. 1. Regarding socialism, you rightly quote various socialists' own definitions of socialism as, roughly speaking, public ownership of the means of production. What you have not considered, however, is WHY socialists want this. They do not want public ownership for the sake of public ownership, they have a specific goal to achieve with this public ownership of the means of production; socialism aims for (a representative government of) society as a whole to take control over the means of production, so that the economy is run in the interest of the entirety of society, rather than just a small, wealthy subset of it. Egalitarianism is a very important goal of socialism. By just quoting socialists' definition of socialism as "public ownership of the means of production" and stopping there, you end up missing a lot of the context surrounding what socialism as an ideology is. Essentially, you end up defining socialism by the means by which it means to achieve its goals, while ignoring the goals as such (and I hope we agree that the goals of any ideology are an absolutely central part of what that ideology is!). This is why I think you rightly point out the connection between socialism and public control over the economy, but wrongly end up with an absolutist point of view that EVERY type of public control over the economy automatically is socialism. To apply this to calling publicly owned shares in a corporation a form of socialism; yes, technically this is (limited) public control over a corporation (i.e. a part of the economy/means of production). Does this however fit within the ideology of socialism? No, because socialism does not aim for limited public control over a part of the economy, it aims for a complete seizure of the means of production in order to ensure that the economy is run in the interest of society as a whole. That is the entire point of socialism; creating an egalitarian economy by having the government take control over it on behalf of the working class/society. A few hundred/thousand individuals buying shares is NOT the same thing as wishing for all means of production to be used in the interest of the broader society rather than individual interests. You already seem to partially see this by naming that you see this as more of a hybrid between public and private (which I would agree with), but you still choose to call this socialism (which I disagree with for above reason). 2. Also regarding socialism, I want to point out you almost exclusively quote authoritarian socialists that want a dictatorship of the proletariat in the from of a government taking direct control over the economy, but there are many other forms of socialism that do not share this view. Especially libertarian or anarchist forms of socialism may not fit this definition well. By quoting mainly authoritarian socialists, you may end up equating only this specific form of socialism with socialism as a whole. I understand this focus on authoritarian socialism, because historically we have for the grand majority of instances seen authoritarian socialism in practice (and failing all the time). But remember when speaking of socialism as a whole, libertarian and even anarchist socialism also exists. I feel like you have too little attention for this, which I understand, but then you must specify you are only/mainly speaking of authoritarian socialism.
    2
  1210.  @PaxUnova  That is ridiculous, the UK would never ally with the US under such conditions or aid them in invading Europe. Wow
    2
  1211.  @sherbear8286  Please.... what we pay Eastern Europe today through the EU to develop after communist rule is double the entire Marshall Plan and counting, and it isn't even ending anytime soon. What you gave us through the Marshall plan over the years is in present-day money what we gave in foreign aid to third world countries (90 billion euros, 100 billion dollars), which is a fraction of our GDP. Don't overstate these things. And you only did it because you needed capitalist buddies to trade with and earn everything back several times over, plus win the cold war. We already paid you back, you got exactly what you invested for and then some. What's next? You're going to claim you "saved" Europe in WW2 or even worse, WW1? You won the cold war by yourself and totally didn't (desperately) need your allies? Cut the crap, mate. I wouldn't even dare tell the Polish "we rebuilt their country" even though we paid Eastern Europe literally twice and in a few years possibly thrice the Marshall plan. We helped, that's it. Some humility would be fitting for you... self-important fools.
    2
  1212. Haha fantastisch
    2
  1213. Ross Penny Exactly. The EU spends 90 billion of the total worldwide 130 billion foreign aid budget, the US spends 30 bn. China doesn't hand out the money for free but rather loans it to those countries for a profit, and I'm sure that's billions as well. Especially the foreign aid is useful, as it's a yearly fee those countries get for free and in principle whoever gives it is free to stop it at any time. The EU is currently using this power to make African countries enter into deals with the EU to keep migrants from coming, for example. These are deals that these countries actually don't want to engage in, but if they don't the EU will cut their foreign aid. This is how power is projected nowadays, not by military means. And if we're to measure soft power, the EU would be first place, the US second place and China probably third place. Those three countries/unions have immense power to make others follow their agenda, including world powers
    2
  1214. +Peyot Cacti Here in the EU adding hormones to either milk or meat is banned. Don't know how it is in the other places you mentioned, but I always thought it was just the US that did that nonsense to dairy and meat.
    2
  1215. @Elzo Styles In that case Trump's America First foreign policy is probably safer for me than that of someone who voted for Iraq and continues to support the pre-Trump US foreign policy.
    2
  1216. +Thomas Kuipers Dit is juist goed. We moeten geen politie hebben die graag schiet of het neerschieten van burgers bagatelliseert. Als de agent maar schiet wanneer het nodig is, is het goed. Je moet ook weer niet gaan doen alsof deze man niet zou schieten als hij een terrorist of zo voor 'm heeft.
    2
  1217.  @volkiruski1221  Ze hebben de clitoris van zijn zus weggesneden dus dat wordt nog moeilijk, maar veel succes gewenst
    2
  1218. Or perhaps you could think and see that both the Soviets and EU members are European, and then deduce that this must be a European custom.
    2
  1219. Hou jezelf niet zo voor de gek. Trump is gewoon weer zo'n republikein die allerlei cadeautjes aan bedrijven geeft en de overheid kleiner maakt. En geen van beiden helpt het volk in significante mate. Als je voor dit beleid bent moet je vooral op 'm stemmen, maar je moet niet doen alsof alleen hij voor "het volk" is en dat de democraten "zichzelf haten". Dat slaat helemaal nergens op.
    2
  1220. ​ @khululyp  Is gender identity partially informed by actual biology? Sure. Women and men are not the same, we do have a biological tendency to like different things, broadly speaking. Socially, women on average do have a natural tendency to behave differently in various ways, which in turn informs what we perceive as typically "feminine" social behaviour. But we also created stereotypes that massively exaggerate these differences, and many raise their children to fit these stereotypes. Other typically "feminine" traits/preferences are just straight up fabricated by society. Matt f.e. names lavender candles as "feminine", but why exactly? Because society has randomly slapped the label of "feminine" on there, no other reason. Women have no biological reason to like lavender candles, nor men any biological reason not to like them, this is something society has made up. Gender identity is basically partially exaggerated differences between men and women, and partially completely made up differences, that all in all compound into a social construct of what your typical man or woman is, according to our culture. I agree that liking a few typically feminine things does not make you a woman. In fact, many men do like typically feminine things and vice versa. Because we have randomly branded many things "masculine" and "feminine" while really both genders like them. Gender dysphoria is not about liking feminine things, it is about mentally actually being a different gender to your body. Being a woman is not just about your body. It is also about your mind. Having female genitals only says something about your biological body, but not necessarily your brain. Matt is telling only half of the truth when defining women by their body only. There are actual biological mental differences between men and women, as well as socially constructed differences in terms of identity. Trans people have a disconnect between their mental gender and their body. Gender dysphoria is a real recognised thing in psychology. We do not help these people by ridiculing the only thing that makes them happy: changing their bodies to fit their minds; transitioning to their mental gender. I do agree with you we should differentiate between people who have gender dysphoria and f.e. men who identify with typical feminine traits and think that makes them a woman. Being a woman is not just about liking make-up and pink. The problem is that it's incredibly hard to define what a woman, in the mental sense, is. We know there are mental differences between men and women, but these cannot easily be defined. Even our own constructed female gender cannot easily be defined. "What is a woman?" is actually a deceptively difficult question to answer and focusing only on the body/genitalia is cutting some serious corners. When someone is mentally, hormonally and partially also bodily a woman, I'll call them a woman. They'd definitely be a lot more woman than man. Trans women are mentally women (thus socially behave as a woman), have the hormonal make up of a woman, have feminine bodily traits such as soft skin and breasts (naturally, due to female hormones) and surgically have changes their biological body to resemble a female body, BUT don't have female reproductive organs and have XY chromosomes. They are like 90% woman post-transition. What sense does it make to latch on to those chromosomes and say 'nope you're a man'? It just serves to bully them, nothing more. And considering their suicide rate due to how society tends to not accept them, bullying their identity is a downright evil to do.
    2
  1221.  @richardashendale922  Your first issue with my post is already directly addressed in my previous post. I said that gender identity in part is informed by actual biological differences between men and women. However, these differences are often exaggerated and turned into stereotypes. I will take your example of men being able to handle stress better than women to illustrate my point further. Yes, men biologically are better equipped to handle stress/anxiety than women. However, society has exaggerated and stereotyped this difference to mean: men are expected to NOT have stress/anxiety at all, and to if they do not show this to their peers. Because "real men" do not or barely experience anxiety and are seen as unmanly if they do admit to need help for anxiety. This aspect of male gender identity is an exaggerated and stereotyped version of reality. Adversely, women are thought to be overly emotional and mentally fragile by the female gender identity stereotype. These are damaging stereotypes that infantilise women and encourage men to neglect their mental health. These stereotypes may partially be informed by reality/biology, but it is very important to note that they are a massive exaggeration of biology to the point where gender identity is NOT representing reality anymore. Men are better at dealing with anxiety, therefore they experience NO anxiety and NEVER should seek help? This makes no sense. Being slightly better at something does not mean you're perfect at it! And women are worse at dealing with anxiety, therefore they are overemotional weaklings that need protection constantly? Being slightly worse at something does not mean you're helpless! In truth, this mental difference between men and women biologically exists, but the difference actually is not that great. Definitely not even close to great enough to form the kind of stereotypes we see in gender identity. Remember that this gender stereotype was used back in WW1 to shame veterans who had PTSD/shell schock. Because certainly men should always be paragons of mental stability, no matter the things they face, so goes the stereotype. This is not reality. Your second point does not change my argument. I merely sought to distinguish between the mental and physical. Regarding your third point, if it is easy to define feminine neurology, please do. That'd help this discussion massively, since I can't come up with a comprehensive definition so easily. In any case, I agree that having masculine/feminine traits alone does not mean you have male/female neurology. In fact, the entire idea of masculine/feminine traits is another one of the massive exaggerations I mentioned under the first point. There are certain traits we see a bit more often in women or men, so we at some point named those masculine/feminine traits respectively. But the problem is that the grand majority of those traits are very common in the opposite sex as well, making it nonsensical to gender them. Looking at psychology, there is a great overlap in terms of the character traits of women and men. We are much more similar than most tend to think. The differences mostly are slight. The grand, grand majority of humans have a mix of feminine and masculine traits. Yet gender identity regards these traits as a hard split between men and women. Men are expected to embody all the stereotypical masculine traits, women all stereotypical feminine traits. This actively denies the reality that we all are a mix of the two traits and do not differ that much from one another in terms of personalities. But I digress. Now your last point. It is true that most of the biological changes happen due to transition procedures. The argument is indeed about psychology and whether the neurology of a person fits their biological sex or not. We seem to agree that if there is a disconnect, transitioning to help gender dysphoric people achieve mental stability is a good thing.
    2
  1222.  @christiantaylor1495  I live in a country where autism has plenty of attention and where autistic people get the care they need. So from my perspective they do not need additional attention. My sister has autism, so I think about it more than enough. The reason why transgender people get attention is because there are many anti-trans people that seek to suppress their existence. If trans people could get a transition when they need it and got accepted for their trans identity in society, we would not be speaking about them right now. They'd all be living their lives unbothered, and would not require any special attention. But because of transphobes, they do require attention. Since the transphobes put them at risk.
    2
  1223.  @Jess_ica2927  You understand me correctly. And yes, you could see it as a mental condition called gender dysphoria. I don't like calling it an illness though, as that carries certain implications. But yeah, it is terrible to have this disconnect between mind and body. The thing is, even if we assume that their body is correct and the mind is deviant, the cure to gender dysphoria is to transition. Studies show that people with gender dysphoria end up a lot happier if they transition and that this alleviates the mental issues that trans people have with their identity, especially when accepted by society. Forcing them to be their biological sex is very harmful. So that is why I think it is important to recognise trans people and to support them. Not doing so means we harm people by forcing them to live with deep feelings of gender dysphoria.
    2
  1224. As bad as I think this shooting is, the fact that a kid was there is not relevant. The kid should not be there in the first place and you can't call of an entire military operation because there is a kid present. What you should do is prevent the death of the kid best you can, that's all.
    2
  1225. +Peyot Cacti Whoops, this troll and/or idiot conspiracy theorist forgot to read the description :)
    2
  1226. +Jcizzle210 Just watched the Fox news report on that... they took a compliment from Moon to Trump and bloated it up as if he gives Trump all the credit. Trump played a role, a good one, but I'd say Moon ultimately would be more deserving of the peace prize. He has been pushing for talks since the moment he came in office and is the one doing most of the actual talking. America and China forced Kim to accept those talks.
    2
  1227. +Crammit Stop looking at guns as yours. Countries in which the government takes responsibility for such national issues are OBJECTIVELY better places to live. Take note.
    2
  1228. Zo extreem veel water verbruiken wij dus. Onverantwoord
    2
  1229. I think the intervew showed perfectly how stupid some of these protestors are. "Trump is misogynistic, racist, etc." "Isn't it unfair to call him a racist?" "He's obviously a white supremacist" All they do is throw around empty terms around without being able to couple actual arguments to them. BBC did a nice job intervewing them
    2
  1230. Considering the Western attitude in the beginning of the war, I'm guessing they'd build up a ridiculous army in the west and then invade. Geopolitically, a Nazi Germany under control of the East is unacceptable from French and British perspective. There is no way they'd accept this unless they want to commit geopolitical suicide.
    2
  1231.  @adamking4538  You seriously think the UK would support a US invasion of Danish territory? REALLY?
    2
  1232. +Khal Drogo Why would the South have been allied with Hitler? Fascism really isn't something the South likes or ever would have liked. The South would probably have been hardcore isolationist. Plus, if America was divided and Fascist, you'd have had to seriously fear Canada in the 1940's. They'd kick your arses back then when not unified. And that's not even taking into account that the North would be against a Fascist South as well. Going Fascist with a democratic North and Canada close to them is like a death sentence for the South. Canada alone would probably have gotten the job done. And Mexico was allied too, to put the last nail in the South's coffin. As to Nazi Germany winning WW2, I wouldn't be too sure about that. Without US supplies the British empire would only slightly outproduce Germany and its territories. Before the US joined and signed the Lend-Lease agreement, Britain had booked significant successes in North Africa and the Middle East, ruled at sea and established a firm position in Britain itself, but in Europe the fight against Germany was a stalemate (Norway, Greece, Dieppe raid failure). Britain could have done Italy alone, with them forming the grand majority of the forces in the Italian campaign anyway. Beyond D-day, however, things get interesting for the British. Since the British planned D-day and the following breakout of Normandy, they clearly were strategically capable. The question is did they have the manpower? I think so; they never resorted to conscripting men from the Empire, if manpower was desperately needed they could do this and theoretically match the invasion force of the UK and US. Equipment would be much less, though. Russia greatly outproduced Germany but without Lend-Lease would miss certain equipment so they too wouldn't be as effective as they were in WW2. Nonetheless, the victory at Stalingrad and Kursk would have happened regardless. Russia was in itself capable of defeating the Third Reich. Perhaps it would have taken longer. Conclusion: the Nazis would probably still have lost.
    2
  1233.  @B-Man-69  People like Sargon of Akkad on youtube are classical liberals, but called alt right by people Americans would call "liberals". Liberalism is pretty good, but only when applied in moderation. Democracy is great, having civil rights is great, but give too many people too many rights and it spirals out of control. It right now is spiralling out of control a bit and then you have SJWs which aren't liberals anymore but more like full blown socialists making a strange comeback.
    2
  1234. @The real Youtuber copyright claimer Thierry, maar ik begrijp dat spellen moeilijk voor je is als je ook zijn punt niet snapt.
    2
  1235.  @gtagta8086  Except Europe has a shared culture and nowadays shared values. We all decend from indo-European ethnic groups and today still have many shared cultural elements of that history even if we are different ethnicities. And while we were at constant war with eachother it's wrong to mistake conflicting economic and political interests as there not being any kind of shared identity/ideals/culture. It's like mistaking the constant warring between Germanic tribes as there being so such thing as a Germanic people. There always has been and today it's stronger than ever. We are by no means the same, but we are a related group of countries for sure. There is such a thing as a shared European identity and it doesn't even have to do with race either. How else do you think the EU was even possible at all? You think the US and Mexico could even hope to enter into such a project? If there is any continent with a shared identity it's going to be Europe.
    2
  1236.  @gtagta8086  As I said, western culture/values are not homogenous things. There are many values that Europe has created and they are all western. Many of them contradict one another. We spawned capitalism, socialism and fascism, just to name one example of how values that Europe creates are in no way uniform and can be seriously contradictory. The Balkans and the West of Europe are not the same, but we both adhere to European values, albeit different ones in certain areas. The origin of our culture is still one and the same. We still share many similarities. America is part of European civilisation too, even if they are very different from us and for a large part have lost European culture (but by no means European civilisation). The EU is the epitome of the neoliberal tendencies of globalisation and free market. I don't know where you get the idea from that the EU is "far from" a free market. The EU is a central globalist government that for most of Europe has created a borderless market with strict freedom of competition rules against monopolies and cartels. The EU is the embodiment of neoliberalism. If you don't like the EU, you don't like what neoliberalism stands for. And that's fine by the way, many are critical of the EU, including me. But to call the EU left wing is ridiculous. It almost can't possibly get more neoliberal and globalist than the EU. They are everything the current liberal and globalist world order stands for.
    2
  1237. It isn´t annoying at all. The only rule about kissing in public is that you should not go too far (full-on tongue kissing for prolonged periods of time, etc.). A normal kiss or a bit more is just fine and in no way disturbing to those around you
    2
  1238.  @finkamain1621  People freak out because the only reason communism managed to kill more is that fascism was stopped early enough to prevent it from taking all the lives it planned to. Fascism is actually not so bad compared to communism, but national socialism had such ridiculous plans if Germany won that you can't possibly call communism worse. Think genociding most of Eastern Europe to make place for German expansion. National Socialism should always have the first spot when we're talking about destructive ideologies of the 20th century, with authoritarian communism on the second spot and regular fascism on a distant third.
    2
  1239. Not exactly.... The -isms also determine how and for what labour is used. It's entirely feasible that under a different -ism, iPhones would never have been made because labour was directed at manufacturing very different things. Especially the incentive towards innovation under capitalism directs intellectual labour towards thinking about new things like iPhones and not all -isms have that same approach to innovation. Capitalism is actually outstanding at generating wealth and innovation (sometimes at great cost, but let's forget that for a moment), so the way it directs labour seems to be fine, grosso modo. Its main issue is how it distributes that wealth.
    2
  1240. In terms of democracy, I'm fairly sure the Greeks were first. Republic I don't know, but probably the Romans
    2
  1241. +iankneumann I'm pretty sure that America has had almost the same amount of terrorist attacks as Europe in the past few years, plus all the mass shootings happening frequently...
    2
  1242. +Heather Larson And that's the thing: Europe isn't a chaotic place. We have no mass shootings/stabbings, our murder rate is five times lower than the US' (and we're talking about the entire EU, 510 million population). It's about the mix of poor government policy towards criminals and everybody being allowed to have guns. Every country has evil people, but the US has five times more murders than we do. Even 10 times more than my country. You can cherry pick London out of it (which only shortly started having some serious knife attack issues) and compare it with New York (which has been very safe the past few years), but this comparison just isn't realistic. Reality is that the EU has a drastically lower murder rate, even the poor countries within it and comparing a particularly violent city in the UK to a particularly safe American city will not change this simple fact. We do have a higher ground and it is YOU who should get your facts straight.
    2
  1243.  @MokumseBoy84  Vind ik ook. We zouden er beter aan toe zijn als we stoppen willekeurige levensregels van 2000 jaar geleden te volgen. We hebben wel sterke normen en waarden nodig in onze cultuur, maar die moeten modern zijn en met de tijd mee gaan. Da's beter voor iedereen.
    2
  1244.  @FazsterHQ  That's funny, because this response is exactly what I would expect from someone with an inferiority complex trying to overcompensate in the face of any criticism. People without an inferiority complex will take criticism and discuss it openly, instead of going into a fierce defence, refusing to even consider the criticism at all. Weak people behave this way, and they shall never improve if they continue this behaviour.
    2
  1245. +Rosie Her Choosing the US over Europe is the definition of treason. The US caused both migrant streams into Europe... Fuelling a civil war in Syria and having NATO bomb Libya. It is American aggression that caused the "terrorists" to come in and it in fact caused the terrorists to exist in the first place...
    2
  1246. Yup, it's going to mean (hundreds of) thousands of deaths, but hey, Biden is bringing "decency" back into the oval office! What a farce... and people actually fall for it too. Apparently he's going to "politely" start global wars and "politely" ship away factory jobs abroad for corporate profit.
    2
  1247. Seems like a fun guy.... haha
    2
  1248. Vreugdevuren zijn tradities die al duizenden jaren in Europa bestaan. Als dat geen overlast veroorzaakt zoals dat vreugdevuur van vorig jaar dat veel te hoog was, is er geen probleem. Het probleem met vreugdevuren in Scheveningen is dat ze elk jaar weer elkaar proberen te overtroeven om de hoogste te hebben, dat moet stoppen. Op een gegeven moment wordt dat gevaarlijk. Dus duidelijke limieten zijn nodig, maar géén algeheel verbod op een zeer oude traditie. Dit is alsof we kerst gaan verbieden omdat er ergens op een viering iets mis ging. Dit is echt totaal ongepast.
    2
  1249. "DON'T LET THE USSR WIN"
    2
  1250. No you weren't.... nor was the US navy even the strongest navy at the time.... wow
    2
  1251. LPforFun I meant the Royal Navy
    2
  1252. +John Santola Firstly, I'm not British. Secondly, the US has today the biggest navy in the world, if you don't count the EU. In the past, this was very different and the UK was known to have the biggest. Just pointing out someone's mistake. That guy literally said the US was the only one to have aircraft carriers in WW2, I mean come on...
    2
  1253. +Gary Rumain No, including the death cult of islam and including zionists
    2
  1254. +hitman hit That is my point. The deal gave us time before Iran started developing nuclear weapons again. Trump blew up the deal and essentially just gave Iran an excuse to start NOW instead of 2030. The deal may not have been perfect, but it did grant us time. If Trump was intelligent he would've first created a decent plan to stop Iran from making nukes and then either wait until the deal is over or blow up the deal and implement that plan. Now he exchanged a deal that worked temporarily for... no deal at all. It's beyond stupid. He seriously thinks that now he can make a better deal, even though the US has LESS leverage than before and all other signatories (being all other world powers) are siding with Iran to boot. There is no way in hell he gets a better deal under these conditions, if he gets a deal at all and Iran doesn't straight up walk away and starts making nukes! He traded a half-decent situation in for a much worse situation of NO deal and an unwilling Iran to make another deal. The deal kicked the weaponisation down the road and Trump just kicked it into the NOW, with no plan or policy to replace it and he is expecting an angry Iran (rightfully angry, as the US breached international law with this) to accept worse conditions.
    2
  1255. +hitman hit You broke international law by breaking the treaty, genius. You can't simply withdraw from a treaty and tell the others to go fuck themselves, unless the treaty allows for this. That the oter signatories intend to continue the treaty only makes it even more stupid than it already is for the US to leave. If the US imposes sanctions on Iran, it also hits European and Chinese companies doing business with Iran and those countries are going to be wanting to respond to that... He risks a trade war with the biggest economic entities in the world. Iran holds all the cards. They've been wronged by a breach of international law and are highly unlikely to accept a worse deal for them, plus they have the EU and China on their side, which makes sanctions on the US' end a risky decision. We all agree that Iran mustn't have nuclear weapons, but this is the worst way to make that happen. It risks Iran making weapons now instead of in 2030 and is very unlikely to lead to a better deal than we have now.
    2
  1256. BcA Wrong. Even countries like Poland have taken in refugees, but from Ukraine. And even if we haven't, why must we? I remember in the 1990's we had lots of refugees from former Yugoslavia, we took all of them in. Why must we take refugees from Africa and the Middle East when somthing is going on there while if something happens in Europe we take 100% of the refugees?
    2
  1257. Gebruik de dividendbelasting om te investeren in de Nederlandse economie. Zo krijgen aandeelhouders in wezen hun geld terug doordat bijvoorbeeld de infrastructuur waar hun bedrijven gebruik van maken efficiënter wordt. En hoe meer we investeren, hoe meer nieuwe bedrijven erbij komen en hoe meer dividendbelasting, etc. Afschaffen is gewoon dom. Een relatief kleine bonus voor aandeelhouders die het algehele plaatje niets goed doet.
    2
  1258.  @XTheFinalEpisodeX  Als dit de milieuvriendelijkste manier van vervoeren is dan is ons economische systeem tot op het bot gecorrupteerd. Wat jij niet begrijpt is dat we nu constant willen groeien, constant de handel uitbreiden, zonder naar de consequenties te kijken. Het uitgangspunt van globalisatie is maximale groei en maximale internationale handel. Het probleem is dat we niet oneindig lang kúnnen groeien. Wanneer stopt die groei? Wanneer zijn we rijk genoeg? We zitten vast in een mindset van groeien om te groeien. Kijk naar hoe wanhopig de overheid met de uitbreiding van Schiphol omgaat. Schiphol zelf kan niet meer groeien, dus gaan we andere vliegvelden uitbreiden, maar wat blijkt? Het vliegverkeer in NL is te druk om meer routes erbij te plaatsen. We zitten nu dicht op de limiet van wat NL aankan. Maar de overheid denkt hier niet eens aan, overweegt niet eens dat we ooit een keer moeten stoppen met groeien. Ze zijn zo wanhopig dat ze met een plan kwamen dat volgens de inspectie vliegtuigen gevaarlijk laag zou laten vliegen...
    2
  1259. We had good relations with Russia before Ukraine happened, so your argument is invalid. We like Russia, but our foreign policies sometimes clash and lead to cold relations for awhile... I'm sure we'll take up relations again soon
    2
  1260.  Insert Name Here  Like father like son... But hey, at least it wasn't Stalin or Mao.
    2
  1261.  @nicklammers3633  Dat kán niet, je leeft in een fantasiewereld. We kúnnen niet eindeloos groeien tot we in een of andere utopie zonder armoede leven. Dat bestaat niet. Het is niet de realiteit. Daarnaast gaat het grotendeels niet om armoede, maar om luxe. Dat of door het systeem gecreëerde armoede (mensen die geld hebben maar vanwege bedrijven met hoge winstmarges toch niet veel kunnen betalen). Het probleem met armoede is dat veel daarvan (in Europa) komt doordat moraliteit compleet geen rol speelt voor bedrijven. Het gaat ze niet om bijdragen aan de samenleving, het gaat om maximale winst. Dus wat gebeurt er? Ze gaan op een prijs zitten die hoog genoeg is om een hoge winstmarge te hebben, maar laag genoeg om veel mensen aan te trekken. Doorgaans valt wat een armer persoon kan betalen onder die prijs. Dat is niet omdat de productiekosten zo hoog zijn, niet omdat de winst met een lagere prijs niet respectabel zou zijn, maar puur en alleen om de hoogst mogelijke winst te behalen. En denk ook aan wat bedrijven bij de invoer van de euro hebben gedaan; salarissen waren wat men in gulden kreeg omgerekend naar de euro, maar prijzen werden hetzelfde getal maar dan in euro. Oftewel... toendertijd zijn de prijzen gewoon verdubbeld (gulden is ong 2 euro) zonder reden. Niet omdat dat moest, maar omdat ze daarmee weg konden komen. Dat soort gedrag is precies wat armoede überhaupt mogelijk maakt. Eerlijkheid speelt geen rol, alleen winst. En doordat eerlijkheid geen rol speelt, leven heel veel meer mensen in armoede dan hoeft. Als wij kapitalisme naast winst-geörienteerd ten opzichte van de bedrijven zelf, ook moreler kunnen maken ten opzichte van de samenleving, is het systeem meer in balans. Moet je je voorstellen hoeveel mensen nu niet in de armoede zouden leven als bij de invoering van de euro ook de prijzen waren omgerekend. Dát soort gedrag leidt tot armoede en je kan groeien wat je wil maar die armoede blijft zolang dit gedrag blijft.
    2
  1262. On the point of crime in London, even doing well is met with critical journalism from the BBC. Apparently only massively outpacing everyone else can be classified as a good job. In my book, taking down crime when being mayor of London (even if that means doing just as well as the other parts of the country) and crime subsequently rising again under mayor Khan is a good job. It shows that Boris contributed to the safety of London and apparently changing methods under a different mayor can produce less favourable results, so yes Johnson can at least partly take credit for that.
    2
  1263. There should be European, African and Asiatic exhibitions as well
    2
  1264. Dan zou je eerder nieuwe vrienden nodig hebben
    2
  1265. Oh thanks, it was "just" a bullet fired into a school. Totally fine, no harm done...
    2
  1266. Nee dat is het niet. Dit gebeurt normaal ook niet op deze manier
    2
  1267. De enige reden dat deze man is verkozen is dat men tégen Trump is. Hij was gewoon "the other guy". Dat in combinatie met de extreme polarisatie van dit moment en het feit dat Trump zijn achterban doet geloven dat de verkiezingen oneerlijk zijn verlopen maakt Biden de president met de minste legitimiteit ooit. Ongeveer de helft van Amerika haat hem en van de andere helft hebben de meeste alleen op hem gestemd als manier om Trump weg te krijgen. Dit is echt triest. Het wordt een moeilijke termijn voor 'm, denk ik.
    2
  1268. +Euboean The Yugoslavs are a special case. At the end of WW2, Churchill and Stalin made a deal that Greece and Yugoslavia not fall behind the Iron Curtain and would be under Western influence, and also that Romania would have more moderate Soviet influence. The UK fought the communists in Greece and ensured it wouldn't go red. But... the Yugoslavs went communist by themselves, so you had this strange combination of a communist country under Western influence as part of a deal. So Yugoslavia kind of became a mix of both.
    2
  1269. Economie boven alles, zo denken zij en dat is waarom er niet wordt ingegrepen
    2
  1270.  @qwertyuiopasdfghjkl2556  Dat onderscheid tussen expats en gelukszoekers maakt niet eens uit. Iedereen die erbij komt, maar eigenlijk toegang tot Nederland ontzegd had kunnen worden is een PROBLEEM. Want Nederland is vol. En het wordt met zo'n rotvaart voller dat wij niet eens snel genoeg huizen erbij kunnen bouwen! Het moet stoppen, dat wanbeleid. We moeten beginnen met nadenken over hoeveel mensen wij aankunnen (of aan_willen_) en op basis daarvan een duidelijk getal noemen van wat wij gaan doen qua immigratie. En de rest blijft buiten tenzij het écht niet anders kan. En over gelukszoekers wil ik nog iets toevoegen; ook al zouden er in Nederland zo veel huizen beschikbaar zijn dat er duizenden leeg stonden, dan nog zouden gelukszoekers linea recta weg moeten. Ze hebben hier niets te zoeken behalve geluk dat wij ze niet van plan zijn te geven. Vluchtelingen en expats zijn een ander verhaal. Zij hebben het óf nodig, óf ze komen hier om iets bij te dragen aan onze samenleving. Maar als er geen plek is is er geen plek, ook niet voor hen.
    2
  1271. Not really because that implies that authoritarian measures are needed to achieve those things. Western Europe is a much better region to take as an example, because everything they do, America in theory should also be capable of doing due to having similar systems of government and wealth.
    2
  1272.  @careyunknown3449  British fits Geralt better than the game accent in my opinion. The way Cavill does it is on point
    2
  1273.  @careyunknown3449  Why, you American or something?
    2
  1274.  Vlad the guru  Why are you dividing people based on race? I am comparing similar situations and what race the people in those examples are is irrelevant... There are plenty of similar situations in the world where land was taken by force. In terms of Turkey it even went coupled with a form of colonialism against Europeans. If South Africa needs to be given back to blacks without compensation, than half of Turkey is Greek, just about all of Poland should be German, etc. The world just doesn't work like that. I agree that compensation would be good to offset the racist practices of the past and I think that that compensation can come in the form of giving land to black people, but if you take land from current land owners they should get compensation for land lost.
    2
  1275.  @jonas5372  That is really inaccurate. You act as if Europeans are the only ones to invade South Africa, and as if all of the land Europeans settled was already inhabited. The Bantu people (from West Africa) migrated south, invaded and conquered the native South Africans. Should every West African migrant get kicked out of South Africa? Certain parts of the land Europeans settled was previously uninhabited, why should they lose that land? In other parts, Europeans and Bantu people migrated into an uninhabited area at the same time and had wars over those areas. Why does one side have more right to that land than the other? They were both foreign to South Africa and the land belonged to nobody yet
    2
  1276.  Roger Gerritsen  Ik denk dat Athene meer bekend is dan Minerva, de meesten zullen haar wel kennen denk ik
    2
  1277. Knowing when to back out of a mistake is not weak. What you should be afraid of is that Trump, unlike Bush, will not back down even after 200k jobs are lost. Because he's too weak to admit he makes mistakes. Everything is "tremendous" and "great". Trump makes no mistakes, therefore he never backs down. I'd be worried about it.
    2
  1278. +lazzaboyce That the EU is undemocratic and comprised of "EU bureaucrats telling us what to do" while in reality the member states themselves are by far the most important entities in the EU and hold virtually all the power. That the EU only costs money, which could have been spent otherwise on a national level. In truth, the EU requires a fee to uphold it, but you also gain a lot of extra revenue by being part of the single market and its benefits. So in the end you lose money anyway by leaving. Remain lied by talking about an "economic disaster" if the UK would leave. In reality you'd only stand to lose money and future growth, but the UK could certainly manage on its own. In short, the Brexit camp attempted to make voters hate the EU and see it as the enemy and the Remain camp attempted to fear monger and make the UK feel as if it couldn't go on without the EU. Neither were telling the truth. I respect your vote to leave, but I wish it had at least been a well-informed vote. The world is not as black and white as the campaign painted it, far from it...
    2
  1279. The UK would probably win the EU the war. Multiple aircraft carriers, a large air fleet... Yeah that'd tip the balance significantly. Fun fact: if you add the UK the combined EU navy actually has more ships than the entire US navy. Realistically they'd join the EU in this scenario anyway.
    2
  1280.  GodBAINS Yt . 6.1M views  Nice. Also take into account that Britain was under constant pressure, being bombed as well (incl. factories). The US could in relative peace build up its war production. That was a major advantage that helped the US build up its military and support its allies. Also interesting is that contrary to popular thought, the US military at the start of WW2 was tiny (like, only slightly bigger than minor European countries like the Netherlands at about 300k men strong and very poorly equipped with mostly WW1 tech), which makes it very impressive how they managed to build a massive military and join the war in full a few years in. In war, production capacity is extremely important, probably more so than having a large standing army at the ready in peace time.
    2
  1281. Klopt, helemaal gestoord die stoepranden. Ook scharen verbieden, ik heb weleens gezien dat iemand met eentje rende en dat kan echt niet
    2
  1282.  @denice.a3620  In the year 98 Roman historian Tacitus described how Germanic people painted themselves black as part of a tradition that is extremely similar to Sinterklaas of today. And all Germanic countries today have their own version of it. In the Netherlands we have Sinterklaas and black pete. In France it is Saint Nicholas and Père Fouettard. In Germany it is Saint Nicholas and Krampus. You are calling a 2000+ year old tradition racist. The origins of black pete is so old that our ancestors had never even seen an African in their entire life. Bit difficult to be racist back then. The origins is the yule festival of the Wild Hunt, in which Odin soars the skies followed by an army of black figures. Black pete is the modern and christianised version of that ancient tradition and you see similar cultural festivals all over Europe in which the black figure is slightly different. Odin was changed to Saint Nicholas and the black figure is supposed to be a boogeyman following him. But recently (1960s) he was changed from boogeyman to friend because this was better for children.
    2
  1283. Wat leuk, we gaan mensen terughalen om hier te vervolgen voor lidmaatschap van een terreur organisatie (max zo'n 3 jaar) terwijl we totaal geen idee hebben wat ze daar allemaal hebben gedaan (misschien wel meervoudige moord) omdat we daar natuurlijk niet effectief kunnen onderzoeken los van enkele idioten die allerlei gruwelijkheden op sociale media hebben geplaatst en zelf het bewijs hebben aangeleverd voor hun deelnemen aan de strijd. Wat een puik plan, jongens... Dat zal de lokale bevolking ook fantastisch vinden. In plaats van hun aanvallers daar te kunnen berechten voor de ogen van de slachtoffers die daar zo'n behoefte aan hebben, waarschijnlijk met een hoge straf tot gevolg, worden IS'ers daar weggehaald en hier ongelooflijk soft berecht. Dat heet nu rechtvaardigheid.... Om nog maar niet te spreken over het feit dat je mensen die het westen haten en geloven dat je westerlingen het beste maar kan executeren omdat ze ongelovig zijn terughaalt naar.... het westen. Wat kan er toch misgaan, hè? Werkelijk ongelooflijk dat dit überhaupt discutabel is; ze moeten daar berecht worden. Dat is niet alleen pragmatisch voor ons vanuit het oogpunt van veiligheid, maar ook beter voor de rechtvaardigheid van hun uiteindelijke bestraffing en hoe dit door de slachtoffers wordt ervaren. Het is ook leuk hoe de standaardpraktijk is om criminelen in het land waar ze de straf hebben begaan te veroordelen (evt. alleen de straf in NL uitzitten, niet meer dan dat), maar bij terroristen opeens iedereen de behoefte op voelt rijzen om met die praktijk te breken. Ik zal nooit begrijpen waarom een Nederlandse moordenaar in de VS gewoon daar berecht wordt en niemand deze gevestigde praktijk ter sprake stelt, maar we een terrorist dan opeens wél hierheen zouden willen halen ter berechting. Dit klopt van geen kanten.
    2
  1284. American independence, 14 July 1815. Napoleon rode atop a unicorn accross the atlantic to help the US kick out Britain
    2
  1285. Biden is such an idiot. That's one of the last things you should say if Trump is saying it's a fraud. People will only see this as a confirmation that there is fraud. He's basically declaring victory already and saying some vague "process" is working. Yeah, very smart when you want people to calm down amidst claims the Dems are stealing the election....
    2
  1286. Yes, because we're obviously a bunch of marxists here in Europe... Definitely not your most important capitalist allies...
    2
  1287.  @Dan-zc7ut  Shame they can only ship 10% of what they produce over here while the EU would have access to all they can produce. It's pointless.
    2
  1288. +Badger0fDeath The EU combined economy is stronger than ever and outgrowing the US at the moment. The EU is the one that stopped the middle eastern migrant crisis by using its leverage as an economic and political power to strike a deal with Turkey that immediately dried out the migrant stream. The EU is the one that is currently using this same power to diminish the migrant flow from Africa and prevent any future crises. And the EU is richer than the US, but when the UK leaves it will be second. The combined EU military is almost the size of the freaking US military so I wouldn't call it pathetic. Truth is: if we are divided we can't arm ourselves against the future population growth in Africa and the migrants that might come. We don't have enough leverage over African countries on our own to make them fight population growth and migration. Together we do. If we are divided we are economically no more than semi-important and have no leverage in trade deals. Together, we can tell big companies like Apple or Google what to do. And also remember that when we're divided, war between European states is possible again. I know that nothing will happen, but I think it's funny that a few weeks after Brexit the UK defence minister already spoke of war with Spain if they continued their pursuit of Gibraltar. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/britain-and-eu-worse-off-without-brexit-deal-says-michael-fallon And again: if you don't like the current EU, change it into something you DO like. All we have to do is work together and how we do it doesn't really matter that much
    2
  1289. +Lynx That's where you're wrong. If you knew anything about the EU, you'd know that the "EU bureaucrats" have nothing to say about what happens with the EU. The EU lives and dies by its member states . What OUR governments say, happens. What OUR governments say, the EU bureaucrats do. The European Council dictates the political coarse of the EU. The European Council of Ministers votes on whether to pass a law or not (as well as the Parliament, which is directly elected but less important than the Council). And as the name suggests, the European Council of Ministers is literally the ministers of all our governments sittings together. And the amount of times countries lose a vote is also limited. Generally, countries try to come to a joint decision and will try to prevent doing things not everyone likes. For example, this is one of the fact-checking statements from brexit (as usual, both sides lied....): https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/ The UK agreed with 95% of the EU laws that passed and only voted against 2% . Countries generally all agree with a law, except for a few controversial ones. And the voting system is set up in such a way that you need the majority of the total EU population to vote for it AND the majority of member states. I would personally prefer to live in a superpower region that is also free and democratic. And again, if the EU isn't democratic for you, change it. The power lies with the member states (European Council) to decide the political coarse of the EU. Hell, the member states can dissolve the current treaty and make a completely new one! That's what we did when we changed the European Economic Community into the European Union! We can make the EU more loose, we can make it go further, we can change it into something else entirely even. We can work together in a myriad of ways and all I want is that we work together to defend our interests. If you are against the current EU, please advocate to change it and not to destroy it all
    2
  1290. +Lynx Schulz is a buffoon for calling for a "united states of europe". Nobody wants that and everyone has made that clear to him, including Merkel. And I've said and proven before, EU laws are almost never pushed through and all countries are respected. Even the UK, known for its opposition against almost every Franco-German plan for the EU, has had its way in 98% of the cases, only being opposed to 2% of all laws that were passed. How do you vote against Merkel? You do what you've done for the past few years... You HAVE voted against Merkel, multiple times. ' I don't know where you get the idea that criticising the EU gets you a racist label, but you're wrong. Everybody criticises the EU. The EU needs criticism, since it is not yet mature. What it doesn't need is people who don't want an EU in any form. People with legitimate criticism on the EU and pleas for change aren't branded anything. People who want to destroy the EU usually are branded as morons, though, I agree with you on that. But constructive criticism is mostly received respectfully. You're delusional if you compare the EU to the Soviet union...
    2
  1291. +Lynx Yes you did. It's good that you mention the EU army, because countries have voted on that on the 15th of november. 5 countries voted against, 23 countries voted for and guess what? Those 5 countries simply won't be part of the EU army and their vote will be respected. Yes you can vote against the big countries whenever you don't agree with them. Same with the Euro, those who didn't want it, don't have it. Big things like this are never pushed down anyone's throats. As for your vote being drowned by people with other cultures, it isn't. The entire point of the EU is that wherever we are different, our own governments remain sovereign. On whichever subjects we have common goals, we work together. The EU doesn't have any say over small issues that only exist in one country. The EU works on a bigger scale than that. What you said can be applied to just about any international treaty out there. Should we stop having contact with other countries at all? Before the EU, countries in Europe would do very similar things through treaties. However, it is true that with the EU we of course see much more cooperation. As for the Soviet Union, it was a union of de facto equal states but Russia of course had a lot more influence and power than the rest. The EU is different: in terms of voting, the majority of the EU population needs to be represented, in other procedures even 2/3. Even if France and Germany want something, they can't get it done without building support with the grand majority of other countries. Another clear and very important difference is that the Soviet Union had a one-party system. One Communist party ruled every country in it and who controlled the Communist party? In the EU, everyone's national politics is left alone. Everyone has their own interests and can defend their own interests without ending up in a gulag for opposing the Communist party. On the surface (equal countries in a union) it may seem the same, but when you look further it's entirely different. The reality in the EU is governments sitting together and working out an agreement (and other countries' opinions are always respected, nothing is pushed through without support). The reality in the USSR was one Communist party controlling everything and everyone, and guess who was the leader of that party? Stalin, Krushchev, etc. The Russian leaders... Very, very, very different.
    2
  1292. 32 seconds, 364 comments.... all of my hopes of making a snarky "I'm first" comment are crushed
    2
  1293. Not to mention that attacking Britain would be attacking our own trading partner. In or out, we trade a lot so it'd only hurt ourselves if we'd attack. And of course it's extremely costly and difficult to occupy the UK, if it's even possible at all.
    2
  1294. Ja dat lijkt me goed voor ons én goed voor hun thuisland.
    2
  1295.  Julius Caesar  They'd be crushed if it weren't for other European empires frustrating the British war effort.
    2
  1296.  mat bauer  You think stating that Scandinavian cultures EXIST is right wing now? This commercial is unacceptable to anybody that is not a woke extremist. Even normal woke people would probably disavow the idea that nothing is Scandinavian and no such thing as a Scandinavian identity or culture exists while foreign cultures do exist. It's a blatant falsehood, an insulting falsehood.
    2
  1297. Past bij het onderwerp
    2
  1298. Cynical Lawman  An accusation is an eye witness account. An eye witness account is a form of evidence, BUT can only lead to a proper conclusion with supporting evidence confirming it. So a pure eye witness account (accusation) without supporting evidence is a form of evidence, just a very very inconclusive and weak form of evidence.
    2
  1299. Tourniquet Now  You don't know whether she is lying. You are the only fake news here. It's his word against hers and without supporting evidence for either stories it is just down to who you choose to believe. And who you choose to believe is completely irrelevant to the actual truth. The woman's account is evidence , Kavanaugh's account is evidence , but neither one can be confirmed or denied at this moment in time.
    2
  1300. +Geth Creator Then all of that is wrong. Separating a child from their parents should happen only in one situation: the parents are unfit to take care of the child. A lot of offences may lead to the conclusion that the parents are unfit to care for a child, but crossing the border illegally surely is not one of them. Whether American families or foreign, it is unjust.
    2
  1301. +Geth Creator Aha, I see. Returning children to their biological parents after they did their punishment is "letting them off"? Don't kid yourself...
    2
  1302. Miljonair in welke zin? Dat hun boerderij een miljoen waard is? Hun koeien? Ik ben het met je eens als je het hebt over die boeren megabedrijven, maar de gemiddelde boer is alleen op papier "miljonair". En het feit dat er meer megabedrijven zijn dan voorheen komt doordat boeren voorheen werden geforceerd uit te breiden, wat heel veel familiebedrijven niet hebben gehaald. Het liefst zie ik ook alleen kleine familiebedrijven, maar in de huidige economie werken megastallen helaas beter. De familiebedrijven die wel succesvol hebben uitgebreid krijgen nu juist te horen dat ze weer moeten inkrimpen. En weer zullen veel bedrijven het onderspit delven, waarschijnlijk vooral de familiebedrijven. Megabedrijven kunnen me gestolen worden, maar ik geef wel echt om die familiebedrijven.
    2
  1303.  Big Smoke  All of the EU would, they have the same "attack on one is attack on all" articles as NATO does. So RIP Russia if they try this
    2
  1304. +Lone Wolf I wholeheartedly agree. America is one of the worst "allies" we ever had. In EC president Tusk's words: "who needs enemies with friends like this?". What kind of ally fuels a civil war in a country bordering its best and largest ally (EU) as well as another NATO ally (Turkey)? The US screws us over even over small issues like removing a dictator from Syria. Surprise surprise, millions of refugees flooded us. The US doesn't give a damn about its allies, it cares only for the petrodollar. 30 october 2000: Iraq announces it will sell oil for euros instead of dollars 2001: "WMDs", turned out to be fake Some time before 2011: Libya plans to sell oil for new gold dinar currency instead of dollars 2011: "Gaddafi wants to commit genocide in Libya", turned out to be exaggerated/fake. May 2018: Iran sells oil for euros instead of dollars 2 days ago: US prepares sanctions to drive Iranian oil sales to zero (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/22/us-ready-to-drive-iranian-oil-exports-to-zero-says-us-national-security-adviser) I guess the Iranian military is a bit too powerful for an invasion, but perhaps in time... The future lies in Eurasia if the EU ramps up trade with China and Russia and decreases its dependency on the US economy. But the US will do everything it can to prevent a Eurasian partnership because if the EU drops the petrodollar then that is its definitive death.
    2
  1305.  @respect_expert5511  No. It is the land of whomever is part of the land's culture, white or not. We expect immigrants to adopt our culture and become a full part of our society. There are tensions only with those that refuse to do that (mainly muslims).
    2
  1306.  @revirdkcalb  Goed punt, dat verklaart ook waarom Badr niet tijdens intensieve training, maar tijdens de wedstrijd opeens wel een blessure krijgt; tijdens training moet hij niet tegelijkertijd klappen incasseren. En die klappen zijn bijzonder hard, natuurlijk.
    2
  1307. Dat verliezen ze geheid. De meerderheid van de bevolking is pro-Europese samenwerking maar ook zeer Eurosceptisch omdat het huidige systeem gewoon ruk is. De EU heeft die zorgen decennia lang genegeerd en keihard doorgepakt met hun ondemocratische plannen. Totdat ze de burger er actief bij betrekken en op een democratische manier bekijken hoe de Europese samenwerking eruit moet zien, zal de bevolking tegen de EU zijn.
    2
  1308. +Meb III Allowing him to visit is not the same as liking him. I heavily dislike Trump (sometimes his policies are good tho) and I think it would be rather dramatic to bar him from visiting. And the UK has even more reason not to get on Trump's bad side because of Brexit
    2
  1309. Door beiden.
    2
  1310. @Bhigr Bond Evidence is readily available in books, go read them. It's not my job to educate you. Holocaust denial is ONLY allowed when you read the proper evidence and provide a well-researched counter argument to it, with proper sources underlying it. Nothing else is permitted. ONLY scientific criticism. So do that, or go away.
    2
  1311. Wat een idioot, die Jetten. Een discussie over de balans binnen de trias politica en hoe ver de rechtspraak in de politiek treden is de normaalste zaak van de wereld binnen de rechtsgeleerdheid. Hij hoeft het niet eens te zijn met Baudet, maar wat hij hier doet is niet discussiëren over de rol van de rechtspraak binnen de trias politica, maar hij zet een stropop op ("ja Baudet wil de rechterlijke macht zoals in Turkije helemaal controleren") en claimt dat iedere vorm van kritiek de onafhankelijkheid van de rechtspraak aantast. Zo ondergraaft Jetten de hele discussie, hij doet alsof de discussie (die nogmaals binnen de academia volkomen normaal is en bijvoorbeeld losbarste na de Urgenda-uitspraak) an sich al niet zou mogen. Dat vind ik een slinks and nogal schadelijke strategie waarmee de discussie wordt gesmoord.
    2
  1312.  @miracleminty  And the negative things would be..... ? That he kind of reminds you of a racist blackface practice in the US even though it has nothing to do with it? That applying black paint to your face is already somehow an act of racism? The fun part is that the origins of black pete are so old that it can't possibly be racist. It's just in your mind. In the year 98 Roman historian Tacitus described how Germanic people painted themselves black as part of a tradition that is extremely similar to Sinterklaas of today. And all Germanic countries today have their own version of it. In the Netherlands we have Sinterklaas and black pete. In France it is Saint Nicholas and Père Fouettard. In Germany it is Saint Nicholas and Krampus. You are calling a 2000+ year old tradition racist. The origins of black pete is so old that our ancestors had never even seen an African in their entire life. Bit difficult to be racist back then. The origins is the yule festival of the Wild Hunt, in which Odin soars the skies followed by an army of black figures. Black pete is the modern and christianised version of that ancient tradition and you see similar cultural festivals all over Europe in which the black figure is slightly different.
    2
  1313. The Netherlands also sank a US supercarrier in the late 90's. Theoretically, the US can send all 10 of its carriers over and the Netherlands itself, as tiny as it is, has a chance to sink the entire US Navy air force with its silent submarines. Don't underestimate anyone
    2
  1314. Het uitgangspunt moet zijn dat iedereen gelijke kansen heeft om bepaalde posities te bereiken. De uitkomsten zijn irrelevant. Als de meeste vrouwen deeltijd willen werken moeten ze dat vooral doen. Als de meeste vrouwen geen zin hebben in zeer bezwarende topfuncties (meeste mannen trouwens ook niet) dan is dat hun keuze. Voor zover de verschillen komen door een cultuur waardoor vooral mannen worden aangenomen moet dat worden doorbroken om vrouwen gelijke kansen te bieden, maar als we het hebben over eigen keuzes dan zou dat geen probleem moeten zijn. Iedereen mag zijn/haar leven inrichten zoals ze dat willen en als deeltijd werken daar onderdeel van is, mooi dat je daar blij mee bent. We doen steeds meer alsof we allemaal MOETEN werken en het hoogst haalbare moeten halen, maar wat er echt toe doet is vrijheid zelf al die keuzes te maken. Het is onzin om voor arbitraire 50/50 cijfers te gaan alsof mensen nummers zijn, terwijl in de realiteit de persoonlijke voorkeuren van ieder persoon meespeelt bij de vraag hoeveel vrouwen of mannen bijvoorbeeld voor bepaalde studies kiezen. Laat iedereen zijn wie ze willen zijn ipv vrouwen te vertellen dat ze iets moeten doen wat ze misschien wel helemaal niet willen. Zo ongeveer 80% van de verplegers zijn vrouw. Als mannen die baan niet leuk vinden en vrouwen juist wel, wat is dan het probleem? "Verkeerde" keuze/voorkeuren? Het tegenovergestelde geldt voor bepaalde technische banen. Als mannen en vrouwen doen wat ze willen, dan zul je verschillen zien omdat wij grosso modo ook verschillende interesses hebben. Niet elke man zal het niet leuk vinden om verpleger te zijn, niet elke vrouw zal techniek saai vinden, maar binnen hun gender zullen ze wel de minderheid zijn. En dat is geen probleem want iedereen moet lekker doen waar hij/zij zin in heeft om een zo gelukkig mogelijk leven te leiden. Verschillen? Jammer dan. Dat is een feit dat iedereen zal moeten accepteren ipv die verschillen kunstmatig te willen "oplossen".
    2
  1315. Which is pretty funny since the EU has a higher GDP than the US
    2
  1316. +God of War Oh no... it's retarded
    2
  1317. I didn't expect that to be a quote from 1952, wow. This has been going on like this for a very long time...
    2
  1318. What if I told you locusts are not only edible, but also nutricious ánd delicious? Catch as many as you can
    2
  1319. What the hell... that's so unbelievably bad I'd have gone to court to get my money back. The treatment was bad as is, but charging 2000 dollars is just insane.
    2
  1320.  @thelovertunisia  Regarding your first point, yes that is (still) the Achilles heel of western Europe; little natural resources of our own. One of the major reasons the Germans lost WW2 despite controlling a vast portion of the continent; ran out of oil. But that is only a problem while blockaded. Something the UK did to great effect in WW2. Russia is not capable of enacting a blockade of the EU today and it is likely a blockade would happen the other way around actually. EU supply of natural resources is not in danger as long as there is no naval blockade. About your second point; yes, which is why the EU can't invade Russia. Not even with the US if you ask me. It would be an extremely costly war with no winners. Makes no sense to start it. But when strictly speaking of protecting the Baltics, I think that lies well within the capability of the EU, assuming there is a quick enough coordinated response.
    2
  1321. Hij interviewt iemand in New York die dit soort dingen zegt. Waarom doen mensen altijd alsof de mening van de persoon die geïnterviewd wordt ook is wat een verslaggever zelf verkondigt? Het enige wat deze video laat zien is dat mensen in New York nogal anti-Trump zijn (en dat was al algemeen bekend), niet dat RTL zelf ook vindt dat Trump maar niks is. Leer dat maar eens van elkaar te onderscheiden voordat je dingen roept
    2
  1322.  @OswaIdo  Het is bijna 50/50 op dit moment, dus nee ook Biden heeft geen goed argument om te zeggen dat hij wint. Trump kan net zo realistisch zeggen dat hij pennsylvania, georgia, north carolina en bijvoorbeeld Nevada wint. In drie van die staten staat hij voor en in eentje is het praktisch 50/50 op dit moment. Als hij die wint, heeft hij al 270. Het is compleet voorbarig voor Biden om te suggereren dat hij wint.
    2
  1323. Calling people a hindrance to the progress of humanity is very dangerous. Sounds too much like communists and fascists calling their victims a hindrance to the progress of their societies.
    2
  1324. Interesting thought, probably no but I'd like to see that analysis
    2
  1325.  @bigsmoke8816  That's true, but they were extremely rare (IIRC you can literally count them on one hand, but I may be wrong on that), which is why having 1/4th of the German soldiers in a game be black is still problematic. If we were given the choice to make them black that would be different, but it is forced and it's a significant amount of the soldiers you see.
    2
  1326.  Just a human Being  Yeah that is right, he would only be correct about countries like Saudi Arabia that take next to nothing but are very rich.
    2
  1327.  @spaketticarbonada9651  Vrijheid is dat de samenleving zèlf bepaalt of zij zwarte piet wil behouden. Vrijheid is niet dat vanuit een relatief kleine, machtige groep (organisatoren van sinterklaasintochten, TV-zenders en nu dus ook bibliotheken) wordt bepaald welke richting de samenleving op moet gaan. En dat is wel wat hiermee gebeurt. Denk maar eens na, ze zeggen steeds "past bij de huidige tijdsgeest" maar dat zeggen ze dus terwijl 70+% van de bevolking dit NIET vindt. Inmiddels is dat dus gezakt naar 55%. Waarom? JUIST omdat de media, etc. een bepaalde mening als de enige "juiste" profileren. Zij volgen niet het publiek, zij sturen het publiek met dit soort acties. Dus niet de huidige tijdsgeest (de meerderheid is hier niet eens voor!), maar de toekomstige tijdsgeest die zij graag willen en via dit soort acties proberen te bewerkstelligen. Ik vind zelf ook dat Zwarte Piet beter kan veranderen (maar ik zou wel sowieso het zwarte gezicht behouden. Alleen het kroeshaar en de rode lippen kunnen wat mij betreft zeker weg, samen met andere karikatuur-achtige dingen als oorbellen), maar ik ben nog steeds tegen dit soort beïnvloeding van de samenleving. Dit is gewoon fout. Al helemaal als je op een leugenachtige manier claimt dat je alleen maar de "huidige tijdsgeest" volgt terwijl ze donders goed weten dat de meerderheid hier geen voorstander van is.
    2
  1328.  @wendigo017  You're kidding me right.... pagans "brutally murdered" eachother only in the way nations would wage war on eachother in the exact same way later on. Meanwhile Christians waged religious wars in which protestants absolutely slaughtered catholics for being catholics and vice versa. This was not a thing in pre-christian Europe. It became worse with the entering of christianity, and with this I'm not even talking about the crusades in Europe (no not the middle eastern ones, the crusades into Europe to forcefully convert pagan Europeans) and how christians came to power in Europe to begin with (it's not a very nice story). You have an extremely screwed up view of the Renaissance if you think that was in any way christian, because the Renaissance was all about reviving Classical (i.e. pre-christian) European values, art, philosophy, architecture, you name it. This was the point when the influence of christianity started to decline and European culture was revived. You know... hence Renaissance/Rebirth.... Chrisian influence was at its absolute peak right after they broke apart Classical Europe and before the Renaissance, in what some call the "dark ages" because in these times we drastically fell behind and didn't start to flourish again until the Renaissance. Christianity is nowadays a very nice religion, but the truth is that back in the day when it entered Europe it destroyed and replaced a system that was far superior to it. Europe had a better position in the world with the pagan Greeks and Romans than it did in the early Middle Ages, when even Islamic countries were more advanced than we were. This was only corrected by reviving elements of that destroyed Classical era and we became even better with the Enlightenment, by placing rationality above everything. Christianity became part of our identity, but this idea of christianity literally "saving" us from the "dark pagan times" and "elevating us/teaching us many things" could only be thought up by christians with a particularly romantic view of history.
    2
  1329. +Sizano Green Too bad that it isn't a myth. Here in the Netherlands, one of the better countries when it comes to integration (unlike for example Sweden, we have laid a lot of focus on integration), it has failed too. According to very recent government research, Muslims in our country have become increasingly religious since their arrival. It was thought that as people would live in a secular country they themselves would become less and less religious and more Dutch as time passed. Instead, mainly because of tensions between different parts of society, they looked to distinguish themselves more from Dutchmen and therefore became more and more religious as a means of separating themselves. 94% of the Moroccans here define themselves as Muslim and 86% of Turks do. About 80% is integrated, meaning that they can speak Dutch at least somewhat well and other baseline things (so the level of integration we achieved is rather good, I think). Another recent government study showed that Muslims felt the need to behave differently at work. They are "themselves" at home, but when at work or otherwise come in contact with Dutch people they feel the need to conform to Dutch norms (meaning they have integrated fully, to the point of seamlessly working together with Dutch people), but they feel like they have to juggle between cultures al the time and that they can't be themselves at work or around Dutchmen. They have trouble with this, according to the study. They aren't their real selves around Dutch people because their real selves would not be accepted, or accepted less (that's how they feel anyway, but I think they're correct). These were the results of that study. Multiculturalism has failed. At least with Muslims, who tend to identify themselves by their religion above all. As they come here they're expected to adjust. As they are criticised by society (be it justly or unjustly, both occur), they look for their identity more intensively and find Islam. They become more religious the more they are criticised. And when fully integrated, they still lead dual lives between their homes and the Dutch society. They will never be fully like us if they stick to their religion and culture, which is exactly what they do. It's not a pleasant life for them either, as they can't be themselves around us. They conform to our norms when around us, but can be themselves only at home or with family. This is why they tend to group together in cities; they look for people they can follow their own culture with. And who can blame them? Would we Europeans be able to fully integrate in a culture that is drastically different from ours? Would we not want to live with other Europeans too and live by our own norms when we can? We would do the exact same thing in their shoes. Multi-culturalism does not work. It tries to force people to shun their own culture. It's not good for them and it's not good for us. Multiculturalism works only with cultures that are somewhat alike, compatible if you will.
    2
  1330. Aux armes citoyens, marchons... marchons... en pak die terroristen
    2
  1331.  @JazINaBoX  As to Teen Titans. It's about the change and the possible reason for the change, not realism per se. They had a reason to change things and it is pushing politics into entertainment, which anyone should stand up against.
    2
  1332. Can't wait for women's football in Europe properly gaining traction so the US team can get their self-righteous arses kicked
    2
  1333.  @yugioh1772  I think Trump means that he made huge changes to American politics that far outweigh what Biden has done in his time. He partially has a point there because going from your typical neoliberal globalist policy to a nationalist America first policy is huge and probably the biggest political earthquake we've seen in modern politics. He completely changes US policy, while previous presidents were basically just working within the existing neoliberal system. Trump changed America deeply. Question is whether you agree with that change or not, but you can't deny that this election probably decides the fate of America more than any modern one because for the first time you can't just choose between a neoliberal and a slightly more left-leaning neoliberal, but between actual clashing ideologies that decide the future of the US. So yes, Trump has a point, he caused America to change very deeply and caused a massive ideological shift. This election decides whether we continue to enact that shift or restore the pre-Trump neoliberal order. And that is a big decision.
    2
  1334. +Ruslan Volkonsky The difference is that they won't take a picture with the Polish or Dutch PM and say "a t-shirt for MY prime minister", yet that is what Özil did with Erdogan. Why would he see a foreign leader as HIS leader if he's German? Ethnicity has little to do with it, it is about proper integration. If they see themselves as German and act German, they are German enough for me
    2
  1335. That was the reconquering of their own land, not the conquering of another land.
    2
  1336. Zowel mannen als vrouwen mogen geen gezichtsbedekkende kleding dragen, dus klaar
    2
  1337. Ipv miljarden naar klimaatbeleid, miljarden naar verduurzamend onderzoek. Zou best kunnen werken. Als er genoeg geld voor is kunnen we heel veel bereiken en de bizarre dingen die wij tijdens wapenwedlopen/oorlogen hebben gemaakt bewijzen het.
    2
  1338. Asking the relevant questions, finally!
    2
  1339. Aart Bruneel Switzerland would also be out. They're part of the EU single market, which means they have to adhere to EU economic rules. I don't think they can continue to trade with Russia if the EU cuts the single market off from trading with them.
    2
  1340. I actually appoint corona financial support cases in a municipality in the Netherlands and it's insane to hear that simple things like these aren't just standard in the US. I've seen so many cases in which small business owners (I only do small business owners, there are other programmes for workers and big businesses) would have gone under hard without the money I appointed to them. The idea of nothing being available is just insane. We have hundreds of application in just a small subsection of a tiny country like the Netherlands. In the US there must be so many that struggle due to corona and just need a bit of money from the government to get by. I can give a family up to 1600 a month, plus a 11k a month loan to their business. In the US that's apparently zero? Unreal.
    2
  1341. +Jeroen van Leussen Dit gaat niet om wapeneigendom, dit gaat om het simpelweg vrijuit laten gaan van iemand die een ander heeft doodgeschoten zonder überhaupt te checken of het gerechtvaardigd was. De schutter uit deze video was in eerste instantie niet eens aangehouden. Dat is gewoon bizar. Zelfs in Nederland is het legaal om jezelf te verdedigen met een vuurwapen (zelfs als dat vuurwapen illegaal is), maar het grote verschil is dat er hier wordt gekeken onder welke omstandigheden het is gebruikt en als blijkt dat je onnodig iemand hebt doodgeschoten krijg je alsnog doodslag opgelegd.
    2
  1342. KellySmith555 I'm specifically talking about the type of christian that acts elitist, like he's better than everybody else. The kind of christian that puts people down by arrogantly saying they're going to hell, perhaps even with a smirk on their face. And yes, thinking you're better than someone and putting them down by saying they'll go to hell is hateful. It's entirely not christian to be like this, but you have them nonetheless. You have both hateful and insulting atheists as well as christians. But both are an extreme within their groups, as the grand majority of both groups are respectful of one another. Religion is not a free pass to degrade or insult people and a christian saying someone is going to hell is the same as an atheist insulting christianity. Islam is even worse
    2
  1343. Ik wed 50 euro dat wij binnen zo'n 2 jaar weer een oorlog hebben zoals Syrië of Libië, aangewakkerd door Amerika.
    2
  1344. Maybe they purposefully stalled the manufacturing so that nations would receive them almost a decade later and thus wouldn't be prepared to start development for a replacement until much later in order to make sure the F-35 wasn't a waste of money. All part of the strategy to keep the EU industry down and dependent on US technology. At least the UK, Sweden and Italy won't fall for it as they're jointly working on the Tempest 6th gen.
    2
  1345. To see racism in as many things she does, you'd have to constantly view the world in a racially divided manner, measure how those groups are interacting and whether there is perfect equity. That's a deeply racist way of viewing the world.
    2
  1346. @Manannan anam Multiculturalism = one big melting pot monoculture with no specific culture popping out.
    2
  1347. It's the two-party system. There is no pluriformity in US politics and never will be unless the system is fundamentally changed. You need millions upon millions of dollars to even launch a proper campaign (in Hillary's case even a billion) and you simply can't get that kind of money without lobbying at big companies. That in itself is already a problem because this way companies get an unacceptable amount of influence on politicians, but that's another topic. What the companies want is a reliable candidate that will do what they want them to and for them, investing massive amounts of money into a brand new party that they don't even know will get into parliament in the first place is not an option. Why would they risk that? So any new party in the US is going to be broke and with no chance to match the elaborate campaigns of the established parties. The Americans themselves are to blame as well. They support the established party system. A lot of people just vote democrat/republican standardly without even considering the alternatives. The most hardcore ones even support candidates that have serious scandals to their name, just because they are democrat/republican and they don't even care what person represents the party. A political landslide of any kind in the US is impossible, they are destined to get the same established parties at the helm again and again. They can push forward the worst candidates and they'll still get massive amounts of votes.
    2
  1348.  @Melnek1  By then our homeland was already taken over by the Germans. The colonies were poorly protected as a consequence. They essentially had to make do with their standard peacetime defence instead of a built-up wartime force. And yeah the Japanese weren't exactly friendly in their treatment. My aunt was placed in a concentration camps along with all Dutch settlers there. And what people tend to forget about Indonesia as a whole is that 4 million people died under Japanese management.
    2
  1349. +TON 618 It was a joke, smartarse. That'd be worse fake news than CNN, and nobody is worse than CNN
    2
  1350.  @zgsfreaky9102  Ik ben helemaal niet bekrompen. Ik sta open voor nieuwe ideeën, zelfs de islam. Ik begrijp gewoon niet hoe iemand kan bekeren tot de islam. Als je het kan uitleggen, fijn.
    2
  1351. +Original G Het gaat erom dat de OORSPRONKELIJKE CULTUUR er nog is en samenleeft met buitenlandse culturen zonder problemen. Dus de oorspronkelijke en dominante cultuur van een land moet kunnen samen leven met andere culturen zonder dat die oorspronkelijke cultuur verdwijnt of sterk vervaagt. Daar zijn geen voorbeelden van. Nederland is geen immigratieland; het is een land met een oorspronkelijke cultuur en een oorspronkelijke bevolking. Dat is Aruba niet. Als je een Nederlander, een Pool en een Engelsman op een eiland dropt zullen ze waarschijnlijk gewoon samen kunnen leven, maar als je een dusdanig groot aantal Polen naar Engeland verscheept tot op het punt dat het een effect gaat hebben is het toch echt wat anders (zie Brexit en de rol die Europese migranten daarin speelden). Het gaat niet alleen om samen kunnen leven, het gaat om het beschermen van de oorspronkelijke cultuur. Als er geen oorspronkelijke cultuur (meer) is dan boeit het niks want dan is er ook niks te beschermen, dan is gewoon iedereen zichzelf. Maar als buitenlanders naar een land komen met een oorspronkelijke bevolking en cultuur dan gaat het niet alleen om samenleven, maar ook om het behoud van de identiteit van het land.
    2
  1352. Except Europe is very critical of Israel as well and sees all occupied parts of Palestine as not belonging to Israel.
    2
  1353. "Is toch hetzelfde als vrouwenvoetbal winnen???" Wat een gekkies ook, hè...
    2
  1354.  @daffymore  Helemaal mee eens. Maar dat mogen we niet bestrijden want zij willen goedkope werkers uit het buitenland voor de economie.
    2
  1355. +Vincent10 He is a centrist. First he fixes the economy by stimulating the business life. When the businesses bring in the revenue for the government, he gets to spend that money on the people. So yes, the modernising part is on the right side of the political spectrum, but when it bears fruit you'll see the left policy coming in. What France has done for years is embrace left policy while neglecting the economy, Macron is changing that.
    2
  1356. +Dabaq Yashar I agree with it, don't attack me over this. America is stolen land, it never was a true "white" country. It's an immigrant country now, but it used to be for the natives. This is why I always laugh when an American yells about keeping the US white. It never was a European country, whites aren't native there. There is nothing to "protect", since everything native in America has already been destroyed. I just wanted to point out their hypocrisy when they say Europe is so screwed up with migrants, even though they themselves have much bigger issues on every subject. In my opinion, migrants coming to the US is no issue at all because it isn't a white country anyway, but too many migrants coming to Europe is. I believe every country should be left to the natives to have their own people and own cultures. That includes us in Europe, but not America
    2
  1357. +madmatt097 And European armies are any different? Just face it: the ultimate defence against a totalitarian government is to build institutions that are nigh incorruptable. America isn't protected against tyranny by ownership of weapons (armed citizens would be beyond hopeless against the US army), but because of US institutions having a low chance of becoming tyrannical. And guess what? European institutions have built in multiple safe guards after WW2 to make sure something like that never happens again. The US doesn't have the same level of safeguards and even they are moderately safe from going tyrannical. European countries are so well protected that a totalitarian party can literally become the biggest party and still be barred from ruling (tried and tested: in early 2000's Turkey the biggest party wanted to introduce sharia law... it was promptly disbanded and made illegal. It had 2 million members and was set to win the elections, yet it was succesfully destroyed before it could introduce oppressive religious laws). This is not specifically directed at you, but the notion that the US is better protected because of guns is crazy. The idea of armed citizenry rivalling the government has been outdated for a literal century by now, if it was even relevant at all (after all, even the US itself relied on European empires such as France to intervene in their revolution, otherwise it'd have been a sure loss). The plain fact is that European, gun-less societies are much better protected than the US is against tyranny because we learned from WW2 that our democratic system must be vigilant against anti-democratic forces. We incorporated defences in our actual system rather than relying on firearms.
    2
  1358. +madmatt097 Wrong, according to the world freedom index, America is behind just about all of Western Europe, a substantial amount of Eastern Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and more. You have less political and civil freedom in the US and that's a fact. Gun ownership won't change that... especially since you can own guns just fine in Europe too, if you don't have a history in mental institutions. Nor will absolute freedom of speech, because what you fail to understand is that rights are not a one way road. My absolute freedom of speech would enable me to use my right to invade on other's rights through for example hate speech against them. Why should I need to accept hate speech against me or slander that can affect my reputation? Even in Roman times this was already illegal and for most of history a man would challenge you for a duel to the death for opening your mouth in the wrong way. Compare it to freedom of movement; I have the right to go where I please, but does that mean I can also enter your house at will? No, that would invade your personal space. Rights have to be balanced with eachother, not be absolute to the point of seriously affecting other people's personal lives. And about governments, yours is corrupt and cares more about companies' "donations" than the actual citizens of America. You have so little political freedom that you can barely choose between more than two parties and have zero chance to enter politics with a new party. The success of parties is reliant on the amount of donations they get from corporations, which enable them to launch billion dollar campaigns. Anyone without at least a multi-million dollar budget is doomed to lose. Here in the Netherlands all you need is 30k signatures of support for your own party and you get equal air time to the established ones... Just last elections, 2 new parties entered parliament, of which one is now projected to become one of the biggest next elections. And we have 15+ parties in there, with a wide range of ideals. That is REAL liberty, an actual opportunity to defend your views in parliament instead of the artificial choice you get in the US. You just don't understand what liberty means if you seriously think owning firearms is even remotely relevant for it... You're just stuck in your idiot founding fathers meme about firearms being able to defend against tyranny even though they themselves needed European empires like France and the Netherlands to intervene in the revolution! Remember that without other European empires, the Americans would have had little chance of winning. It was a mediocre idea at best when it was conceived and already hopelessly outdated by... say the 1930's, when the difference between the military and citizens became larger and larger. At this point a truly cruel government can just sit back, relax and murder hundreds of civilians with a joystick and a monitor like it is a bloody game (drones). Yeah your AR-15 will totally save you. You're one of the least free western countries and that's a fact, only some Eastern European countries score lower and you're at the absolute bottom of the first world, with even some second world countries beating you; https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2017#anchor-one
    2
  1359. Dndn Ndhd  I'm not talking about what Hitler said, I'm talking about the actual system of National Socialism. It's a special case because they didn't have the classic idea of having workers seize the means of production. Hitler wanted to get rid of the class struggle by uniting all classes into one class: the Aryan race. There was a lot of privatisation under National Socialism, but the corporations weren't free like in a fully capitalist system. If "the people" needed something, the government could order companies to produce something for national interest. If the approached companies would refuse, nationalisation could follow. Take Hitler's Volkswagen for example, with which he wanted to mobilise German citizens. Under National Socialism there was no seizing of the means of production, because Hitler wanted to unite all classes under one class (the German people). And the German people in general owned all means of production. Then he made sure that the means of production were actually used in the interest of the German people by directing what the owners should do with them. Hitler hated the selfish motives of corporations in capitalism (but liked the competition between corporations and strive for improvement) and he also hated pure socialism (but liked that the means of production were actually used in the interest of the people). National Socialism is an attempt to take the best of both into a new system. It has the privatisation of capitalism but the control over corporations of socialism.
    2
  1360. +MAURIICE KIING Too smart to not be cucked workers of corporations, sure. What "freedom" you have. Freedom to not get paid when pregnant, oh how I long to live in the US so I can have that too.
    2
  1361. +M M Ik ben zelf allochtoon, opgegroeid in een overwegend blanke wijk, met vrijwel alleen blanke vrienden (jeugd en nu nog steeds). Nu ben ik wel anders omdat ik half Nederlands ben (en derhalve van huis uit ook een overwegend Nederlandse opvoeding heb gehad vanwege mijn Nederlandse moeder en alle familie in mijn omgeving is Nederlands behalve natuurlijk mijn vader), maar ik heb toch een half-donkere huidskleur (iets donkerder dan bijvoorbeeld een Marokkaan of Turk, dus wel duidelijk allochtoon). Ik ben nooit met de nek aangekeken, nooit anders behandeld (anders dan de nogal regelmatig voorkomende vraag waar ik vandaan kom) en wordt altijd normaal bejegend. Waarom? Omdat als je mij ontmoet, je hard kan zoeken naar een verschil met een blanke Nederlander in hoe ik me gedraag, maar die niet zult vinden . Mijn cultuur, gedrag, hoe je het ook wil noemen is volkomen Nederlands, dus ik word ook hetzelfde behandeld als autochtonen. Ik spreek ook gewoon ABN zonder accent. Als je een beetje een idee wil hebben van hoe ik eruit zie, zoek dan Pierre van Hooijdonk op. Lang verhaal kort: het gaat om cultuur, niet om uiterlijk/huidskleur. En dat het om cultuur gaat, betekent dat het een integratieprobleem is, niet een discriminatieprobleem.
    2
  1362. +M M Ik weet niet eens wat ik zou doen, maar ik weet één ding zeker: ik zou diep ongelukkig zijn. Ik heb namelijk niets anders dan Nederland, ik heb geen alternatieven. Marokkanen hebben natuurlijk andere Marokkanen en Marokko als alternatief als Nederlanders ze afstoten, maar ik zie Nederland als mijn enige echte thuisland. Over dat laatste, misschien zijn we inderdaad niet zo tolerant als we denken, althans niet in de algemene zin. We zijn historisch en ook vandaag tolerant tegenover allerlei levensstijlen, geloofsovertuigingen en meer (zo lang die niet zelf intolerantie prediken), maar van migranten verwachten we dat ze volledig Nederlands worden voordat ze ook volledig geaccepteerd worden.
    2
  1363.  @alphatrion100  Prima, mee eens, maar wat heeft dat met Nederland te maken?
    2
  1364.  @alphatrion100  Geen enkel nieuwskanaal is volledig neutraal. Het is onzin om WNL ertussenuit te pikken alsof zij hier bijzonder in zijn. Ik kan precies hetzelfde zeggen over de NOS, RTL, CNN, Fox News, BBC, noem maar op.
    2
  1365. Germania über alles! 🇩🇪 🇳🇱 🇩🇪 🇳🇱 🇩🇪 🇳🇱
    2
  1366. who cares
    2
  1367. +Nunsuch It ensured that Iran wouldn't make nuclear weapons until 2030. This gave us time to develop a policy that would ensure Iran to never make nuclear weapons. Once Iran has nukes, they are highly unlikely to ever part with them. We must do everything to prevent them from making nukes at all
    2
  1368.  @solowingpixi  Yes, think about the centuries celtic culture has survived... and how you are deliberately theatening its existence just because you want to "incorporate other cultures into the country". Celtic culture survived because its practitioners were adamant to protect and preserve it. It's now up to you to preserve and transfer this beautiful culture to your descendants and what do you do? You want to "incorporate different cultures into the country", which puts celtic culture at risk. And for what reward exactly? Because you're too lazy to travel around the world to see other cultures and want them right outside your doorstep? If you import people who are not part of your culture and you allow your own culture to be heavily influenced by their culture, you are decreasing the amount of people in your country that practice the culture of the land and increase the amount of foreign influence on your culture, which carries a risk to significantly change or in the worst case dissipate your culture. Immigration is no joke, it can either go well or it can significantly damage your culture. If there is some kind of merit to justify this risk you're taking with your culture then do share, but until then I can only conclude you're being very sloppy with the culture you inherited and perhaps you don't really care about it all that much. In any case you seem complacent with what you have.
    2
  1369. Not even NATO, because of the EU alone. The EU has the same "attack on one is an attack on all" articles, so the baltic war would immediately draw everyone into war. Besides that... the EU literally has practiced working together if exactly that would happen. There is a standard procedure in place on what to do in case of a Russian invasion and it of course involves almost every member state. Hell, many EU countries are already present in the Baltic states, including the UK, which for some strange reason is not involved at all in this scenario. I don't think Binkov has a full understanding of how the EU works. It's not as divided as it sometimes seems. That some countries don't want to take in refugees doesn't mean that in case of a huge war with Russian they won't help either. If push comes to shove, all member states would obviously help. Even when the UK is out, they've already made clear they're still part of the common defence policy so even the UK would still help
    2
  1370.  @brianlong2334  Britain succesfully disrupted German attempts at developing nukes and were themselves the farthest in that research field. In the hypothetical situation that a ground war would be unlikely to be winnable by the British, I'd say it's probable they'd even double down on nuke research and eventually develop them as a means to force Germany and Japan into submission.
    2
  1371. +sander Tamso Verdeling van rijkdommen is weer heel wat anders. Een homogene groep leeft beter samen dan een diverse groep die continu met elkaars verschillen rekening moeten houden en dat is een feit, rijkdom of geen rijkdom.
    2
  1372.  Kees De Jong  Integratie is dus racisme.... wat nog meer? Stop met die nonsens
    2
  1373. No.
    2
  1374. Tja, wolven zijn al tientallen jaren niet meer in Nederland geweest tot nu. Die schapen weten niet meer wat een wolf überhaupt is, maar als er meer wolven in Nederland komen zullen ze daar wel achter komen dat ze moeten rennen.
    2
  1375. Watching from the Netherlands it's more like Bernie is centre-left and the rest has derailed and fell off the edge
    2
  1376.  @A_Degenerate_with_Glasses  Sure, but the thing is you don't need the A-10's gun to do that. Less powerful cannons can do the same. You don't need a lot of firepower to achieve broken tracks or damaged optics. If a tank is peppered with 30mm cannons or even 20mm cannons, chances are you will achieve a mission kill by disabling the tracks or another element of the tank that puts it out of the fight. It's not an impressive feat at all
    2
  1377. Israel doesn't want Peace, it keeps building on the west bank illegally and refuses to allow Palestine to become independent. There has to be a two-state solution and that means BOTH have to sacrifice something. And at this time, NEITHER is willing to do so. Therefore, both are at fault for the conflict. But to be frank, my preference does go out to Israel ever so slightly because of the history of wars against them. The problem for Israel is that conquering land by war isn't a legal way of acquiring territory anymore, even if it was a defensive war. So the land they build on is officially Palestinian and not Israeli. But I understand the difficulties. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a mess with no clear solution
    2
  1378. Do you remember how Daniel Craig got shit because he's blonde and not brown haired with blue eyes like in the novels? Yeah.... Idris Elba can pull off the role for sure and he has that secret agent allure around him, but he doesn't look like Bond in the slightest. For many that'd be unacceptable, and not because of race.
    2
  1379.  @DocRealTalk  Turks are not European, not ethnically nor culturally. A tiny bit of Turkey being situated in Europe after they conquered it from Greeks doesn't make them suddenly European. And I know not all Europeans look the same way. I'm not wrong about elves, that is the mythological meaning behind elves in the original myths. In popular culture they of course aren't represented in their original way, but originally they're supposed to represent our forefathers. In local traditions that survived from pagan times, they still do. Fantasy is based on mythology (at least as far as elves, dwarves and such fantasy goes). I think it's terrible to change that without taking heed of the cultural background of that fantasy. But if there were a Chinese adaptation of Sherlock Holmes, with a Chinese version of him I'd honestly not have anything against it. As long as it doesn't come in place of the real Sherlock. Then there's fictional characters like the Hulk and I'd not care what they did with it. Regarding the last paragraph I wholeheartedly agree.
    2
  1380.  @jessivandehill6304  Thanks
    2
  1381. He is decent on the outside, but every bit as corrupt as Trump on the inside. Telling his corporate donors "nothing will fundamentally change", getting his son a nice job and free money, first wanting to cut social security across the board and now being "the most progressive candidate ever". The man is a farce. A corporate crony. He only acts decent, but really is not.
    2
  1382.  @benjamincannell4906  Wow.... There's 320 million people in the US. During a pandemic like the regular flu, approximately 20% of the population catches it (64.000.000). 2% of that number is 1.2 million people dead. But hey, "just" 2%. In 1918 influenza killed 600.000 Americans as it spread into a pandemic and had a 1% deathrate.
    2
  1383. That'd be very interesting indeed
    2
  1384. Ik denk dat het goed zou zijn om meer te herdenken, maar dan wel gebeurtenissen die RELEVANT zijn voor ons. Dus militairen die ook na de Tweede Wereldoorlog voor ons zijn gestorven? Absoluut. Maar Syrië zeker niet, dat heeft niets met ons te maken. De herdenking op 4 mei gaat om de realisatie dat wat wij hier hebben geen standaard gegeven is. Onze vrijheid is met bloed gewonnen en dat moeten we nooit voor lief nemen. Daarnaast moeten we ook nooit vergeten hoe gruwelijk wij mensen kunnen zijn tegen elkaar. Daarom is het belangrijk om te herdenken wat de Nazi's in de Tweede Wereldoorlog hebben gedaan. Ook dat waren mensen die dat deden en het is onze taak om ervoor te zorgen dat wij die kant nooit opgaan. Wij herdenken de slachtoffers van totalitaire regimes en oorlogszucht, herdenken degenen die daartegen terug vochten en ons beschermden. Wij herinneren dat onze vrije samenleving ons tegen die verschrikkingen beschermt en dat het aan ons is die vrije samenleving in stand te houden zodat we niet weer afglijden naar vergelijkbare verschrikkingen. Syrië heeft totaal geen betekenis voor Nederland. Ja, het is allemaal verschrikkelijk maar nee, het herdenken van die doden heeft geen boodschap voor ons. En het is zeer belangrijk die boodschap niet uit het oog te verliezen, want dát is waar 4 en 5 mei om draaien.
    2
  1385. Zelfs FvD wil van fossiele brandstoffen af door in Thoriumcentrales te investeren en is ook voor milieubescherming/verbetering.
    2
  1386. Seems to work in the rest of the world
    2
  1387. Bovendien is deze discussie volkomen normaal binnen de academia. Na Urgenda barstte precies deze discussie los binnen de rechtsgeleerdheid. De vraag hoe de balans binnen de trias politica eruit moet zien en hoe ver rechters de politiek in mogen treden is een alledaagse vraag binnen het Staatsrecht. Jetten is hier heel verkeerd bezig en zorgt ervoor dat deze discussie wordt gesmoord in de politiek.
    2
  1388.  @finntran1672  True. In rich countries we've essentially been betrayed for the economy. Our governments, with only a few exceptions, chose to delay measures as long as possible to prevent unnecessary damage to the economy. Now the virus has spread
    2
  1389. Pfff War Thunder is a million times better
    2
  1390. They didn't betray you, you betrayed them and got a 31% tariff slapped on their products. Harley Davidson stayed in America, they were one of the most loyal and typically American companies. Even their export was made in the USA. You got a 31% tariff slapped on that, well done. And now after decades of them staying in America while others were moving away for the money, you call them traitors. Well, if even they are traitors you have no loyal companies left. First you get a steel/aluminium tariff on their imports and now you get a huge tariff on their exports. What did you expect them to do, suffer for you even though for decades they chose for more expensive American production and you just backstabbed their business model?
    2
  1391. Nee joh, dit is voor arbeidsmigranten. Je weet wel, van Polen en zo. Als het economische "vluchtelingen" zouden zijn zou ik helemaal uit m'n stekker gaan, die moet je lekker in een AZC proppen, niet in een luxe hotel. Van arbeidsmigranten kun je nog zeggen dat ze het terugverdienen met de bijdrage aan onze economie.
    2
  1392. Then vote for a new prime minister that hasn't lost contact with reality and you shall see him among the others in Brussels... The EU follows the political situation in its member states, not the other way around
    2
  1393. A well done analysis! The problem is that mainly due to the influence of anti-racism activists from the US, this entire topic has politicised into a "white versus black" thing, while in reality it's a lot more complex. In the US I think one may conceivably say that there was such widespread racism that the state and white population as such can be pointed towards as having contributed to it, but in terms of the Dutch slave trade this is so much more complex. Most Dutchmen didn't have anything to do with slavery, plus I wonder what they even knew of it. Maybe their attitude towards it was comparable to the way we think about our corporations using cheap labour abroad today. Yes, there is plenty of exploitation happening abroad, yes it's our corporations and yes, we buy those cheap products that are created that way, but in the end we kind of ignore it or are only half aware of what happens. Should we then apologise for it? Are we complicit? In a way, yes, but also not really. Could it have been similar with slavery back then? Just the WIC making money and the average Dutchman only half knowing what is going on but still buying those cheap products? I wonder. And what was even the state involvement? Did they encourage the WIC, do nothing, actively aid them? At the very least they knew about it and allowed it to continue, making them complicit, but how much did the state do? Also an interesting question. And what of the black slave traders? Why do they not need to apologise and why are their descendants even asking for compensation/apologies themselves? Should we track everyone's ancestry and see who is "guilty"? How does it even work in the first place to be held accountable for something your distant ancestors may or may not (but probably didn't, statistically speaking) do?
    2
  1394. The problem is adeptly portrayed here, but the underlying reasons? I don't think anybody seriously thinks that we taint every idea and ruin it or that we are to blame for every bit of poverty on the planet and must therefore take in everybody.
    2
  1395.  @marleentuuuh7126  Het was geen vogelspin maar wel een hele grote. Het was ongeveer 15 jaar geleden, ik was iets van 8 of zo en hij was net zo groot als mijn hand. Meegekomen in bagage van Afrika. Van wat ik me kan herinneren heeft mijn vader de stofzuiger erbij gepakt en de spin gewoon opgezogen. Tja.
    2
  1396.  @eddiel7635 EU member states don't have to give up their militaries for an EU army, nor is that even a proposal. The proposal is an EU army that exists alongside national armies.
    2
  1397. JE MAG GEEN I AM ZEGGEN DAT IS TE INDIVIDUALISTISCH
    2
  1398.  @charvalanta  Bernhard zette zich actief in tégen Duitsland in de tweede wereldoorlog. Hij zette een fonds op om oorlogsmaterieel voor de Britten te bekostigen en was hoofd verbindingsofficier tussen de NL en Britse strijdkrachten. Hij sprak zich vanaf het begin van de oorlog, zelfs toen Duitsland zeer sterk was, uit over zijn vertrouwen in de overwinning van Groot-Brittannië. Hij was tijdens en na de oorlog niet fout, alleen daarvoor was hij enigszins fout.
    2
  1399. +Devil Hex You're right about the real life scenario, one could argue forever about it. My opinion on the matter is that the US simply can't pull off an invasion and meanwhile... the EU starts outproducing the US until at one point in the future (talking about years of course) it feels comfortable to take the war to the US. So kind of a draw but with better perspective for the EU in the long run. And yeah in an arena war the EU would lose because of lack of air power. The EU is essentially just a slightly bigger and more advanced Russia, militarily (in terms of land and air power, that is. Navally the EU outclasses Russia clearly). So it would play out similarly to the US-RU arena war. About the warships, yes destroyers and cruisers are the biggest and most powerful of warships, but they can't equal multiple smaller vessels coming at them. The smaller vessels have the exact same defences as the destroyers, but there's multiple targets instead of just one. They do carry less anti-ship missiles though. Multiple frigates can only deliver the same firepower as one destroyer, but are better protected than the destoyer due to spreading out as different targets each with the defensive capability of a destroyer. Ultimately the frigates would stop more missiles while being able to shoot just as many. The EU has 40 destoyers, 87 frigates and 35 corvettes. So they're close to the amount of destroyers the US has and have over 100 smaller vessels to compensate for the 20 or so US cruisers and 20 destroyers that remain. About the subs, you are wrong. Nuclear submarines are actually inferior to diesel subs in battle. Diesel subs are quieter, but nuclear subs have longer range. So nuclear subs are better if you need to send one halfway across the world, but when you're close to the enemy... a diesel sub is actually quieter and therefore better at submarine warfare. The nuclear reactor means a nuclear sub can stay submerged longer and travel further on its own, but it is louder too. If a nuclear sub and diesel sub meet, the diesel has the advantage. But... every 2-3 or so weeks it has to get to the surface to recharge its electricity.
    2
  1400. +Techno Viking Poisonous substances are much easier to smuggle into a country than weapons. Customs check for drugs (pills, powder...), weapons, things like that. Poisonous substances can be disguised as food or something else and can also be carried in extremely low quantities (apparently this nerve agent is very potent), making it very low risk to smuggle it. Attempting to purchase illegal weapons in Britain itself is an alternative, but that risks you ending up on the radar of British intelligence, which is something that absolutely must be avoided by the killers for obvious reasons. Second, it sends a message quite a bit more clearly than a conventional killing does. This nerve agent can only really be manufactured by a state, or at least a very rich and well-organised entity. Using this on a former spy sends an eerily clear message, more so than a simple gunshot. It suggests Russia is behind it, but if the attack is carried out perfectly (as they usually are) there's not enough evidence to actually point at Russia. So now we are in the situation that Russia is the clear main suspect and sent the message, but Russia won't experience severe negative effects until there's actual evidence. So it's either Russia (most likely), or another entity that wishes to suggest that it is Russia (also possible). All the BBC does is report about the most logical suspect and I think anyone knows that it's not 100% certain. What I would really be concerned about is if the BBC reported that there might be a conspiracy going on, without any kind of evidence. Now that would be concerning. I don't think they want you to think it was Russia; they want to to know/think Russia is the main suspect. Everybody who can think for himself can watch this and still be aware of the possibility that it wasn't Russia. You shouldn't be so quick on calling something propaganda/biased just because it doesn't report possible conspiracy theories
    2
  1401. Hij werkt hard... nu ja. Een paar dagen geleden wist hij bij god niet wat landen als Zuid Korea en China hebben gedaan om corona te bestrijden. Je weet wel, die landen waar we heel veel van kunnen leren omdat zij al veel verder in deze epidemie zitten dan wij. De Minister werkt zo hard omdat hij ons land niet op deze crisis heeft voorbereid. Ik vind het ook sneu om dit te zien, maar ik laat me mijn mening over zijn werk daar niet door veranderen. Hij heeft deze hele crisis gebagatelliseerd en nu het hard aankomt dat misschien 40.000-80.000 Nederlanders zullen sterven aan dit virus (als ik virologen mag geloven), moet hij opeens keihard aan de bak. Ik ben dankbaar dat hij zich in deze mate inzet, maar er zijn fouten gemaakt. Fouten die mogelijk duizenden meer doden met zich brengen dan nodig was. We hebben verloren tegen het corona virus en alles wat we nu kunnen doen is wachten tot er groepsimmuniteit is. In de tussentijd is het wachten op Italiaanse toestanden, mede vanwege deze Minister. Gisteren weer 450 mensen op één dag overleden.
    2
  1402. If you think the UK would aid an invading force taking over Europe you're insane
    2
  1403.  Pinga - Politiek Incorrecte Gast  Vind het alleen wel jammer dat hij het op zo'n arrogante manier overbrengt. Daar verliest hij onnodig stemmen mee. Ipv alles gelijk "de meest domme maatregel ooit" of wat dan ook te noemen zou hij gewoon zonder dit soort retoriek een tegenargument moeten geven. En dat kan hij.
    2
  1404.  @carl48uk  There was an actual (succesful) invasion of England by the Dutch military.
    2
  1405.  Mary Lee  Note how he doesn't respond to anything. Others have said they saw this exact copy-paste text in other comments. It's probably a Chinese bot. It's crazy, but apparently bots really are used for propaganda purposes. I just hope the upvotes are fake as well...
    2
  1406. Shut up
    2
  1407.  @ZeldagigafanMatthew  Nazis were not capitalists, but fascists (and a special form of fascism at that, which made it a lot bloodier than regular fascism we've seen in other states). Calling fascists capitalists is about as inaccurate as those modern right wing talking points about fascism being a form of socialism (moreover, calling fascism capitalist actually was a far left talking point in the past as well. Stalin called national socialism the "natural end point of capitalism", which is of course ridiculous). Fascism is an anti-marxist/socialist, anti-democracy/liberalism and anti-capitalist system. It's the "third option", if you will. The only deaths we can truly blame capitalism for is the deaths it has indirectly caused by failing to provide for people. Having enough food but failing to distribute it properly. Being able to treat people medically but simply not doing it because they're not insured. Perhaps working people to death or at least into sickness due to bad working conditions. And it's a stretch to compare these types of deaths to the more or less active killings that happened under Nazism, Fascism and authoritarian versions of Communism/Socialism. In my eyes, an unnecessary death is not the same as summarily executing someone or willfully taking food away from them to have them starve. So yes, capitalism has its flaws, some of them major flaws, but let's not take that extra step and compare failing to distribute food to something like the holodomor under Stalin.
    2
  1408. Ze hebben de argumenten van Baudet eruit geknipt. Hoe zou het op jou overkomen als je het debat niet hebt gezien en hier Baudet hoort zeggen dat hij het JIT niet vertrouwt en het niet bekend is wie MH17 heeft gepleegd? Dan komt hij over als een domme populist. Maar als je het argument erbij zet, dan heeft hij ook wel een punt dat het vreemd is dat Oekraïne als verdachte bij het onderzoek is gehaald én een veto heeft op de inhoud. Dat verandert helemaal hoe Baudet hier uit de verf komt. Ze hebben elke keer Baudet's onderbouwing eruit geknipt, waardoor zijn standpunten als ongenuanceerd en ongeïnformeerd overkomen. Ik vind dit heel slechte politiek. Het was een goed debat waar beide kanten vrij sterk waren, maar hier lijkt het alsof Baudet de onbenul door Rutte de ervaren leider wordt geschoold.
    2
  1409.  @genieglasslamp5028  I'm not mad at the immigrants, not even the ones that are structurally in welfare (unwillingly, that is). I'm mad at the government for setting up a mass immigration scheme to get max economic growth while ignoring the consequences. And businesses... I've given up on being mad at them, their profit-seeking behaviour is to be expected at all times and is at this point just a fact of nature. But yeah I dislike that too. Immigrants that come here in good faith, searching for a better life, mostly can't be blamed for coming here. Doesn't mean it's a good idea to let every single one of them in, though. It's always better to work towards a more durable solution for their entire countries' economies instead. Only immigrants that can really contribute to society are good options to come here.
    2
  1410. TIK, saying Nazis and Soviet Communists are the same because both employ socialist methods is like saying the ultra capitalist USA is the same as European social democracies just because both are capitalist systems. The US and Europe differ massively , politically. I think the same applies to Soviets and Nazis. Both socialist, but very different.
    2
  1411. Of course... we have been ruled by 5% of our population for so long now here in the Dutch Caliphate. Makes perfect sense
    2
  1412. Wat de rechter heeft gedaan is het volgende: De regering heeft verdragen getekend waarin staat dat alle klimaatverhalen kloppen en dat door mensen uitgestoten CO2 levensbedreigende situaties gaat veroorzaken tenzij wij stappen ondernemen om die uitstoot terug te dringen. Als dat allemaal waar is (wat als je het mij vraagt onzin is, maar de politiek heeft verklaard dat dat allemaal klopt) en de overheid gebonden is aan het recht op leven, dan is het de taak van de overheid om alles te doen wat ze kan om de levens van haar burgers te beschermen. En dat betekent dus het terugdringen van de uitstoot. Het probleem is dus dat de regering in verdragen heeft verklaard en ook tijdens de rechtszaak heeft bevestigd dat als de overheid niets doet, er uiteindelijk doden zullen vallen en de levens van vele Nederlanders drastisch beïnvloed zullen worden door klimaatverandering. En als dat het uitgangspunt is... ja dan moet de overheid natuurlijk alles doen om dat te voorkomen. Je kan niet eerst zeggen als we niks doen dat heeft dat ernstige effecten en vervolgens ook echt niks doen. Het grote probleem is dat dat uitgangspunt en die doemdenkerij überhaupt niet klopt. De Staat had makkelijk deze zaak kunnen winnen door heel simpel te zeggen; die klimaatvooruitzichten kloppen niet/zijn onzeker. De rechter mag niet in de politiek treden, maar mag wel op basis van de feiten waar de partijen vanuit gaan de volgende logische stap nemen; ALS het 100% zeker zou zijn dat klimaatverandering levens gaat kosten én de overheid dat kan voorkomen door X te doen, dan is NATUURLIJK de logische juridische stap om te zeggen dat de overheid X moet gaan doen. Dit ligt niet aan de rechtspraak, maar aan de politiek die Nederland heeft gebonden aan verdragen waarin de meest ongunstige en catastrofale klimaatvooruitgezichten worden bevestigd en die tijdens de rechtszaak ook gewoon glashard bijstaat. Als je A zegt moet je ook B zeggen en als je het niet met A eens bent moet je wijzen naar degene die A heeft gezegd (politiek) en niet degene die zegt dat als A waar is B moet volgen (rechter).
    2
  1413.  @petje35  Technisch gezien kan dat als echt feitelijk aantoonbaar is dat het beleid heel schadelijk is en Nederlanders in hun mensenrechten schaadt. Ik zie vooral linkse groepen altijd procederen en dat is jammer. Het is echt mogelijk om de Staat te veroordelen beleid te veranderen wanneer dit aantoonbaar onze mensenrechten schaadt. Het is moeilijk (ook Urgenda was alleen maar mogelijk omdat de Staat de klimaathysterie simpelweg bevestigde en totaal niet aanvocht), maar mogelijk. En rechters zijn niet links of rechts, die kijken in beginsel naar de (juridische) feiten. Politieke keuzes liggen bij het parlement, maar waar iets feitelijk vaststaat en eigenlijk maar één juridisch antwoord mogelijk is kan de rechter ingrijpen. Als aantoonbaar is dat het huidige migratiebeleid zeer schadelijk is en onze mensenrechten raakt, dan kan de rechter zeggen dat het beter geregeld moet worden. Hoe dat geregeld moet worden ligt niet binnen de rol van de rechter, maar dat iets anders moet kunnen ze wel opleggen aan de Staat. Dus rechtse groepen zou ik willen meegeven, probeer het eens.
    2
  1414. Gelukkig is ze uiteindelijk toch opgepakt
    2
  1415. +Felix Niederhauser I'll list the biggest actors of the European front from big to small: the USSR. The British Empire. The USA. Do you really think that staying out of Europe for the grand majority of the war and then providing about 60% of the troops from 1944 to 1945 means you "saved" the UK? Even after D-day the UK arguably played a bigger role.... They planned D-day, the British empire had more beaches at D-day, the British forces were the spearhead after D-day. They planned Market Garden and were the spearhead of Market Garden. They planned Operation Varsity, again as the spearhead. They received the surrender of all German forces in the Netherlands, North-west Germany and Denmark. The most impressive act of the US was the Battle of the Bulge, which was Germany attacking the weakest link in the Allied supply chain: the Americans tagging behind the British spearhead to the north. Patton had been struggling at Metz, advancing very slowly. The US lost at Hürtgenwald before the Battle of the Bulge. It was clear to the Germans who to attack... The fact that the Germans assigned pretty much all their Tigers to British sectors is also an indication that they feared the British more. The US role in Europe is hugely overrated, especially by Americans. Even the role post 1944. The British and Americans did it together, nobody "saved" anyone.
    2
  1416.  @rdkleinjan  Luister naar jezelf... wie is hier dingen aan het opfokken, een groep demonstranten die staat te schreeuwen of een moeder die boos wordt als haar kind begint te huilen? Denk eens na
    2
  1417. Well he certainly is not wrong
    2
  1418. Christianity itself bears the fault of religion disappearing. It should have never come to Europe. It's dumb to expect any intelligent culture to stay religious when it asks of you to arbitrarily believe in some static scripture and defend whatever it says even though (surprise, surprise) after 2000+ years some of its morality and rules might be a bit outdated. If Europe is ever to regain its spirituality, it'll have to be a return to pre-christian paganism. You can combine such spirituality with even atheism (look at the spirituality of the Japanese, for instance, whose religion is very similar to what European paganism also is and was). Our loss of religion was caused by a foreign, heavily flawed religion invading Europe. It was only a matter of time before we'd reject it.
    2
  1419. Vluchtelingen in opvangcentra (waarvan overigens verschillende zijn gesloten omdat ze LEEG stonden), Nederlanders die tussen wal en schip vallen in sociale huurwoningen. Zo simpel is het. Dit is een voorbeeld van ongelooflijk dom beleid. Vluchtelingen hebben helemaal geen sociale huurwoningen nodig, zij komen niet van de straat maar van een opvangcentra. Heropen de gesloten centra en spreid vluchtelingen dusdanig over die centra dat alle gelukszoekers/uitgeprocedeerden en families gescheiden zijn en wijs de waarschijnlijk tienduizenden sociale huurwoningen die daardoor vrij komen toe aan dakloze Nederlanders. Het is nog erger als je bedenkt dat mensen als in deze video belasting betalen om Nederland voor iedereen een betere plek te maken, maar dat geld eigenlijk wordt besteed aan het toewijzen van de voor hun broodnodige sociale huurwoningen aan vluchtelingen die ze helemaal niet nodig hebben. Voor vluchtelingen is het een luxe upgrade van opvangcentrum naar eigen huis, geen benodigdheid waarzonder ze op de straat zouden leven.
    2
  1420.  @Hartwig870  Yup, in WW2 many allied soldiers died to defend capitalism against fascism and later communism in the cold war. Don't blame us for being adept at practicing the capitalism you so love. The more money there is, the higher the asking price ;) You can't fight for capitalism and then blame those your freed for practicing typical capitalism. So technically yes, 7600 Canadians died so we could do things like charge a film maker 100 bucks for a bag of concrete. Something we could not have done under the planned economies of fascism and communism with their fixed prices. But those Canadians died for much more than just that. They died for the freedom and respect for human rights inherent to a democratic rule of law, which is much more important than capitalism. And that was a sacrifice that deserves massive respect and thanks. We love Canadians and always will remember the role they played in our liberation.
    2
  1421.  @firemasterx23  We are one large nation of Mr Krabs
    2
  1422. The fun part is that our car brands like BMW and Mercedes already have their plants in the US. Now we get more jobs due to Harley Davidson moving here, but will the US also get more EU car factories in return? We may sell a whole lot more to the US than vice versa, but our factories are in fact in the USA so unless those factories don't produce enough for the US market, will sanctions even have a significant impact on EU cars being sold in the US?
    2
  1423. +Rydro "Well isn't that her choice not to go to school?" Children must go to school and children must learn how to swim. And in school or in swimming class they might find the behaviour of others uncomfortable. That's their problem. By your logic I can stay away from school because I feel uncomfortable by people wearing Hijabs. This makes no sense. In a free society you have rights, but you also have the responsibility under the law to respect or condone what others do or what they dress like. Freedom means you can do what you want, but also that others can do what they want and that you have to accept that.
    2
  1424. +Qais Almutahr Well, our system is clearly working better as there are thousands of migrants drowning trying to get here. Should have let some "strange people" teach your children to swim :)
    2
  1425. Also important to mention the war industry of each nation. If the EU war economy would be activated, it'd absolutely dwarf the production capability of Russia. AND the population pool for the soldiers. Any long term war between the EU and Russia is very much in favour of the EU. But in the short term Russia can get a lot done because they have maintained a great military despite their much smaller economic and population size.
    2
  1426. Technically open marriages are in line with evolution, now that women can control their fertility. There is no more risk of the husband ending up supporting the gene passing of another man. On the other hand, it does create an extra risk of either spouse falling in love with someone else and breaking the marriage apart. But strictly speaking.... birth control made this a semi-viable possibility
    2
  1427.  @forhonor7408  True, but genes are only a small part of that identity. I'm not aware of any differences between personality and such between ethnicities, but I don't think it's unlikely that there are. And maybe differences in average intelligence exist too, but that is unknown at the moment. If the average mentality within an ethnic group is different , the culture they form will be different. So in that sense, genes are relevant too. The total sum of what creates a culture is complex. At the least we should think of the group's history, surrounding cultural influences, climate and landscape, subelements of the culture also influencing how the rest develops (like language, which also heavily impacts how a culture as a whole develops if you compare languages with large vocabularies and types of grammar that for example are good for poetic expression), the current genes of the ethnic group and its influence on both the phenotype and possible behavioural traits, the ethnic pedigree of the group (the ethnic groups that came before, whose cultures and legacy usually are still a part of the new culture) and much much more. Culture certainly didn't spring up from thin air, but it isn't a purely genetic thing either. It's a highly complex combination of probably hundreds of factors, big and small.
    2
  1428. America is no democracy. The power of the two main parties is so large that they can get away with suppressing third parties and forcing most politicians to stay in line
    2
  1429.  @ShadaOfAllThings  Exactly. I see Trump as a unique opportunity to change the cycle. He was supposed to be a wake-up call to Dems as to how neoliberalism is dying and like the Reps have a new right, they ought to form a new left (hopefully in the form of Bernie) to realign with the people. But they refused to acknowledge what someone like Trump beating Hillary meant, politically. That's why Biden needs to lose to hammer the point home. The Dems need to be shaken up to the point of them seeing that a new, better left that actually answers to what the people want is what is needed to ensure a political future for the Dem party and that they can't get away with shoving their fav candidate in the faces of voters and yelling "vote blue no matter who" to gaslight them into confirming the pick at the elections.
    2
  1430.  @rjr81  Nonsense, if that were true then Biden would not be the candidate. How many people believe in what Biden stands for doesn't matter (which would be not a lot of people, judging by his enthusiasm ratings). What matters is how many people the Dems can bully into voting for him by saying "it's this guy or else Trump wins". They don't care about progressives, which have grown quite strong among the Dems. Not one bit. They care about pushing their own agenda as much as they can and actively suppress other views. If they cared even a little bit, there'd be a progressive VP for Biden but they didn't even bother with that.
    2
  1431.  @ShadaOfAllThings  I get what you mean, but I think this time is different. Voting has not mattered in the US for almost a century imo, but this is the first time that two candidates actually have vastly different views. This time it's not neoliberal versus slightly more left-leaning neoliberal. It's a neoliberal versus a nationalist. And the nationalist put neoliberalism to shame in 2016 already. If Trump wins again, that is such a bombshell to the Dem establishment that there is a good chance they'll be willing to move to the left to excite voters for the next election. They have to be shown that the US voters reject neoliberalism. And Trump is basically the only candidate that can do that, because for once in many decades there actually is a candidate at all that is not part of the typical ideology of modern America. If he wins, the Dems might realise they need to change their strategy and move left to win next time. It's only a chance, but for the first time in a very long period there is a chance at all to break the cycle. So yeah this time it matters. At the very least it matters a lot more than usually.
    2
  1432. +Sean Rea Just about every western state is built like that. The lower you get in the decentralisation, the closer you get to the people. Yet, in European countries (at least most) the government also is deeply connected with its citizens on a national level. Germany, for instance, even has states like the US with a very comparable position within Germany (quite autonomous). But that doesn't mean the national government is further away from the citizens. The only difference between national and local government is the type of subjects they get to make laws on, not how separated they are from the population. Strange part is that it's almost the opposite in Europe. People care a lot more about national politics than they do local. A lot more people vote in national elections than they do in local elections (myself included). A possible explanation could be that national issues are usually more important than local issues, so strangely I and many others actually feel more connected to national than local government. The national government should be every bit as connected to the citizens as local government should. ALL of the government should be. It's not normal that any segment of the government is as separated from its citizens as the US parliament. If US parliament would properly represent and care about the citizens, I'm sure that Americans would feel more connected with the government. But the reality is that they don't. Campaigning for the elections costs millions and on presidential level even billions at times. Where does this money come from? Corporations that fund individual members of the US parliament. And who can blame those members of parliament for lobbying (btw, 1/3 of all their time is spent on lobbying with corporations to ensure their seat in the next elections, wow)? How is one person going to get millions (just to be able to pay for his own campaign), not just once but every election? It's a horrible system. If you want to even have a chance at entering parliament, you need to lobby. Even Hillary Clinton, a millionaire herself, had to lobby hard to get the money just for one election campaign. Donald Trump, a billionaire, lobbied for funding of his campaign (though a lot less than anyone else would). This is what creates a government that is more worried about what their funders think than actual US citizens. They regard the interests of their own party and of their funders as more important than America itself. Democrats and Republicans constantly block eachother's propositions for this very reason. It's in America's interest for them to work together and create quality laws. Instead, either nothing happens because the other party blocks it or one party gets to push something through. Meanwhile in my country, the Netherlands, our previous government consisted of VVD (right wing liberals) and PvdA (left wing socialists) working together. They are complete opposites, like the Democrats and Republicans. They'd normally never work together. Yet, the Netherlands at the time had serious problems with the economic crisis. They were the two biggest parties and a coalition with many small parties would be too unstable for proper governance. So they put aside their differences and went in a coalition. It's what we call a "purple" cabinet (red and blue together) and happens rarely. They saw that the Netherlands needed a government ASAP so they both did HUGE concessions and in the end, both put away their party's interests in favour of Dutch interests. And indeed, one of those parties paid for it. The socialists weren't happy with the concessions, so they voted for other leftist parties en masse. The PvdA went from the second biggest party in the country to one of the smallest (3rd or 4th smallest of about 15 parties). That's the equivalent of the Democrats going from what they are now to the size of the Libertarian party or another one of those 2-3 seat parties in the US. It was dramatic for them after being a prominent party for decades. They committed political suicide to prevent the Netherlands from suffering unnecessarily under an ineffective government (the VVD got away with it somehow, I guess more forgiving voters). In the US they chose the ineffective government. That's one of the best examples of the difference in mentality.
    2
  1433. +Richard Marshall Sure, and you talk about "God-given rights", yet it's openly known that your government spies on civilians and you do nothing , what about your "God-given right" of privacy? It's openly known that lobbyists almost fully control politicians and their voting behaviour and you do nothing , what about your right to self determination (democracy)? A government that doesn't properly represent you can bind you by law and you tell me I'm being oppressed? Your police loves pulling the trigger real fast, meaning the government is actually killing civilians almost on a daily basis and you do nothing about it. The government can legally abduct Americans and put them in a torture camp if they suspect them of being involved in terrorism (without trial!) and you do nothing . That's the right to a fair trial and prohibition of torture straight up ignored. I find it quite funny how Americans always speak of owning weapons to defend themselves from a tyrannical government, because if I was American I'd have started defending my rights decades ago. It's crazy how much you accept from the government. It's not about it being big or small, it's about fighting for a proper government. I wish you had as much adoration for your fundamental rights as you espouse your precious firearms. And if the voters in my country would suddenly want firearms for whatever reason, it's done. Politics here actually represent the people. Just last elections, two new parties entered parliament and one of them is already projected to become one of the biggest next elections. All you need is 30k signatures and you're in the race. And unlike in the US, where one has to turn to big companies to fund their multi-million or even billion-dollar campaign, here everyone gets the same amount of money and equal time on television. If the voters want weapons, they get it. If you want something from politicians, he has to wonder whether his sugar daddy will still pay for his next campaign or if it's game over for his political career. New party? No money for the campaign. What you don't understand is that the status quo in Europe is the result of civilians constantly standing up to government. All the way from the time of kings to the early days of parliaments. Revolution after revolution introduced new ideas of how government should be and every time the government fell. America prefers to stay the same, for better or worse. You're one of the newest countries, yet you have the second or third oldest constitution in the world. You missed a few revolutions, you never challenged the government, not even once. Stuck in 1776. If Europeans were living under the US government, a revolution would have already started today. What your government does is unacceptable
    2
  1434. There's always something going on. Both parties are known to use incredibly anti-democratic tactics to influence elections. This is basically standard practice. Trying to get Green Party or Libertarian party off the ballot, gerrymandering, actual ballot stuffing. It goes on for sure and on several occasions was uncovered. Both Reps and Dems are guilty. I'd be concerned if people thought NOTHING was going on, tbh.
    2
  1435. I'm convinced these guys are worse than Trump. I fully expect economic policy that is more or less the same as Trump, but with more free trade (i.e. shipping jobs abroad for corporate profit) and a much softer stance on China. And I expect a few foreign interventions that cause a lot more issues than what they fix. Trump is worse in other ways, but overall I'd probably pick him over these two.
    2
  1436. Well then at least pay us a billion or so when you take it
    2
  1437. +DrDoctorDerp Actually, France has the most SOFT (diplomatic) power, the UK the second most and only then comes the USA. Of course in HARD (military) power you are number 1. Nowadays you can barely get your allies to do stuff diplomatically, let alone others. But you have your hard power to fall back on, so it should be fine
    2
  1438. Tariffs make both sides bleed, common knowledge
    2
  1439. Jet built purely for air superiority > jet built for multirole No surprise there. Now compare the Eurofighter to any other multirole out there.
    2
  1440.  @YKK1357  Liberale moslims zijn moslim, fundamentalistische moslims zoals salafisten en wahhabisten zijn moslim, gewelddadige fundamentalistische moslims zoals terroristen zijn moslim. Het zijn allemaal moslims of je het nu wil of niet. Als ik een salafist vraag of jij een echte moslim bent zegt hij waarschijnlijk van niet, maar dat betekent niet dat dat ook zo is. Er zijn verschillende interpretaties van de islam en allemaal, inclusief de gewelddadige interpretaties, zijn ze islamitisch. Punt. Erken de gebreken in je geloof: er zijn veel te veel islamitische fundamentalisten en veel te veel islamitische terroristen. Dat komt ergens vandaan en je lost het niet op door te ontkennen dat het ook maar iets met de islam te maken heeft. Niet met JOUW islam misschien, maar wel met die van hun. En dat is het probleem. Fundamentalistische/gewelddadige interpretaties van de islam bestaan en ze hebben veel gevolg.
    2
  1441.  @konya17  Dat betekent dat Mohamed zelf geen moslim was. Hij vocht regelmatig en verspreidde het geloof mede dmv oorlog. Nu ga je me waarschijnlijk vertellen dat al het geweld dat de profeet toepaste rechtvaardig was en een reactie op aanvallen van de vijand. En daarop zeg ik dat terroristen denken dat hun geweld rechtvaardig is en als reactie te zien is op westerse oorlogen in het midden oosten, net als oorlogen die voorheen in naam der islam zijn gevoerd. Er is nul komma nul te vinden over kruistochten in het nieuwe testament van de bijbel, of welk soort oorlog dan ook. Tóch waren de kruisvaarders christenen die in de naam van god oorlog voerden. En ja de kruistochten waren christelijk. Wat in de bijbel/koran staat maakt het niet los van de religieuze context. Nog erger zijn de mormonen in de VS. Zij bedachten zelf een complete extra profeet en geschrift bij het christendom om Amerika het middelpunt van de religie te maken. Duidelijk een verbastering van het christendom, maar TOCH een stroming van het christendom. Een stroming die door alle andere christenen als fout wordt gezien, maar desalniettemin een stroming van het christendom. Jij bepaalt niet hoe anderen invulling geven aan hun islamitische geloof, noch kunnen anderen bepalen hoe jij dat doet. Jij hebt jouw interpretatie, zij hebben die van hun. Islam is een religie met vele interpretaties. En je zal moeten leren leven met het feit dat sommige interpretaties niet verenigbaar zullen zijn met die van jou. TOCH zijn dat moslims. En daar kun jij niks aan veranderen. Zij geloven oprecht in de islam, maar lezen de geschriften anders. Misschien neemt de een alles letterlijk, misschien leest de ander meer tussen de regels, misschien ziet weer een ander zelfs de gehele koran als symbolisch. Het zijn allemaal mogelijke manieren om hetzelfde boek te lezen. En geen van deze interpretaties kan objectief als "correct" worden bestempeld. En allemaal zijn ze even valide in hun geloof.
    2
  1442. +My Boy Saying it's "original" about the US anthem is a bad joke. The entire song is a rip-off of a British drinking song called To Anacreon in Heaven. That is probably why it was never a good anthem to begin with; it wasn't written as a national anthem . It was written by a bunch of British musicians who had developed a liking towards alcohol and prostitutes...
    2
  1443. Damn.... people who call the Polish Nazis should look up the crazy plan National Socialists had for Poland. They wanted to take the entire country and murder almost all Poles
    2
  1444. Nou hier zouden ze een grote kans hebben om voor doodslag vervolgd te worden, en die straf ligt heel wat hoger. Als ze heir voor zware mishandeling zouden worden vervolgd, zouden ze een vergelijkbare straf krijgen
    2
  1445.  @eldricshadowchaser5454  The EU would likely open up to Russia more, maybe even attempt an alliance. This would crash the global market for sure (everyone affected, including economic suicide for the US to even try this), but there would at the same time be much more trade between Russia and the EU.
    2
  1446. No, people got tired of seeing their best standards threatened by horrible government policies
    2
  1447. Stop calling everything propaganda... This is a very accurate and fair representation of the Iran Deal and the fact that they didn't mention Israel's nuclear arsenal (which is common knowledge anyway) doesn't magically make it propaganda. The more you use that term, the less meaning it has. Reserve it for real propaganda...
    2
  1448.  @nabil9772  Het probleem is dat de islam GEEN kritiek accepteert, pipo
    2
  1449. +Critically Thought Read my comment again, carefully. Where did I mention that people who attended public schools can't be smart or intelligent? I didn't, I said they would have received sub-par education in their middle school. I would never say Americans are by nature unintelligent, that would almost be like saying X race is inferior to Y, which is of course nonsense. But what I do believe is that a lot of Americans receive sub-par education.
    2
  1450.  @technoloverish  I do, as long as it stays sane. Most Christians in Western Europe accept gays, almost all even. In Eastern Europe you will see a lot more Christians who believe it's unnatural, etc. but they are not the type of Christian as Westboro church or something. I live in the Netherlands, pretty much nobody is against gay rights here. Among the absolute most conservative Christians, you have people that think it's a sin and therefore a good Christian should not engage in homosexual relations if he/she has such feelings and should live a celibate life. But even by them, homosexual relations are seen as a normal sin (i.e. like lying: everyone does it and everybody has some sort of sin, but you should absolutely try not to). But that is how they think Christians should deal with being gay, they do accept that others are gay and can openly be such.
    2
  1451. Yeah lol
    2
  1452. Even the most amazing work on the planet doesn't justify 50 billion dollars in income. Saving the bloody planet doesn't justify it. Nobody needs that amount of money and if you know what you can do with it it becomes painful to hear him say he deserved it. Sure some work deserves more pay than other work. Some unique important work might even justify very high pay. But 50 billion is off the charts. He has it now, fine, but to say something like "I worked hard for it" is just.... eh. That's the yearly income of certain countries. One man can't feasibly work hard enough or be important enough to say his work is worth more than what an entire country can produce with millions of people. He has no sense of balance.
    2
  1453.  @tjorvenplontke2806  Yes, exactly. We should rightly fear what Russia can do in a short term war, but in the long term the EU alone can dwarf Russia with its war economy and population pool.
    2
  1454. Hij gaat weer oorlogje spelen zoals alle presidenten voor Trump
    2
  1455. Cruise ships come in, unload over 1000 people at a time into one city's centre and you don't even see the problem?
    2
  1456. +Tengo Tapwater You are not the only ones to be proud of or brag about your country, but you ARE the only ones to literally think you are the best of the world and put other countries down! Normal people are just proud and don't feel the need to develop a superiority complex with it... That is the main problem with Americans in general. And before you say I don't know what I'm talking about, I have family in the US and I've been there plenty of times. My personal experiences confirm some of the stereotypes. It's the only place I ever actually heard a real life person say their country is the best in the world.
    2
  1457. Helaas wel ja. Ik vind het ook wel grappig dat hij tegen zijn donoren heeft gezegd dat "nothing will fundamentally change", maar hier nu doodleuk zegt dat een stem op hem een stem voor "change" is. Die man is door en door corrupt. Hij dient zijn donoren, niet het volk.
    2
  1458. Een organisatie als de NTR bepaalt eventjes voor alle Nederlanders dat Zwarte Piet niet kan. De meeste Nederlanders maakt het niet zo uit hoe ZP eruit ziet, maar tegelijkertijd laten we ons niets opleggen en veranderingen vinden plaats waar goede argumenten voor zijn. Oftewel niet onzin als Zwarte Piet met de zwaar racistische Jim Crow blackface vergelijken "want allebei zijn ze zwart geschminkt". Je verandert niet zomaar een traditie als deze. Dat gebeurt óf op een natuurlijke manier, óf op basis van goede argumenten. En anders gewoon niet. Doen we dat wel dan laten we over ons heen lopen. Ik luister oprecht naar de anti-ZP demonstranten, maar ik vind hun argumenten simpelweg bagger. En ik ben half zwart dus moet je nagaan...
    2
  1459. +SamAdams3011 You sure? Both the USSR and the British Empire contributed more to defeating the fascists in Europe, in terms of actual fighting.
    2
  1460.  @mitchellline4242  Hmmm well then he is wrong. While he is correct about the similarities between NS and Marxism, he also should recognise that there are large differences between Marxist Socialism and National Socialism, even though they can both be called Socialism. Mainly class struggle vs class collaboration.
    2
  1461.  @mariekerot3962  Racist
    2
  1462. Go read a book TIK.... because I can't wait for more videos of yours ;)
    2
  1463. AWResistance You must mean Protestantism?
    2
  1464.  @caiovilela9912  European nationality/culture and British-Indian ethnicity. Ethnicity and culture are not the same. And nationality is the most useless point of reference possible when it comes to actual identity. Nationality meanas nothing anymore, but culture and ethnicity do. In the context of casting choices based on looks, we are of course talking about ethnicity. So yes, she is European in the nationality sense, in the cultural sense, but she is half European in the ethnicity sense. Personally I think her complexion is light enough for it to be okay, but others feel differently and that is not racist. This show is supposed to be about a fantasy adaptation of medieval Europe, so you'd expect an ethnically European cast for authenticity sake. There were black people in medieval Europe, even in the aristocracy and similar high social positions, but they were extremely rare so their presence has to be explained. In terms of Indian, technically speaking gypsies have been here for a very long time so that's possible.
    2
  1465. Heb ik wel meer met de SP. Goed in bekritiseren, maar twijfelachtige eigen visie
    2
  1466. Why not both? :)
    2
  1467.  @iaingunn2001  They can't even operate all of it without running out of oil, nor can they project power in any meaningful way, but yeah technically they have the numbers
    2
  1468. Ja, ik vind het walgelijk om die protestborden met "sinterklaas voor elk kind" te zien. De enige kinderen die zwarte piet als racisme of iets anders negatiefs zien zijn degenen wiens ouders ze hebben ingefluisterd dat zwarte piet slecht is. Het gaat ze niet om de kinderen, het gaat ze om henzelf. En het is natuurlijk ook slecht om de hooligan uit te hangen maar ten minste doen zij het om dat gezeur bij de kinderen weg te houden.
    2
  1469. +Als hij zag dat hij geen echt wapen in de hand had was het gewoon een goeie actie
    2
  1470.  @DennisTjhie  But there is in EU law. The child has the right to family life, which entails it has the right to live with its parents. There have been cases of parents without nationality getting the right to stay in an EU country because the child had the nationality, because it is deemed a right of the child to grow up with its parents present. This way, the mother can in theory indirectly acquire citizenship (or at the least, a right to stay). But of course it is not certain whether the same applies to Shamima. It is, however, possible.
    2
  1471. +Shadow Heart "Nature and progress". Sure. Editing humans is what is against nature and progress. Gene editing is too intricate and dangerous to apply to all of humanity. It puts our very existence in peril. You probably think our day and age is "nature and progress" over 4000 years ago too, even though we as humans sooner regressed than progressed in that time. With technology and civilisation we ditched natural selection and impaired all genetic progress. Fiddling around with our genes isn't going to compensate for that. Its use should be limited to eradicating certain diseases. Any big changes made to all of humanity can have some seriously adverse effects. If you want us to improve, let nature do it.
    2
  1472. 1940? Zero chance. 1945? I'm thinking Germany got this. Stg44 vs AK47 is a match. Tiger II tanks can with some difficulties take on early post war Soviet tanks. But the air force is in trouble though. More men for sure, probably more tanks. Give them some time to organise and they could pull it off
    2
  1473. Zixiang He What about 1945 (if Germany was never defeated and had time to organise)? AK47 vs StG44 (a match) T54/55/62 vs Tiger II, Panther II, Maus (edge for NK, but Germany has tanks capable of killing everything NK has) Mig-15/17/etc. vs Me262 (RIP Me262, could maybe challenge Mig-15 but will probably lose hard anyway) Germany probably more men and tanks, capable of outproducing NK. NK has air superiority for sure. Sounds interesting
    2
  1474. +Warlord25100 I have insurance too, but I can't pay for it because I'm a poor student right now. You know who pays it? My society. We care for eachother, we look out for eachother. I had my wisdom teeth pulled a moth or two ago and guess what? I'm don't have a 5000 euro debt from one dentist visit, nor did I have any reason to skip dentist visits like a lot of destitute Americans do. It's because we care about eachother here. When I'm done with my law study and go to work, I get to pay taxes to help others in my society too. But helping one another is not something you would understand, it's founded in thousands of years of shared history, all the way back to us being barbaric tribes. Not something you have with other Americans, living in a melting pot, so I suppose you feel no connection or sympathy whatsoever for eachother there
    2
  1475. My only problem with this is that they Americanised it. They threw Slavic culture and European mythology out the window in favour of a typical diverse Hollywood cast. They made elves, which are mythological people supposed to represent our hunter-gatherer ancestors, black. It's just annoying that their view of "diversity" is making every film the same Americanised melting pot instead of authentically portraying stories from cultures around the world (you know... REAL diversity). This should have been a portrayal of a Slavic story, based on European mythology. It should have been the Polish Lord of the Rings, if you will. But on the bright side, Geralt looks stunning, Triss looks great, Ciri looks great, Yen looks a bit too young but she might make up for that in acting and they seem to properly follow the books. But they really miss that Slavic atmosphere. If this was made in the early 2000's we'd have had another epic Lord of the Rings type story with fully authentic cast, but eh... it's current year of course. The current trend of making everything the same and calling it "diversity" is annoying me. But it looks well made and a proper book adaptation, so I'll give it a watch. Ultimately it's no deal breaker.
    2
  1476.  @hansblanken2546  Wat bedoel je daarmee? Impliceer je dat Baudet voor vrouwen verkrachten/aanranden is, voor "metoo" praktijken? Of gewoon dat hij flirt met vrouwen, ook als ze eerder nee hebben gezegd en ze in zijn ogen "hard to get" spelen? In geval van het laatste, wat is daar precies mis mee als het bij praten en respectvol flirten blijft?
    2
  1477. So you will try to destroy a country and the lives of the people within it just to stay number one (which you won't even without China)? You are truly pathetic. The rise of China, whatever you think about it, is inevitable. Unless you cause massive political unrest within China, that is (i.e. civil war). The only way to stop China is to destroy it. It's going to happen and you are to deal with it. Give up on your pathetic "we are number one" dream. Empires rise and fall, it's all a cycle that you can't stop.
    2
  1478. +Craxus Alby And so will the US if the world stops trading, so will any large economy. What is your point? China isn't special in this respect. Such behaviour will likely cause a massive crisis, with everyone suffering in the end. It's not a realistic option
    2
  1479.  @narrativequestion  Then Qatar should not have used modern slaves to build the stadiums and especially should have ensured proper safety rules were in place to prevent unnecessary deaths. They made it an in-house political issue for the world cup.
    2
  1480. Ja klopt, zo voel ik over beide kanten. Wat een gezeur
    2
  1481. +Bagel Bandit Nice superiority complex you got there
    2
  1482. The terrorist was literally brought here by globalists, indeed
    2
  1483. I don't know, why have Saudi Arabia and similarly (oil) rich Muslim countries taken close to zero Syrian refugees? They don't care. Countries like Lebanon, Turkey and more have taken the brunt of them. Even the EU took more than the neighbouring country of Saudi Arabia. They're morally bankrupt nations.
    2
  1484.  @essieb778  Thanks, he's all grown up now but still as adorable as ever
    2
  1485. Where and what happened?
    2
  1486.  Marco  Klopt, enige reden dat wij niet in Saoedi Arabië: christelijke editie wonen is de renaissance en de verlichting.
    2
  1487. UK* They prevented Greece from falling behind the iron curtain after WW2 and also struck a deal with Stalin that involved leaving Greece out of the USSR's sphere of influence and in the British sphere of influence.
    2
  1488. @The Wave Afpakken van NL paspoort, ook als ze dan staatloos worden. Dat deert me niet. Of voor zover ze hier zijn, een lange gevangenisstraf. Ik begrijp dat de vrouw in kwestie maar 1 jaar kreeg, wat belachelijk is.
    2
  1489. @The Wave Een moord in Nederland is ons probleem, als iemand buiten Nederland afreist naar onze vijand vind ik dat we die persoon kunnen laten vallen. Dit is geen onderscheid maken tussen Nederlanders; alle Nederlanders die dat doen zijn landverraders die wat mij betreft hun paspoort kwijt mogen raken. Maar goed... blijf maar hard proberen om allerlei vreemde dingen te lezen in mijn comments die ik niet heb gezegd.
    2
  1490.  @RutgerS.  Als men keer op keer maar niet lijkt te begrijpen hoe destructief de regeringsstijl van Rutte is voor de democratie en hoezeer die regeringsstijl ook lijnrecht tegenover ons staatsrecht staat, dan vind ik overdreven termen niet misplaatst. Ik zou niet vanuit mijzelf de term NSB'er gebruiken, maar ik snap waarom Janssen hem gebruikte. Vandaar dat ik toch de verdediging op mij nam.
    2
  1491.  Flash Gordon  Warren would be a terrible stab in the back, but I see her do it...
    2
  1492. You would have a point if NATO actually bothered to defend Europe. The truth is that NATO is used as America's personal foreign intervention tool, sometimes even at the expense of its allies. The NATO intervention in Libya, for instance, caused a migrant stream into Europe... The US doesn't care about Europe, it uses NATO for personal gain , even if it damages Europe. Why should Europe be paying for the US' little war games? War games that not only aren't in the interest of Europe, but can be HOSTILE to Europe?
    2
  1493. You're going to be wanting to take it easy with the trade war. If the US-EU trade war gets so bad that it would be better for the EU to switch to a Eurasian alliance with Russia and China, the USA is done for. And I mean done for permanently. You could have your isolated America and an isolated America can take care of itself, but at that point your superpower days would be over. And if the Eurasian alliance would drop the dollar as reserve (which they probably would), the US economy would instantly crumble and fall apart. The one and only reason the EU is not dropping the US is this: our economy is dependent on your trade. In short, you give us heaps of money and we don't destroy the US by partnering with Russia and China. Your economy is highly dependent on the petrodollar, so be careful with your allies. If the dollar is dropped as a reserve currency by enough countries and sold en masse, it loses its value on Zimbabwan dollar levels... This is exactly what would happen in the case of a Eurasian alliance. Get ready to print some 1 trillion dollar notes if you turn on the EU. There's a reason for the trans-Atlantic alliance and the huge appeasement of EU economic interests.
    2
  1494. Israel.... lmao. And the bloody US, where this SJW madness is the absolute worst in the entire west.... Only your mention of Eastern Europe has some sense in it
    2
  1495. Dammit I hoped Belgium would win this one
    2
  1496. From what I've read, the feasibility of a nuclear bomb was shared with the US relatively early in the war, along with other highly valuable information, but the British didn't share their progress until their own project stagnated due to the war damaging their abilities to further research, somewhat later in the war. And Oppenheimer said about this that the later British shared research sped up the development by months, perhaps a year, as despite having to shelve the project later, they had made farther progress than the Americans thus far. But yes, this would be an interesting video indeed, I don't know whether this is all correct (perhaps Oppenheimer f.e. downplayed the role of British research?).
    2
  1497. +Oscar spain Ramírez ibiza Misschien komt het zo over omdat we in het noorden over het algemeen veel kouder zijn in de omgang en niet zo makkelijk vrienden maken. Maar als we op vakantie gaan in een land waar mensen veel warmer zijn en makkelijk in de omgang, passen wij ons enigszins aan. Gewoon een cultuurverschil
    2
  1498. I have relatives in America too, in Maryland as well as Texas. Visited them on numerous occasions (Maryland, not Texas yet). And Africa is not all like a food-depraved wasteland either, but that doesn't mean we should ignore the parts of it that are.
    2
  1499. +maykolee Look another troll and/or unintelligent conspiracy theorist that mindlessly brands the BBC as being fake news or biased. Read the description...
    2
  1500. @Ro Ensch Ze zijn netto ontvangers van EU geld, geloof ik. Dus leuk dat ze erbij willen, extra handel en zo, maar de financiële bijdrage voor ons gaat dan ook iets omhoog.
    2
  1501.  @criminaliteitcijfersenafkomst  Als ik vind dat de invasie van Amerika slecht was en de inheemse bevolking van elk land beschermd moet worden en in stand moet worden gehouden, ben ik dan een "identiteitspoliticus"? Dit gaat niet om identiteitspolitiek, dit gaat om of het moreel juist is om de inheemse bevolking van een land om te volken tot het punt dat ze de minderheid zijn in hun eigen land zijn. Ik vind dat moreel onjuist, of we het nu over de Native Americans, Afrikanen, Aboriginals of Europeanen hebben. Ik vind dat niet alleen onjuist, maar een ronduit kwaadaardig iets om te doen. En dat maakt mij of Baudet geen identiteitspoliticus. En even voor de duidelijkheid, migratie is niet per definitie omvolking of slecht, ik spreek pas van omvolking als migratie zo ver gaat dat de inheemse bevolking van een land niet meer de dominante cultuur binnen dat land is. Er is niets mis met migratie zolang zoiets ingrijpends niet gebeurt. Baudet is heel duidelijk in waar hij voor staat. Je kan zijn opvattingen lezen in de vele boeken/etc. die hij heeft geschreven, in het partijprogramma van FvD, in de vele speeches en debatten die hij heeft gevoerd, etc. etc. en het is ronduit belachelijk om op basis van enkele woorden zoals boreaal dat allemaal uit het raam te gooien en te zeggen "dat geloof je niet echt, eigenlijk geloof je dit en sta je alleen maar voor blanke Nederlanders". Slaat totaal nergens op.
    2
  1502. I'd say the US deciding not to aid in war or to only send a token force for assistance is more realistic than the EU not being unified when attacked. So I agree with you there
    2
  1503.  @arminius-6339  Yennefer is fine. Her skin is light enough to make it work
    2
  1504. +jj deg It is you that is the moron. This "behaviour" of mine didn't start becoming popular until they actually started being a problematic group . Where is this "behaviour" towards black people in Europe? Virtually non-existant compared to the anti-muslim sentiment. Where is it towards Asians? Again virtually non-existant. We tried hard to integrate them but they simply refused. And as they refused, the Dutch society became more and more frustrated with them and only THEN did the stigmatisation actually start. There is no stigmatisation towards those that wilfully integrated, regardless of skin colour or ethnicity and that includes Moroccans/Turks/whatever that did deign to integrate; we love them. This is about the group that wilfully secludes themselves, raise their children to be different from Dutch children, etc. etc. As I said, they and they alone are foreigners BY CHOICE. You apparently want to solve a serious problem by never even speaking about it (because that is "stigmatisation") and letting it worsen. Do you have any idea how much worse it would be today if we never named the problem and acted on it? Just so you know: most European governments already gave up on multiculturalism long ago and instead focus on assimilation into the culture now. We recognised the issues that come with multiple cultures living separately, so instead we try to assimilate all migrants into our own culture. If it were up to you we'd have never even spoken about those issues, let alone acted on it. If it were up to you, we'd be living in an even worse society right now with far less migrants that assimilated and even more tensions between cultures. You'd make a horrible politician
    2
  1505.  @polypor7644  Nee, ik zie het juist als een alternatief voor een EU leger. Samenwerking zonder vereniging.
    2
  1506.  @homer1273  I am not lying. The big difference between South American illegal migrants in the US is that abusing them is... illegal. And the state tries to hunt down those that do abuse migrants. So I have an issue with the individuals who abuse illegal migrants, but not the US as a whole, because they are also against it. Regarding prisons, I agree. The US constitution does exclude prisoners from the abolishment of slavery and they do work for free. In my country, prisoners have the choice to work or not, and they are paid (very little due to being prisoners) for it too. The US should change this. I do criticise them for it. But because the US doesn't use an army of prisoners to build football stadiums for their world cup, I don't think it is necessary to boycott a world cup in the US because of their prison system. There are many more things the US can be criticised for, but none have directly to do with a world cup. Qatar has legal modern slavery AND has specifically used modern slaves to build the infrastructure for the world cup. This puts a direct link between their abusive behaviour and the world cup and is the reason why I think anyone should boycott it.
    2
  1507. It's rewind time
    2
  1508.  @EpicMRPancake  Saudi Arabia was made into what it is today by the Americans, literally from day one. They have supported the Saudis since the very beginning and collaborated to extract oil. America's foreing policy is NOT based on "spreading democracy". It has enacted more coup d'etats that ended in installing US-friendly dictators than it expelled dictators in favour of democracy. US foreign policy is based on keeping the petrodollar alive (which essentially means the dollar will always be strong currency, which makes the US economy very easy to maintain). If you didn't know, countries across the globe are more or less forced to buy oil with dollars. This keeps demand for dollars perpetually high. This means that the US central bank can get away with printing dollars to a great degree without heavy inflation. The US sometimes even prints free money for their allies in the EU, Japan, etc. After the 2008 crisis the US federal reserve essentially printed money and gave it out through so-called swap lines to the EU and other allies. So you make sure your allies in this petrodollar scheme also benefit every so often. But the petrodollar also means that once the demand for the dollar collapses, the US economy is in for a wild ride as the dollar collapses with the demand. Countries that don't comply with this petrodollar idea and sell their oil for other currency are Russia (rubles), Iran (euros), pre-invasion Syria (euros, I think), pre-invasion Iraq (euros), China (yuan) and pre-invasion Libya (wanted to create a new African currency). If enough countries ditch the petrodollar idea, demand for the dollar will collapse and the US economy would be in serious trouble. Up until now, every country that opposed the petrodollar has either been outright invaded or bombarded with economic and political sanctions. Saudi Arabia is not a target for regime change because they're a US ally in this, simple as that. They're an important ally in the petrodollar scheme and are a huge Western arms buyer. After Kashoggi, the EU decided to not sell any more arms to Saudi Arabia. That means they've given up billions upon billions of euros based on principle. The US not only won't do this, but they'll actively overthrow otherwise stable countries purely for their own political interests. Toppling Gaddafi was "necessary" to protect both the petrodollar and French monetary interests in Africa (the francophone African countries use a French currency), because he wanted to sell oil for another currency and wanted to create a pan-African currency for African economic independence.
    2
  1509.  @Joker-yw9hl  A break up in trade would destroy not only the US and EU but the global economy. I don't know why you assume the US would just carry on, they'd be economically hurt and badly. EU too. A war like this is economic suicide for both sides
    2
  1510.  @herbertbruna  Oh the Syrians would know exactly what to do with them. Throw them in a prison and throw away the key
    2
  1511. That is too simple. If their historical relevance is purely related to defending slavery (like the Confederates), taking them down is the way to go. There is nothing to honour about those people. It's like erecting a statue of Hitler in Germany because he was a skilled statesman and is of great historical relevance to Germany. Well, central to his history is a deeply racist ideology, so that overshadows everything. But historical figures that were racist, but are known for non-racist actions should be honoured regardless. We shouldn't scrutinise people's full character by today's character and erase those who can't withstand this test. That goes too far.
    2
  1512.  @reallyjustme  Ja ze zijn de controle volledig kwijt daar. De criminelen zijn te sterk voor ze, dus krijg je steeds meer eigenrichting door burgers.
    2
  1513.  @dunklerKurfurstDesDeepstat  That much is certainly true. The Nazi economy was pretty shit
    2
  1514.  @sebastianliebmann6014  For a country based on individual liberty, the US has a strange obsession with respecting and serving the nation
    2
  1515.  @przw3920  Ja, de economische component van de EU dus. De EEG is opgegaan in de EU
    2
  1516. Just get out of NATO and sod off out of Europe. All the US has used NATO for is furthering its own interest. It has nothing to do with protecting Europe. In fact, with Libya and Syria, NATO/US has been damaging Europe more than protecting it. The EU can defend itself, no more US wargames.
    2
  1517. +The Slim Reaper Doe nou maar rustig. Deze video zegt helemaal niets over of dit goed of fout is, de NOS rapporteert alleen maar over het feit dat hier gedoe over is. Ikzelf vind het een nogal onsmakelijke zet van Duterte maar verder geen me too onzin of zo. Als de vrouw er geen problemen mee heeft dan boeit het mij niet zo. Deze video laat alleen zien wat er is gebeurd en rapporteert over de discussie. De NOS zelf heeft helemaal geen opinie geopenbaard met deze video, dus hoe is dit onzin?
    2
  1518. Next: Can the US invade the EU (with or without UK support to US)?
    2
  1519. So France can burn the Mona Lisa with zero criticism? Okay.
    2
  1520. Lol so crossing the border once is "a life of crime" now? You must be kidding. This woman should never have attempted to get into the US illegally, but the US effectively stole her child away and didn't even deign to inform her where he went and how he's doing. It's unjustifiable and completely disproportional
    2
  1521.  @optimchs  Morality is relative, I'm sorry to share it with you. Morality rises not from some higher understanding of "good", but from pure practical needs. If history went differently, our morality would be different too. That doesn't mean our morality is meaningless, however. It is important to see that our morality has great value in preventing past suffering from happening again. Moral rules like all humans having equal intrinsic value were borne of the suffering of protestants and catholics killing one another en masse hundreds of years ago. It's a random rule we made up out of nowhere, as a practical solution to end the suffering. Recognising that our morality is relative and merely the product of our history is not the same as saying it is meaningless or we shouldn't expand upon it. The truth is that morality is relative, the basis of morality is not a matter of fact but a matter of opinion. No authoritative "higher morality" exists. It's all a fluke. A fluke that has proven to be very important to us.
    2
  1522.  @optimchs  I believe that too, but as I said before we believe that for one reason only: hundreds of years ago we made up this concept of an equal intrinsic value in humans that today is at the centre of our morality. I love this idea, but we all have to face the fact that it's a fluke and not a "fact". We made it up. By the same token we could have made up that all life on earth has intrinsic value (something I'm a proponent of by the way), but we didn't so we've created a society that destroys nature and kills animals at a huge scale just for economic gain. We think this is "good" anyway because of our human-centric morality. We could have made up that those who contribute more to the wellbeing of society are also more worth as humans. You name it. And you can't argue against any of these forms of morality. Slavery was normal and even morally correct for many years until the concept of equal human worth was created. There is no central uniform "correct" morality. It all depends on what you base your morality; keeping human suffering to a minimum? If so, is it okay to make some humans suffer for the greater good of society or not? Or perhaps morality based on a broader sense of ecological balance in nature, which includes not only the wellbeing of humans but also those of animals? What is "good"? It's subjective, this is the harsh truth of reality. I think we in the West have one of the best moral systems on the planet today, but it's not the only "correct" one. It's just the one we've developed more or less by chance throughout our history. Every time an event of great suffering occurred, we invented or expanded upon a moral rule to prevent it from happening again. I already explained where the idea of equal human worth came from. Another example of our morality changing is WW2, after which we drastically cranked up the value of human rights as a part of our morality, as well as the idea that diplomacy should always precede war. Before that, especially before WW1, war was considered normal and honourable to participate in and human rights barely existed.
    2
  1523.  @p.m.8316  Immigratie is het grote probleem dat de bevolkingsgroei en daarmee de woningnood creëert. Dat is niet de schuld van de immigranten die komen, maar wel de overheid die die migratie toelaat. Het moet STOPPEN. NL raakt overbevolkt en het gaat zo snel dat we het qua woningbouw niet eens kunnen bijhouden. De politiek is blind voor de problemen die migratie veroorzaakt en ziet elk anti-migratie standpunt als xenofoob.
    2
  1524.  @Waterdiver3900  Nee, het gaat erom dat boeren op andere manieren de voedselproductie kunnen inrichten. Het volbouwen van NL is een heel ander probleem dat wordt aangezwengeld door massaimmigratie en de ruimte die nodig is om de daardoor groeiende bevolking te huisvesten. NL is vol, alle grond heeft al een bestemming. Als je wil bouwen zul je een boer moeten wegjagen of natuur kappen.
    2
  1525.  @MrJohn3927  Ik vind het veranderen van hoe wij voedsel produceren een constructieve oplossing waar ook boeren wat aan hebben. De groenlinks types die grijpen alles aan om de boeren weg te krijgen, zodat er weer een perceeltje vrij is om een nieuwbouwwijk te plaatsen die alleen nodig is vanwege massaimmigratie.
    2
  1526. Wat een idioterie zeg... handschudden is mogelijk al meer dan 2000 jaar oud, maar een griepje met een 2% sterftecijfer gaat dat eventjes afschaffen. Sjonge jonge, wat een domme video. We doen het eventjes niet, maar als het coronadrama is overgewaaid gaat alles weer terug naar hoe het was. Het is erg allemaal, maar ook niet bepaald een zwarte dood of zo. En zelfs die plaag heeft de handdruk overleefd. Sensatiezoekerij is het laatste wat we nu nodig hebben... gaan we straks ook een video maken over hoe knuffels en zoenen in de ban worden gedaan? Ach schei toch uit...
    2
  1527. Dat komt doordat de meeste Nederlanders waarschijnlijk een partij ergens tussen de VVD en FvD in willen. Er is een zeer grote groep Nederlanders die geen partij heeft die echt goed bij ze past. Dus krijg je serieuze versplintering
    2
  1528. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to attack even a relatively small nation with a modern and well-trained military? The threat of S-400's alone is enough to make Russia extremely difficult to approach, without even considering their air force or their massive war industry that could pump out Su-57s in great number if needed. Basic military strategy rule is that about you need to outnumber your enemy about 3 to 1 to ensure succes when you are attacking an entreched position. Invading in modern times is hard and the invader always has a massive disadvantage. Supply lines are problematic too. You are also forgetting that if a war starts, it is not fought with whatever military equipment the nations have now (unless it's a succesful flash invasion, which is not a realistic option here). It is fought with what the war industry of both nations can put out in terms of tanks, airplanes, etc. and the population pool that can be conscripted into the military. Russia has the technology to pump out tanks that are better than the Abrams and airplanes that are equal to the F-22 Raptor in massive numbers, should they be invaded. And this constant stream of extra equipment will not stop until you reach the industry itself and shut it down. The US doesn't have the proper supply lines or geographical position to invade Russia. However if you would take the EU and its possible industrial output (it dwarfs Russia) combined with its high population pool and very close geographical position to Russia, the EU alone could probably take Russia down in a years long conflict in which the EU war industry pumps out several times the tanks, planes, etc. and conscripts 5 times the soldiers as Russia can. Russia could in this scenario only win if they'd defeat the EU early, with the current military numbers. But as time goes by they will get hopelessly outnumbered simply because of the industry differences and population pool. Adding the US to the EU and allowing the US to use EU infrastructure would end Russia 100%. NATO is insanely powerful. But also with hundreds of thousands of deaths, maybe millions. Anyway, taking down Russia would be a huge operation that requires the full might of the NATO war industry before even trying. The US could take Russia going by pure industry and population pool numbers, but the US by itself lacks the supply lines to do it believably.
    2
  1529. Sood81 - Hasbara trolls go back to Khazaria Ah de klassieker: "er zijn ergere problemen dus je mag niet over dit probleem zeuren". Blijf jij maar geloven dat dat een deugdelijk argument is. Totaal geen drogreden hoor. Maar goed, kritisch denken is iets wat men in het anti-zwarte piet kamp niet heel goed kan. Achterhalen wat Zwarte Piet überhaupt is en waar het vandaan komt is al teveel aan hen besteed, anders wisten ze wel dat het niet racistisch is.
    2
  1530.  @bmw1725  That's overly simplistic. Before a certain point of development, ending pregnancy is not killing but preventing a lump of cells from further growing into a fully fledged human baby. The moral question is... when does a pregnancy turn from a collection of developing human cells into a living, thinking baby that should be considered a person (and thus wrongful to kill)? For me, that point is when the brain is developed to such a point where you can talk of a person to begin with. We are our brain and as long as our brain is not functioning yet, we are just an empty vessel. For babies this point lies at about 20 weeks, so when that point in the pregnancy is reached I think a foetus should be considered to be a living person. Before that point the foetus is a collection of cells that is developing into a human. I don't think it is wrong to stop the development of fertilised cells into a human, but I do think it is wrong to put the inconveniencies of carrying a baby, giving birth and taking care of the child above the literal life of a living person. So, it's 20 weeks max for me, though I wouldn't mind that period to be reduced to, say, 10 weeks or so just to be safe. But 20 weeks is my max. My preferred period would probably be 15 weeks.
    2
  1531. Problem is you’re pretending that there even js a difference between an 18+ site and Twitch. The only material difference is the lousy “are you 18” pop up. And the harsh truth is that porn sites often market their content towards minors as well. This meme porn nonsense or whatever they’re up to today is clearly aimed at very young, immature people. And yeah maybe an 18 year old still would like that, but let’s be honest it’s mostly teens around 16 that are gonna be interested in it. The truth is that ACTUAL porn sites are, probably knowingly, trying to attract minors to them. And kids can braindead easily, even accidentally, enter these full on porn sites. And besides the childish stuff, most of this porn portrays women as sex objects, not full persons with their own needs. Like 90% of porn is a woman being used in some way, not a couple having mutually pleasurable sex. It’s all based on the male gaze in a very toxic, even dehumanising way. It’s like anti-feminist brainwashing at this point, training you to see women only as objects to pleasure men. It’s disgusting and incredibly damaging. It has a real life effect in how men see real life women. All sexual harassment, r4pe, etc is based on men who, to varying degrees, see women as basically objects to use, rather than a fully fledged person. Porn is spreading this way of thinking far and wide. It causes actual harm, it’s an epidemic of dehumanisation and harm
    2
  1532. +melty mint This man is watching his career evaporate in front of his eyes. I've seen ministers here in the Netherlands openly shed a tear when forcibly leaving due to lack of confidence by parliament. It's big, not just anything. And it's also very personal, which could make anyone emotional. He knows whether he gets voted in or not, this will stick to his name. And he knows he most likely won't be voted in anyway after this. I'd be emotional in his place for sure
    2
  1533. Nou ik zou niet onderschatten hoe veel erger het zou zijn als bijvoorbeeld Groenlinks de grootste partij zou zijn. Zeker niet hetzelfde beleid, geloof me maar... Maar waar Baudet wel gelijk in heeft is dat alle gevestigde partijen naar links zijn opgeschoven. Er is geen écht rechtse partij meer, behalve nu de FvD. De VVD is verworden tot een iets rechtsere D66, met D66 iets links van het midden en de VVD iets rechts van het midden. En aan de rechterkant zat een gapend gat voordat de FvD toetrad tot de politiek.
    2
  1534. Weer teleurgesteld in de NOS. "Als we een manier vinden om het veilig en gecontroleerd te doen ben ik daar voor" is niet gelijk aan "FvD als enige voor gaswinning". Dat laatste is een zeer ongenuanceerde en onwelgevallige manier om FvD's standpunt te omschrijven en zet ze onnodig in een kwaad daglicht. Jammer weer, ik verwacht meer van de NOS
    2
  1535.  A L  Ga er dan heen en begin met genieten. Jij blij, wij blij, mooi toch?
    2
  1536. De politiek is extreem incompetent. Ze bouwen niet genoeg woningen voor migranten, dus ontstaat een drastisch woningtekort. Ze binden zich én aan allerlei natuurbeschermingsdoelen, én aan massale immigratie, wat niet met elkaar te verenigen is omdat meer mensen ook meer bouw, meer verkeer, een alsmaar meer verstedelijkt Nederland, etc. etc. betekent ten koste van de natuur. Ze negeren de culturele schade en hevige polarisatie door slechte integratie van migranten en gaan ook gewoon door met de massa immigratie.
    2
  1537. It's crazy we have 1400 billion euros in our pension system for 17 million people and France is looking at a deficit... And we're worried about the pension system too lol
    2
  1538.  BARBATVS 89  If it was in decline already, then closing down philosophy schools, murdering anyone who was a dissident (including other christians), burning books and destroying art surely didn't help.... probably accelerated it, if not outright caused the decline. And about the christian persecution, ancient Rome had freedom of religion with many religions existing among one another, including other pagan religions and judaism. Then the Christians came and while initially they were free like the others, eventually they got persecuted because there were incidents of christians destroying art and disrespecting the other religions. It started with light persecution, but got worse and worse as the conflict got out of hand, ending with christians being murdered freely. And about paganism, I'm talking about European paganism specifically. Not all paganism is the same. In Europe, nature was at the centre of spirituality so good care was taken for it. Old trees and elaborate groves were holy. The idea of taking care for the earth in order to pass it on to the next generation is a very distinctly pagan idea. You reading this into a vague biblical passage that completely is not about this is just an example of how deeply pagan values have intruded christianity by now. This happens a lot and by now it's very difficult to see which values originate from paganism and christianity. Your version of christianity too. Whether you like it or not. Christianity has been too distorted, it's no longer pure, it hasn't been for hundreds of years now. It's a mixture of pagan and christian values. According to the bible all on earth exists purely for humans to use as tools. This is an important factor in how we as societies expanded and got to this highly developed state, with its wealth but also pollution (one of the good elements of christianity, or bad depending on how you view modern society). According to European paganism we humans are subjected to nature and need to respect it. A good example of the christian versus pagan mindset is how we dealt with wolves in Europe. Pagans saw them as part of nature just as they themselves. Christians practically genocided wolves because they were an inconvenience and they almost disappeared out of Europe. To Christians only humans matter and all else exists to serve us; it was all given to us by god to use for ourselves, as the bible states. Pagans value nature as a whole, with not only humans but also other organisms. Natural balance is important to pagans, so they'd never do something like completely eradicate a species because they don't like it. Reduce it, yes, but not eradicate and certainly not purposefully.
    2
  1539. +Charles Brightman 7th time's a charm, that's what they were thinking
    2
  1540.  @hamcatjones8028  Except tribal warfare between equally matched opponents also led to colonisation and genocide, especially genocide. So... your argument is that our technological superiority was "unfair"? Because the result was not much different.
    2
  1541. Mail voting is not legal here in the Netherlands even during Covid and now I understand why... no envy here that's for sure. What a mess
    2
  1542.  @andygeller262  It's subjugation of women by religious rules, created by men. That women believe they have to wear it themselves doesn't change that. Western women in the 50's also believed that their place was the kitchen and that it was fair that they couldn't buy anything without permission of the husband, etc. That the women themselves accept it, doesn't change that it is subjugation. But yes, women who uphold those rules are equally responsible, I agree with that.
    2
  1543.  @wadebaldwin8032  Not really, living in poor areas of the US can literally be worse in every meaningful way than living in a third world country. From middle class upwards you're set for a life not as good as other first world countries but still great, but being poor in the US can actually be the same or worse than a third world country. In terms of job availability, safety and more.
    2
  1544. +Not a Russian bot You are both idiots. This video has the clear purpose of making migrants look positive, but that doesn't make it fake. A true free thinker will accept both the positive and negative facts about migrants, including the story in this video, and will make a conclusion. My conclusion is that I still despise mass migration despite all this. The negatives by far outweigh the positives. Calling this fake news will only make yourself look one sided. It is a real story. You can call into question the newsworthiness of it (zero, if you ask me), but you shouldn't call it fake. Be open minded for both the positive and negative sides to shape a proper opinion.
    2
  1545.  @pearlsbeforeswine1731  Gefeliciflapstaart
    2
  1546. +Robin Laurence More like as the world becomes more tolerant Islam will have less influence...
    2
  1547. Why though?
    2
  1548. Not unlucky at all, Italy was one of the absolute best post-WW2 Axis countries to live in and boomed beyond belief in the 50's. So he was born just about the right time
    2
  1549. His job was to arrest a suspect and bring him to court, where the evidence against him would be reviewed and a fitting punishment ordered by a judge. What he did was strangle someone to death before he even made it into the police car.
    2
  1550. The British invented computers, the US just built one. But yeah, if you take Europe and North America alone we are responsible for 97% of the world's scientific accomplishments. Quite bizarre if you think about it
    2
  1551. Vraag me af hoe ver dat ding kan. Waarschijnlijk niet meer dan een paar dozijn kilometers
    2
  1552. +Vrijheidje wijsheidje Sterker nog, het zou kunnen dat het dodenleger van Odin onze eigen gestorven voorouders moet voorstellen: Germaanse strijders die in oorlog zijn gestorven en worden geleid door Odin. Die werden door de Germanen vereerd als helden. Dan zou Zwarte Piet dus het compleet tegenovergestelde van een slaaf zijn
    2
  1553.  @kv-2thekingofderp866 Yeah... partly. Al Gore said the sea level would have risen by multiple metres and a world disaster would have happened by now because of that.
    2
  1554.  Thomas vanDyke  Wij ZIJN een Europese familie. Dat is geen idealisme maar een feit. Ik bedoel niet Europese familie in de zin van letterlijke eenheid, maar in de zin van de Europese familie van culturen en beschavingen. Daar hoort Rusland historisch gezien bij en was ook volwaardig lid tot aan hun omwenteling tot communisten, waardoor wij lange tijd gescheiden zijn geweest. Het is tijd om die relatie met Rusland weer te herstellen. Dat oud zeer heerst omtrent de wereldoorlogen is nonsens. Hoogstens heerst er (vooral binnen de politieke elite) nog vijandigheid jegens Rusland vanwege de Koude Oorlog, maar de wereldoorlogen zijn geen factor meer. Niemand haat Duitsers nog voor wat er 100 jaar geleden is gebeurd, ben ik nog nooit tegengekomen. De EU is opgericht met het doel om Europa weer op de geopolitieke kaart te zetten en dat is deels gelukt. Wij staan hoger in de ranglijst van diplomatieke/politieke invloed/macht dan zelfs Amerika. Economisch zijn wij de tweede of derde grootste markt van de wereld. Militair lopen we achter maar we hebben het geld om er in te investeren. De EU heeft veel problemen, vooral gebrek aan democratische legitimiteit en een slecht functionerende top (landen kunnen het maar niet eens worden over bijvoorbeeld migratie), maar samenwerking is onze beste kans om tegen de door jou genoemde dreigingen op te kunnen. Dat hoeft niet per se in de vorm van een Europese Unie, maar in ieder geval moet er samenwerking zijn om de belangen van Europa internationaal te beschermen. Opsplitsen is geen optie tenzij we geopolitieke zelfmoord willen plegen.
    2
  1555.  @ifiinch  It's a bot. Copy-pastes pro-china response and never replies to comments. Has to be a bot
    2
  1556. Ach, pijnlijk hè, kritiek? Mag niet, dan ben je fake news natuurlijk. Doe alsjeblieft niet zo bekrompen...
    2
  1557. Als vertegenwoordiger van een land (en dus cultuur) ergens op bezoek gaan is niet hetzelfde als in een bepaald land wonen. Als je ergens gaat wonen pas je je aan aan de heersende culturele normen en waarden. Als je ergens op bezoek gaat vertegenwoordig je je eigen culturele normen en waarden. Onderwerping van onze kant zou plaatsvinden als wij een Iraakse vrouwelijke vertegenwoordiger vragen haar hoofddoek af te doen wanneer ze hier komt: dan vragen we een buitenlandse vertegenwoordiger haar normen en waarden te onderwerpen aan die van ons.
    2
  1558. +Ferdi Adiloglu Waarom moet de Nederlandse cultuur plaats maken voor buitenlandse culturen (want dat gebeurt in een multi-culti samenleving waar iedereen rekening met elkaar moet houden), terwijl die buitenlandse culturen gewoon een eigen land hebben waar ze niet met iedereen rekening hoeven te houden? Verschillende culturen in Nederland is allemaal leuk en aardig, maar hoe zou jij het vinden als jij in een land zou wonen met een oorspronkelijke cultuur die continu concessies moet maken voor buitenlanders? Hoe zou jij het vinden om in een stad in jouw land rond te lopen maar te zien dat de wijk waar je in rondloopt meer lijkt op het buitenland dan je eigen land? Ik ben het volkomen eens met je op het gebied van ras (kleur is alleen uiterlijk en hoort niets uit te maken), maar het accepteren van buitenlandse culturen in Nederland gaat mij te ver. Dat doet namelijk af aan de Nederlandse cultuur en identiteit. Als iedereen Nederlands is, is niemand het meer. Dan is er geen Nederlander meer en is de Nederlandse identiteit verworden tot een betekenisloos stukje papier waar "Nederlander" op staat. Dan is Nederland een schaduw van wat het ooit was.
    2
  1559. Croatia deserved it, France played abysmal football
    2
  1560. Dat was tegen IS, een terreur groep die tegen alles is waar wij voor staan. Turkije valt Koerdistan binnen omdat het niet wil dat Koerden een eigen land hebben.
    2
  1561.  @matthijszeeman5351  I honestly don't even remember coverage of the politionele acties in middle school, but thankfully there is a lot of attention for it nowadays so I am aware of what happened. What I remember mostly learning of colonialism is the trade aspects, not really the conquering itself and the brutalities. Did have to read Max Havelaar though, which was nice. Overall there ought to be more attention for our past in Indonesia, I'd say.
    2
  1562.  @katiaharvey5244  Then why can we in Europe be friends and allies with the Germans after WW2? Why can I as a Dutchman like the Japanese even though they put family of mine in a concentration camp in the Dutch East Indies and horribly mistreated them? Because YOU choose to wallow in self pity and WE choose to let go of the past and move together to a better future. And besides these examples, do you REALLY think that what Europeans did abroad they didn't do to eachother? Europe is FULL of all kinds of minorities that were throughout centuries suppressed by the government. Think of Catalans, Basques, Bretagne. All people who had to conform to a national identity that is not theirs (from an ethnic and cultural point of view). What of the Irish? What of Communist rule over Eastern Europe, which can be called a form of colonialism as the Russian Communist Party took control of their land, suppressed their freedoms and culture and took their resources to manage in the USSR (sometimes this redistribution of resources caused starvation). History is full of suppression, colonialism and past injustices, but it is up to you to choose to either get stuck in the past or together move towards the future.
    2
  1563.  @andrevdende8244  Nee hoor, dat staat al vrijwel vast dat hij levenslang krijgt. Rechters geven tegenwoordig veel vaker levenslang, en wel voor veel minder dan wat deze terrorist heeft gedaan. Denk aan een liquidatie in A'dam of zo, daar is een aantal keren levenslang opgelegd, zelfs een paar dagen geleden nog twee die ik in het nieuws zag. Deze man gaat hoogstwaarschijnlijk levenslang krijgen, dat kan bijna niet anders.
    2
  1564. The European renaissance was a rebirth of Europe's pre-Christian Pagan culture and society. It brought the pre-Christian way of thinking of the Greek philosophers and more back. In order for a renaissance to be possible for Islamists, they have to have such a pre-Islamic culture that is worth reviving.
    2
  1565. Yes it is, and it is horrible. Tourism is going a few steps too far and should be reduced in favour of more diverse businesses. The world doesn't revolve around the economy, it revolves around our own happiness. The economy is part of that by providing us with wealth, but if the economy goes the wrong way it can end up destroying our happiness (i.e. cutting too many forests in favour of industry, letting in so many tourists that the country turns into a glorified tourist attraction without any substance, polluting the world until the climate changes, etc. etc.). It is all about balance.
    2
  1566. He ought to do A Bridge Too Far first, it's a much more interesting film to cover from his point of view. I liked Battle of Britain, but I doubt it's very accurate at all.
    2
  1567. ​@PragmaticHornet​ Culture blooms from history, climate, chance and more. Genes have little to no influence. Even the bloody weather is more important, as we see clear culture differences between for example colder and warmer climates that are known to be related to the weather. The main source of culture is a long shared history of a people, and by long I don't mean hundreds but thousands of years. In that time, a people develops shared customs, values and mannerisms that become such an intrinsic part of the collective conscious that they become part of our very identity. An American who has been cut away from his great grandparents' original European culture can be 100% Dutch, but he will never understand the culture to the degree someone who grew up in the Netherlands would. Same for migrants not born in the Netherlands and to a lesser degree even their children. Only growing up in the Netherlands and having parents who also pass Dutch culture onto you will you truly understand Dutch culture. Genes will not help you and genes also don't mean that if a group of people is cut away from their original culture, they develop a similar culture elsewhere. Once they're severed from their history, it's over. At best they may produce a weak karikature of the original culture, like what has happened in the US.
    2
  1568.  @eldermillennial8330  There is a lot of hypocrisy on this subject. The Zulus as well as the Dutch settled South Africa from foreign lands. The only difference is how they came there. As you say, both groups have some sort of root there now. What you can't forget however, is the lasting impact of apartheid. This has deeply separated SA and created this vision of the Europeans (or European-Africans as we might call them) as colonial dominators rather than fellow natives with a long history in South Africa. I think it's a lasting image problem created by those politics, which has created a very negative view of all Europeans living there.
    2
  1569.  @eldermillennial8330  It's truly a shame that racial pseudoscience gripped the west in the 1800's. Nowadays people tend to assume racism was just always there and the most normal thing in the world, so when I first read up on how black people were treated before racism became popular I was really surprised. People back then really didn't care about skin colour. At worst they were a bit xenophobic, but racism was just not a real thing. Knowing that history, it does give me hope that one day we'll return to the mindset that skin colour is about as irrelevant as hair colour. Thanks for the South African story on this, I never knew Europeans mixed with the locals.
    2
  1570. +Geth Creator A serious crime for which the punishment is jail time. She did her time, she underwent her punishment. So where is her child? Gone forever? Why? It's not part of the punishment, nor is it necessary because she seems perfectly capable of taking care of a child. Returning children to their biological parents is not letting them off
    2
  1571.  @WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs  The US wouldn't even be the main superpower today if WW2 hadn't happened. I don't think you understand the ridiculous amount of wealth and power that the US accumulated during WW2 and to what degree Europe was destroyed. In 1939 Western Europe was twice as rich as the US, all of Europe almost 4 times. After the world wars destroyed us, with the EU we tried to regain some of that vigour. In the early 2000's we were finally richer than the US again, then with the 2008 crisis which hit us harder we are now a bit poorer but overall about as rich as the US. So we went from twice as rich as the US and the main global superpowers down to about as rich as the US and an ally of your superpower status. In 1939 we were twice as rich (just Western Europe). By 1960 the current EU countries (Western Europe + some Eastern European countries) had a GDP of 359 billion and the US 543 billion. The second world war absolutely destroyed European supremacy and significantly boosted the US. Without WW2 we'd probably still be twice as rich as you, if not more because of added benefits of being the most powerful region in the world.
    2
  1572. If we allow EU fanatics to turn it into a superstate, yes you're right. If we fight for a reasonable and limited EU which respects the member states, then we can have the positives without the situation you describe here.
    2
  1573. Precies. Er zijn Afrikaanse stammen die hun gezicht wit verven om culturele redenen en ik vind dat mooi. Maar in Europa vinden wij cultuur niet meer mooi, het moet allemaal kapot.
    2
  1574. They'd probably make a deal dividing Europe along the lines of East-West anyway, leading to a pretty similar situation as real life. But with some more territory for USSR, like f.e. Finland.
    2
  1575. Hebben ze zelfs in de gevangenis haha
    2
  1576. Waarom doe je alsof een journalist van de NOS die moppen zit te tappen? Doe eens rustig, ze laten het alleen zien en vermelden er nog bij dat de komiek onder vuur is gekomen. En ook nog dat Trump liever tijd doorbrengt met de kiezer dan in Washington. Het ligt allemaal aan hoe je dingen zelf interpreteert. Dat geldt ook voor de vermeende gasaanval in Syrië. De NOS heeft nooit geclaimt dat er daadwerkelijk een aanval was en liet alleen de vermeende beelden zien en vermeldde erbij dat Frankrijk, de VS en het VK zeiden dat het wel degelijk een aanval was. Het ligt wederom geheel bij jezelf wat je gelooft. Wat wil je nou, dat de NOS een uur lang gaat praten over of de beelden wel of niet echt zijn of of Frankrijk wel of niet gelijk had?
    2
  1577. +Claudia Trumpsta Dat is een keuze die elke nieuwszender zal moeten maken. Fox news is eerlijkgezegd de meest walgelijke propagandazender die ik ooit heb gezien, erger zelfs dan CNN. En ik vind CNN al vreselijk. Dan sta je voor de moeilijke keuze of je alleen het verhaal van CNN uitzendt (duidelijke bevooroordeeld) of ook het verhaal van een regelrechte propagandazender. Het is kiezen tussen twee kwaden. Je miskent overigens dat als de NOS alleen het verhaal van CNN uitzendt, je nog steeds kritisch naar het verhaal kan kijken. Ik heb geen onzin van Fox news nodig om de onzin van CNN te ontmaskeren. Als NOS de bron vermeldt, dan kan ik zelf over het algemeen beoordelen of het geloofwaardig is of niet. Ik ben zelf zelfs van mening dat het uitzenden van Fox news het alleen maar erger maakt, ze verdienen geen aandacht tot ze een beetje normaal nieuws uitzenden. Ik kijk zo nu en dan naar Fox news en het is werkelijk afgrijselijk Bijvoorbeeld: als de NOS een video van de witte helmen in Syrië laat zien dan weet ik dat de bron mogelijk rebellen zijn die de Syrische overheid ergens van willen beschuldigen. Dan hoef ik geen propagandavideo te zien van Russia Today die koortsachtig probeert te "bewijzen" dat het niet waar is, terwijl eigenlijk niemand weet of die video echt is of niet. Dat voegt helemaal niks toe en je geeft propaganda een platform. Als je kritisch naar de meer neutrale nieuwszenders kijkt, dan kun je over het algemeen de waarheid wel achterhalen, of in ieder geval herkennen wat twijfelachtige bronnen zijn.
    2
  1578. +Claudia Trumpsta Het boeit me eerlijkgezegd helemaal niks hoeveel mensen naar Fox kijken. Wat mij betreft krijgt CNN ook veel meer kijkers dan ze verdienen, en dat betekent niet dat ze opeens de waarheid spreken. In de USA bestaat iets wat men nieuwszenders noemt met privaat eigenaarschap, betekenend dat die zender dezelfde politieke opvattingen heeft (of in ieder geval beïnvloed wordt door) zijn eigenaar. CNN is overduidelijk links en Fox news is overduidelijk rechts. Geen van beide kunnen vertrouwd worden . Het medialandschap in Amerika zaait niets dan verdeling, het is ronduit bizar hoe verschillend CNN en Fox het nieuws presenteren, alsof ze letterlijk in een andere wereld leven. Nee dat is niet "concurrentie", dat is het verdraaien van de waarheid. Er hoort geen tweestrijd te zijn tussen nieuwszenders omdat er maar één waarheid is en één neutrale manier om die te verkondigen. Het enige verschil tussen zenders in Europa is de manier van rapporteren en de keuze tussen bronnen en welke verhalen nieuwswaardig zijn of niet (bijvoorbeeld de keuze van de Belgische zender om Fox news als bron te gebruiken en de keuze van de NOS dit niet te doen). De zenders in Europa zijn allemaal collega's omdat mensen die naar de echte waarheid zoeken allemaal hetzelfde doel hebben . Als verslaggevers geen collega's zijn moet er een belletje gaan rinkelen; één of zelfs beiden verdraaien de waarheid tot op het punt dat hun "waarheden" niet meer met elkaar overeenstemmen. Er is maar één persoon hier die ervan houdt om voorgelogen te worden en dat ben jij als kijker van een zender dat de waarheid verdraait en de waarheid door een rechts filter giet voor het wordt uitgezonden. Fox news is net zo erg als Russia Today. Er hoort geen rechts of links kanaal te zijn, alleen neutrale zenders. De NOS is een doorgeefluik van informatie, Fox news en CNN creëren hun eigen links/rechtse verhaal. Soms zijn de keuzes van de NOS inderdaad niet perfect als het gaat om bronnen/verhalen, maar uiteindelijk doen ze niet aan het aanpassen van verhalen om in een links/rechts straatje te passen zoals Amerikaanse zenders dat doen.
    2
  1579. I think even this video gives WAY too much credit to the US. They wouldn't even get this far before stopping. Hundreds of thousands would die before reaching anything that is even slightly important. The US would be forced to stop very soon due to the sheer numbers that die in landings and initial invasions plus the fact that it'll take years more of so many deaths before they even reach the first city of some importance. And then they need to cross to the west of Russia, which is even more troublesome and likely not within their capability no matter how hard they try. This video also ignores that Russia would use its war industry to build as many S-400 and Su-57 as possible to reinforce their existing numbers, plus of course mass conscription of soldiers. Attacking Russia's east in all out war is suicide for the US because of distance, and it's even more suicide to try to reach the west from there.
    2
  1580. Echt zuur dat het 'm eigenlijk gewoon gelukt is haar te ontvoeren. Zo erg voor de moeder...
    2
  1581. I visited the castle he stayed at in the Netherlands. Always wondered what Kaiser Wilhelm thought of the German invasion of 1940 and the successes in France. Ecstatic that another regime did what he could not, or disgusted by a National Socialist Germany that is very different from the Kaiserreich?
    2
  1582. US big cities are hives of indecency and harrassment towards women. The smaller cities and countryside are fine, though.
    2
  1583. +Melvin V Het lijkt alleen maar zo, dit is een nummer van Doe Maar haha
    2
  1584. Het antwoord op beiden is ja. Zo gaan die dingen, hè
    2
  1585.  @josephclements2145  These things come from America, that is a fact. That is not to say France doesn't have its own culture, but elements like these did come from the US. I'm European myself and see it too. Another example is drill rap and its terrible effect on knife crime. Because of drill rap, it became very popular among young people to carry knives and this has led to dozens of deaths already where I live. Where does drill rap come from? Chicago. That doesn't mean we don't have our own culture, but it does mean that elements of US culture have the potency to ruin lives way beyond US borders. US culture exports glorification of violence and hypersexualisation of women like no other culture does.
    2
  1586. Waylon heeft een fantastische prestatie geleverd. Ik wist van tevoren al dat een country-rock nummer standaard minder winkans heeft en verwachtte dan ook geen winst, maar het gaat erom dat we een zeer goede inzending hadden. Ik heb er in ieder geval van genoten en als je het mij vraagt was Waylon de beste zanger van deze Eurovisie.
    2
  1587. No the browning of Europe is a racist conspiracy (we're literally 95% white and the most multicultural country is Russia, not "Swedistan" or whatever western european country they're picking on). The browning of America is happening, the white population will relatively soon be a minority. And I don't care because the US is an immigrant country and there is no native population to protect anymore. The damage to them has been done long ago. An ethnicity being overrun by foreigners is only a problem when that means the native population of a particular country is replaced. Like the Native Americans in the US, Canada or South America, like Aboriginals in Australia or (if that conspiracy was true), Europeans in Europe.
    2
  1588.  @KAvanAlten  Vrijheid, blijheid. Iets wat miljoenen moslimvrouwen wereldwijd niet hebben omdat ze zich moeten bedekken. Iets waar wij als het westen tegen zouden moeten strijden in plaats van normaliseren (wat je doet door eraan mee te doen alsof er totaal geen problemen aan kleven).
    2
  1589. Lmao I want to see this
    2
  1590. Nou we moeten naar ons verleden kijken in de context, zou ik zeggen. Dat betekent voor mij dat wij zowel de goede als slechte kanten van kolonialisme bekijken, vanuit historische context. Dus ook de wreedheden, maar zonder er een soort guilt-trip van te maken
    2
  1591. The problem is that everyone will have to cut spending at the same time. As long as there are threats around, we will try to counter those threats. And as countries try to produce ever more advanced weaponry to counter the supremacy of the other, budgets rise or at the least stay high. This process only stops if all at the same time decide to back down and shrink their defence budget. Otherwise we risk falling behind, which could have significant geopolitical consequences that'll cost us dearly.
    2
  1592. Big government and taxes is actually the solution, so in that sense the democrats are closer to solving it. Yet they spectacularly fail by allocating their resources wrongly. The republicans are even worse, they think completely leaving poor people in the dark and investing in corporations is the answer. In the end, both are utterly incompetent.
    2
  1593. Trump has not yet done anything meaningful to change the economy. He only recently got the tax reforms, of which the effect on the economy is not yet felt. He promised an infrastructure overhaul, which is probably the most interesting of his plans, but he has yet to implement that one. The current growth already happened under Obama and continued under Trump. Why? Because it's the end of the economic crisis that caused the growth, no specific government policy. And even if it was government policy that created it, it was Obama's policy during the crisis and not Trump. The latter's effect on the economy will be felt in the future And you can say we should agree to disagree, but some things can't be disagreed upon. Active policy to battle poverty is factually better than giving corporations free money and sitting back while hoping they create more jobs. Will corporations suddenly start employing homeless and unschooled people if they have to pay less taxes? No, of course not. The republicans have a downright idiotic idea of how poverty can be solved. Corporations can grow tenfold and have a million vacancies, but the people in this video are not going to be able to fill them. It's fundamentally flawed logic that even a child can figure out. But I guess that child doesn't receive millions in donations from those same corporations, like US politicians do... It's a plain fact that active policy to improve schooling, living conditions and whatnot will lay a proper foundation for the future of such neighbourhoods, so that they produce capable workers that can fill vacancies of big corporations. In truth, both tax-funded active policy AND stimulating corporations is the solution. You just have to find the proper balance between the two. Either one on their own is futile, especially the stimulating of corporations while ignoring the poor. Both the democrats and republicans are utterly incapable of running the US
    2
  1594. The past is not now. Many countries found themselves forced to raise the retirement age. If there's age discrimination then that is a serious problem that needs to be fixed, but that doesn't change that if we want to keep our economies floating we'll need to work longer.
    2
  1595. Sure, but the UK and France dividing the Middle East amongst themselves didn´t cause terrorism. Terrorism is not created by that, but by American interventionalism. America invaded countries like Iraq and governed is terribly, making horrible decisions such as firing all military personel, who now are often found in ISIS. The UK invaded countries like Iraq too, but didn´t govern it even close to how horrible the US did
    2
  1596. Mate, here we have disabled people working everywhere. The government encourages people to hire them. The company pays for the actual work they do (so they don't lose money hiring them), the government pays the rest so they have a full salary. This isn't news. And who cares about lobbyists
    2
  1597. Haha... grappenmaker. De invloed en economische slagkracht van de EU vermindert vrij sterk én landen zitten met de aanstaande verhoging van de bijdrage in de maag. Zelfs NL, het braafste jongetje van de klas, weigert aan de extra betaling te voldoen. Bovendien is er een lange termijn risico dat het VK het eigenlijk heel goed gaat doen economisch en dat andere landen zich ook gaan afvragen of ze beter in of uit de EU kunnen zijn (dit zal per land verschillen). Vanuit de EU bezien is dit zeer vervelend. En ze verdienen het, want Cameron ging voor hervormingen en de EU gaf niets toe. De overgrote meerderheid van de bevolking is eurosceptisch en wil betere Europese samenwerking zien. De EU negeerde dit en er wordt pas recentelijk gesproken over mogelijke hervormingen. Wie zich brandt moet op de blaren zitten, er wordt te veel met de mening van het volk gespeeld, alsof democratie er niet toe doet.
    2
  1598. But Obama was one of the best presidents in terms of deporting actual illegals. He was not an open borders type of guy, even if he was an immigration proponent.
    2
  1599.  @liekevdpoel  As a voter, you can change the party by NOT voting for them and forcing the Dem party to actually try to get the support of voters rather than sitting back, pushing forward whoever they like (Hillary, Biden) and bullying the voters into getting them into office by saying "or else the other guy wins". Something has to change and that change is created by showing the Dems that they CAN'T get away with this anymore and will lose if they ignore the voters any longer. You show this to them by NOT voting for Biden, but instead f.e. the Green party or not at all. Some might even go as far as voting for Trump. The first past the post system will never change, because for that I believe a constitutional amendment is needed and you'll need the approval of all states for that. Not going to happen, ever. Because as you said, Reps don't want it. So the best bet is to change the Dem party. Politicians like AOC try to change it from within, but voters (who can't do that) need to also help by showing a clear preference for change and consistently refusing to get bullied into voting for the Dems when they push forward a terrible candidate. The problem is that they think they can get away with it. So prove them wrong. I hoped the election of Trump would be enough to wake them up, but it wasn't. They need another shock. Trump is a uniquely screwed up president but at the same time a unique opportunity to change politics. Voting for Biden in this context means going back to neoliberal supremacy and confirming the power of the Dem establishment. If Biden loses, there is an actual chance, for the first time is many decades, that neoliberalism is fiercely rejected and the Dems react by moving more towards figures like AOC and Bernie to try and reconnect with voters. But.... it requires living 4 more years under a stark nationalist. It's a difficult decision, but I think going for the long term change is the correct choice here.
    2
  1600. Exactly, prevention is also an important part of battling drug abuse
    2
  1601.  @rachida7235  Oh, oh, en weer de befaamde slachtofferrol inkruipen. Je snapt niet waar je mee bezig bent. Er is een reden dat moslims "zwart worden gemaakt" en dat is precies het gedrag dat jij zonet liet zien. Mensen als jij verzieken de maatschappij en veroorzaken haat. Kijk nou hoe jij als stereotypisch moslimjongere lekker loopt te schelden over van alles en nogwat, meestal iets in de trant van iemands moeder neuken, en dan precies zoals de stereotype voorschrijft meteen in de slachtofferrol kruipt. Je past precies in het stereotype en daar zou je je voor moeten schamen. JIJ draagt bij aan het voortbestaan van dat stereotype. JIJ bent de reden dat pegida en de PVV bestaan. Denk je dat het moment dat er hier migranten waren er meteen bewegingen als de PVV waren? Nee, die ontstonden pas in de jaren 90, als REACTIE op onder meer kutgedrag door moslimjongeren en falende integratie. Vandaag de dag ben JIJ een van de moslimjongeren die dat kutgedrag voortzetten. Applausje voor jezelf, applaus voor hoe jij de PVV en Pegida relevant maakt en gelijk geeft, applaus voor hoe jij bijdraagt aan een stereotype waar heel veel GOEDE moslims last van hebben, applaus voor het bijdragen aan de polarisatie van de samenleving. Dankjewel. De cirkel zou helemaal rond zijn als je ook nog Denk zou stemmen
    2
  1602. Echt hè... dit is al jaren aan de gang en wordt door demografen al enige tijd in de media verkondigd, maar zij moet er weer een commissie bij hebben die er 5 jaar over doet. Zo'n uitgebreid verslag is helemaal niet nodig als je gewoon gezond verstand hebt. Je kan niet een huizencrisis hebben én strenge natuurbescherming én massaimmigratie waarvoor je massaal moet bouwen (wat we niet eens halen). Je kan niet elk jaar in NL voor 100k+ mensen (dit jaar zelfs 130.000 migratiesaldo...) toelaten zonder na te denken over huisvesting e.d. Waar wij mee bezig zijn is echt ongehoord. Elk jaar moet er een Delft aan woningen bijkomen en daarvoor kappen wij natuur (procentueel trouwens twee keer zo veel als in Brazilië, welk land onze politieke partijen maar al te graag op de vingers tikken vanwege de kap van het Amazonegebied; hypocrisie ten top) en stoten wij stikstof uit en dan nog gaat de immigratie zo hard dat de woningbouw het überhaupt niet bij houdt ook al draaien ze op volle toeren. Je hebt geen commissie nodig om te begrijpen dat dit geen duurzaam beleid is. En dat is nog los van de vraag wat de effecten van overpopulatie zijn op NL (infrastructuur slibt dicht, bijvoorbeeld, wat we nu al zien met alsmaar toenemende files en overdrukke treinen). Het moet gewoon stoppen, zo'n commissie kan altijd nog.
    2
  1603. +theylied1776 I honestly don't care that it's just this president. It's time to say goodbye to the US and become more independent as the EU. The EU needs this. I'm just sick of this image of Europe always accepting whatever the US does. You caused a civil war in Syria that led to millions of refugees coming into the EU. No that wasn't Trump now was it? The US just started wars around the EU's borders and thought it'd be alright (how about we start a civil war in Mexico and see what happens in regard to migration?). You have complete and utter disdain for your allies, but we accepted it for so long because of that sweet trade advantage we got for it (you export 270 billion dollars worth of goods to us, we export 416 billion worth of goods to you as of 2016). Trump is giving the EU the perfect opportunity to get out of this toxic relationship. I thank Trump for that. I want the EU to start standing up to the US and distance itself from you. Trump or no Trump. You're horrible allies and always have been. I hope both America and the EU prosper, but that stupid foreign policy has to stop
    2
  1604. Een club waar je naartoe kan met klachten over de overheid... hmmm, als we dat toch eens zouden hebbe. Oh wacht, dat heet de nationale ombudsman, de klachten over bijvoorbeeld de toeslagenaffairen waren er, waren door de ombudsman direct gedeeld met het kabinet en er werd alsnog niets mee gedaan. Leuke schijnoplossing. Maar het zou wel een goed idee zijn om die rapporten ook met de Kamer te delen.
    2
  1605. What a poor review. If you think the game tried to make to "like" Abby you have its goals all wrong. It really just tries to deconstruct Ellie's vision of Abby as this evil monster and show her perspective. Nobody except a bunch of morons are going to like Abby just because she pets a dog that is later killed by Ellie in self-defence. In this regard you're also completely wrong about the game apparently portraying Ellie as "evil" for killing the dog? I honestly don't get where you'd get that from. You're stuck in some kind of "they're trying to manipulate me" pattern of thought that skewed your view of the story. This is not a cheap story that tries to make you like Abby. It's a story about revenge, a story that deconstructs the strawman vision that Ellie (and the player) has built up around Abby and shows how her insistence on revenge is destroying Ellie and various lives around her. It is a story that is made to pull you out of your lust for revenge and make you realise how Ellie needs to stop. It shows the pointlessness of revenge and how it is all based on a one-sided and one-dimensional view of this boogeyman that needs to die, but ultimately never actually helps you with your trauma. It's not an "ellie bad, abby good" game, nor a "you were the bad guy all along" trope. That's a blatant oversimplification that just shows you don't understand what this game is about. By the end of the game I didn't think "abby good", I just abandoned my previous constructed view of Abby as this uniformly terrible person and recognised her humanity. You're not supposed to like Abby, she's portrayed as a piece of shit right up until she loses all her friends and goes through a character arc. Afterwards she's still not portrayed as particularly good, but neutral/okay at best. And Ellie is portrayed as better than her from beginning to end. They essentially went through the same revenge arc, yet Ellie at all times was less brutal and more empathetic, plus killed out of self-defence mostly. This game is not about good or bad, it is about perspective. Not about shifting your perspective from Ellie's to Abby's either, but about showing you both, so that you as the player can see the consequences of being stuck in a vengeful mindset. Meanwhile you portray the story as some cheap method to make Ellie look bad and Abby look good or something, which misses the point entirely and isn't even true to begin with. You basically ignored the complete theme of the story, which is pretty impressive when trying to review a game. If you thought Abby was a monster from the beginning right to the end of this story, the game failed to pull you out of your vengeful mindset and you remain guided by what happened to Joel, instead of seeing the full picture. In this case, the point of the story goes over your head and it remains a dreadful experience from beginning to end. Wanting revenge but never getting it. If the story succesfully brought you along in the multi-perspective angle, you're supposed to detach yourself from both characters and see how this revenge cycle is destroying both of them, simply wanting them to stop. From my experience with the story, Ellie ultimately not killing Abby was very satisfying, because I deeply wanted her to abandon this fairytale idea of somehow alleviating her trauma through revenge and recognise how it was doing nothing other than damage to her life. To me, it was a sign that she finally was ready to let go and move on to better times. Inversely, if you keep stuck in Ellie's point of view from beginning to end, you might have badly wanted Abby to die and Ellie's decision not to is completely alien to you. Jarring, even. If you go into the story thinking they'll just try to "trick you into liking Abby", obviously you're going to keep your grudges throughout the story and the game will fail to get you along with the purpose of its story. And the result is that the story will be nothing other than jarring for you. You need to be willing to detach yourself from Ellie in order to fully appreciate the story or even understand it to begin with. But hey, keep believing this is a "Abby likes doggie, Ellie kills doggie, now you must like Abby" kind of story.
    2
  1606. God is een racist, hij moet altijd de Afrikanen hebben met allerlei onzinplagen en hongersnoden. Moet ie eens mee stoppen
    2
  1607.  Geek X  Honour and loyalty towards whom? If the Nazis had succesfully taken over Britain and in 100 years they ask you to fight for them, is it "dishonourable" or even "treacherous" to deny this and instead seize the opportunity to fight for an independent Britain? No. It is treacherous to fight your own country, not to fight the Empire that your country was made a part of. They fought for an independent India and that is no treachery nor is it dishonourable. Both the Indians that fought for and against the Empire may have fought for honourable reasons. Independence is an honourable endeavour, so is supporting the Empire. Two sides can be honourable at the same time.
    2
  1608. +Maria Schick When the hell did this become a thing about interracial marriages? Illegal migration must stop, regardless of whose daughter they get with... I don't know why that's the first thing you think of...
    2
  1609. Sod off
    2
  1610.  @HabboCoolcattim  Altijd beter dan Denk, dat zeker
    2
  1611. I would choose a European longsword, which in my opinion is the pinnacle of swords. But if I would have to choose between a one-handed arming sword and katana, I'd pick the katana too because it is two-handed.
    2
  1612. You're thinking the other way around. The only reason for hostilities between the EU and Russia is the EU's alliance with the US. This would open up a pact between the EU and Russia.
    2
  1613. +Turk Turkic Het heropvoeden van een bepaalde etnische groep en hierdoor hun cultuur wissen is een vorm van genocide. China pleegt met de heropvoedingskampen (die van Oeigoeren "Chinezen" moet maken, oftewel hun Oeigoerse cultuur poogt uit te wissen of ten minste te verzwakken) dus al genocide.
    2
  1614. +Morningstar The European slave trade was smaller than the Arab slave trade and also lasted less long. The reason why the European slave trade gets more attention is because Arabs sterilised their slaves. No problem when there are no descendants to complain... And Europeans stopped the slave trade themselves, but it was also Europeans that had to stop the Arab slave trade because they never saw it was wrong. Arabs technically still have slaves today with the foreign workers they treat horribly, take the passport away so they don't run, no worker's rights, extremely hard work... etc. Both Europeans and Arabs were wrong... but there simply is no comparison
    2
  1615. Dit soort praktijken zijn zo kortzichtig. Kijk ons eens mensen redden, maar intussen veroorzaken we een politieke crisis (en voor landen die overspoeld worden zelfs een economische, vanwege de kosten) in Europa en sterven er meer en meer migranten óf in de Sahara, óf op de middellandse zee. Laat de Libische kustwacht die mensen redden, of redt ze desnoods zelf en breng ze terug naar Libië. Het is alsof die mensen gewoon niet kunnen nadenken. Het moet stoppen. Dát redt de meeste levens, als dit gewoon stopt. Het plan van de EU was om de Libische kustwacht migranten terug te laten brengen, maar die NGO's zitten gewoon het beleid te torpederen. Ze snappen gewoon niet dat steeds meer mensen door die Sahara zullen gaan wandelen en steeds meer op bootjes de zee op zullen gaan zonder überhaupt te kunnen zwemmen. En ja, steeds meer mensen zullen sterven zo lang jullie deze mensen "redden" en naar de EU brengen.
    2
  1616. Oh god nee alsjeblieft geen Jerommeke, we zullen uit Belgie blijven
    1
  1617. I'm not talking about NATO, but about the EU. If someone attacks an EU country, it's impossible that the rest of the EU stands by and watches. But then again, this is a video about two EU countries (which are very good friends, to the point of having formed an economic union since the 40's, called the Benelux), so I guess a hypothetical situation of Russia vs . Baltic states would also be possible. Those poor countries would be crushed lol
    1
  1618. Exactly. America tortures people, holds people prisoner without trial, has a horrible election system (it's possible to win with less votes than your opponent...) and only two parties to choose from. America is barely worthy to be called a western country, because they've shown complete disregard for EVERY principle the west is supposed to stand for. If you want to see what western countries are supposed to be like, look at Europe, Canada and Australia, NOT America
    1
  1619. Best. Gameplay. Ever.
    1
  1620. +Wayne Cox Are you comparing America with a repressive Communist regime to make it look better, or... ? China doesn't even allow games about war to show historical factions. If you have a WW2 game, all nations and all markings on planes, etc. would have to be censored. This sort of things can be expected from a communist regime, but not from a country that claims to be Western, like the USA. It's pure propaganda to only show America in a positive light and keeps the population dumb and patriotic. And there are other such strange practices in America. The sheer amount of flags you see flying around there is crazy. The fact that in school, children have to stand up to the flag and sing the anthem. That refusing to put your hand on your heart during the playing of the anthem can get you into trouble. The way Americans idolise the founding fathers and other historical figures from the US. How you're taught to love your country there almost gets to the point of indoctrination. It's really no wonder that a lot of Americans refuse to watch films that counter their chauvinistic view of their country. The fact that the ideology of "American exceptionalism" exists, portrays just how far this indoctrination can go. Thinking your country is "unique" and has a "special place in history" is just... repulsive and laughable at best. The arrogance and brainless patriotism of some people is astounding. We all know what happens when you pamper a child and plant the idea that he's unique in his mind; he becomes an unfathomably cocky brat. Why would that cocky brat want to watch a film that portrays how he's not unique and that other perspectives exist in which he doesn't have the spotlight, or is even regarded negatively? Wouldn't be able to stomach it.
    1
  1621. +Wayne Cox Now where did I state America is the only country that does this? I didn't. I just pointed out that the role that patriotism has in the US has a negative effect on filmmaking and expressed my disgust for such chauvinism. There's several other countries that do this, mostly non-western. However, saying all countries "do pretty much the same" is ridiculous. America goes VERY far in its patriotism. I honestly don't think any other country is so full of itself that part of its population truly believe that their country is completely unique, has a special place in history and has a special mission to spread democracy over the world (American exceptionalism). Not even Nazi Germany went that far in praising their country. You shouldn't compare what can't be compared. China is a repressive communist regime and the US is supposed to be a free Western state. Of course China's Communist party is going to censor certain things that portray them or the country negatively, of course a communist regime is going to make sure its population is heavily patriotic. But a Western country with a population so patriotic that the film industry is forced to alter historic films to avoid shedding negative light on their country is abnormal. And you're sure that other countries will enjoy being antagonists in films, with America as saviour? Let's look at the box office of this very film, then. France is not only the antagonist, but it's the British that is the protagonist (surely that'd be worse for them than America being the saviour?). Well... France produced the 5th biggest international profit. It was a hit there. Why wouldn't it be? As long as they're not close-minded and arrogant chauvinists, what would stop them from enjoying this film?
    1
  1622. +LordVader1094 Except he's right. America is very connected to its history and extraordinarily patriotic. You see this in everything from the extreme display of flags and actual belief they're the "best country of the world" to their strong love for guns (which is of course only explicable when looking at their history; the armed revolt against colonial rule as well as the important role guns had in society afterwards in the Wild West era). And I haven't mentioned the almost holy importance they instill on the constitution and the "God given rights" within it. Whether you like it or not, Doug Spencer gave a very accurate description of why Americans can't seem to stomach films in which they're the antagonist. In plain language, they're full of themselves and can only accept films that don't scorch their valuable self-image as the exceptional, brave heroes of the world. It's the country where people respond with great dismay to someone forgetting or refusing to place his hand on his chest during the anthem. Where people truly believe they're the best country in the world. Where people still believe owning firearms will protect them against a tyrannical government because their holy founding fathers said so, even though this idea has been outdated since the 1940s. Where it seems almost mandatory to greet every soldier with a "thank you for your service" or another praise. It all fits Doug Spencer's description. I've been to America a few times (New York/Washington area) as I have family living in Maryland and it's quite a beautiful country. The people are intriguing, drastically different form here in Europe. It was the first time in my life I heard a real life person say their country is the best country in the world :D
    1
  1623. Yeah, if the French took the government-in-exile route instead of splitting up between a collaborator government and resistance, I think they could have been a significant ally. North Africa would've been easier to capture, we'd have had another colonial power fighting the Japanese in the Pacific and more. Just imagine that the rest of the French army was evacuated to French colonies in North Africa and continued the fight. And that the entire French fleet would join up with the British. Such a shame that they didn't do that. The Free French were important in North Africa, but the French could've meant so much more. Damned Vichy government
    1
  1624. Nonsense. If the entire world acquires military presence in South America and Canada and subsequently invades, the US is done for (nukes not considered, because any country that has nukes is strictly speaking impossible to invade). Nobody can take on the world. Even a US-Russian war would see both sides having a chance at winning (even if the odds favour the US, victory is not a given), let alone the EU, China, etc. against the US.
    1
  1625. You´re an idiot if you think the EU would not defend Greece in a Greek-Turkish war. Of course it would and that means goodbye Turkey
    1
  1626. +Teh Weh Wrong. Colonialism wasn't just unfettered conquering of native populations. It was a rivalry between empires. There were other European empires competing for control over lands and fighting eachother over it. Each empire had its golden age in which it was on top, but in the end Britain unmistakenly won. And today, nobody can build an empire. Colonialism is a thing of the past. Even the US can't attempt to build an empire without getting the entire world after it, which would undoubtedly put the US to shame. Nobody can anymore, it's quite simply not accepted in this age.
    1
  1627. We have more and better rights than you under the European Convention of Human Rights and more (privacy much better protected, right to a fair trial much better protected, no "exceptions" to the right to live as there is in America, and many other things). We don't have a 2nd amendment but all across Europe you can buy guns, the only difference is that you need a licence (which you get if you're 18+, mentally stable and acquire some experience in a shooting range, or if you study to become a hunter). Most farmers have rifles here too, for example, but guns aren't popular amongst people who don;t need them for anything. Your income tax rate is low (and income itself high), but in terms of wealth you stand low compared to other western countries. So a lot of the western world is richer anyway at the end of the day (high bills in America?). I live in a European country with privatised health care, so there's that. And a socialised health care system isn't by definition slow. That the one in Canada has that particular problem doesn't mean elsewhere in the world this problem isn't fixed. But I don't know enough about the waiting times to actually compare them with the US. And you ARE flooded by refugees. More than Europe, in fact. 11 million illegals and counting, with the government being clueless on where they are and are incompetent in stopping them from coming (best "solution" yet, build a wall and have Mexico pay lol). That on a population of 300 million. In the EU, 2.5 million refugees came on a population of 500 million, and ALL of those have given finger prints and have been photographed upon arrival so they're in our system. Unlike the US, we know who they are and also where they live (we obviously provided that for them so we'd know). Moreover, the refugee stream from the ME has already been stopped by the EU with the Turkey deal. The EU stopped it within months, the US... like 20 years and counting lol
    1
  1628. Hmm, I wonder who lead the EU... oh wait, it's the bloody member states themselves, smartass. Member states bully themselves by voting for laws that are bad to themselves or by forming demands that annoy themselves? Seriously dude...
    1
  1629. Felix: "From now on I'm going family friendly" Felix next video: spanks Elsa ass and yells obscenities Felix: "Family friendly Felix is now definitely over" Felix next video: serious video about mental health awareness Awesome that you made this video, though. It probably helped dozens of people already
    1
  1630. +Tom Scharstein II You defend religion in general, but distinctions need to be made within that category. All the things you mentioned about storytelling tropes, character archetypes and more come from our pre-Christian pagan culture/religion. THAT is our true culture in which most of our lore is based. I view Christianity as a foreign religion that invaded Europe and destroyed that culture. All we have today is merely what survived. Even Christianity itself has on numerous occasions been infused with pagan ideas to make it the religion it is today. Original Christians were essentially Jews that believed Jesus was the prophesised messiah, nothing like the Christians today.
    1
  1631. I´m a man and I weigh the same as the average US woman lol
    1
  1632. If Jets became a problem during WW2, the British would´ve sent the jets they already had stationed in the Netherlands and Belgium into Germany to face the Me262s. Germany wasn´t the only one who had jets at that point. Only Germany and Britain had jets.
    1
  1633. Er is geen magische oplossing voor alles. Preventie is de beste oplossing en wat dat betreft heeft de politiek ons keihard gefaald met de massa-immigratie. Ik woon in een kleinere stad in de randstad, met weinig allochtonen, en ik heb werkelijk nog nooit gehoord van sissen of wat dan ook. De wet is geen magische probleemoplosser die je overal op kan toepassen. Ook de wet kent grenzen en dit is er één van. Je kan niet eerst problemen veroorzaken/binnenhalen en dan verwachten dat alles op te lossen is. Ik hoop van harte dat er een oplossing komt voor dat gesis, want ik vind dat verhaal van die vrouw echt heftig, maar het is echt belangrijk te kijken naar de oorzaak en of we verder uit de hand lopen van die oorzaak kunnen voorkomen. Dan heb ik het over minder/geen immigratie, betere integratie en/of aandacht voor betere opvoeding op school of thuis. Dit probleem lijkt vooral voort te vloeien uit een giftige straatcultuur, gemengd met elementen van patriarchale ideeën die je vooral in streng islamitische landen ziet. Dus moeten we die straatcultuur wegvagen, zo simpel is het. Ik zie ook autochtonen die die straatcultuur overnemen en ook zij hebben echt heropvoeding nodig.
    1
  1634. Had het niet beter kunnen zeggen. Ik begrijp niet waarom sommige mensen alles wat ze misdaan is zouden willen belichten. Zo'n negatieve instelling brengt niet veel goeds met zich mee. Het is alsof wij opeens zeggen dat we allerlei details in geschiedenisboeken willen over alles wat Nederlanders ooit is misdaan. Alsof we er op kicken ofzo
    1
  1635. Ironically it's the West that made China rich by opening up to them. China has throughout history been a very rich and powerful entity and it will be again soon. There is no way to stop it, we'll have to find a way to live together
    1
  1636. The populists are also not working in Italy's interests; they make ridiculous promises so they can grab power. They do not have the money to realise their promises, they're in it for themselves
    1
  1637. @Mocro Lion Je hebt echt geen leven, ik zie je hier veel te vaak. Ga eens werk zoeken of zo
    1
  1638. The Royal Navy murdered the German, Vichy French and Italian Navy all at once by itself while also contributing to taking the Japanese Navy down in the Pacific. What more needs to be said?
    1
  1639. De EU kan de-escaleren, mee eens. Net als onder Obama, maar dit keer zal het een tikje moeilijker zijn
    1
  1640. 18:30 Gulags are the most powerful weapon of WW2, comrade! Next only to starving your own population.
    1
  1641. There are plenty of professors supporting TIK's point of view that National Socialism was a form of Socialism, even though he could have portrayed it in a better way in this video. So no, western education does not circumvent the idea that NS could in many ways be seen as related to socialism. The problem is that there is also a surprisingly large amount of marxists in universities that are not willing to acknowledge this and with ideologues you never know whether they are being honest or twisting facts to fit into their world view. There is literature on NS being seen as socialist, and literature on NS being seen as capitalist, it both exists in the west. Overall, National Socialism is a bit complex because it shares elements of both, but especially from socialism.
    1
  1642. lmao Britannia ackbar *BOOM*
    1
  1643. People always like to think in beginnings and endings, but we forget that some things are cycles without beginning or end. I personally believe that the universe is such a cycle with neither beginning nor end.
    1
  1644.  @PeterCombs  There is only one human race and a bunch of different ethnicities. And yes, hispanic ethnicities are part of that. It's pretty dumb to leave them out, and they are also genetically different from Europeans. The term caucasian is also bullshit because tha includes everything from Europe to North Africa and the Middle East, which lumps together way too many drastically different ethnicities as "white".
    1
  1645. On Brexit it may be 9/10, but in general the UK is just fine and will be fine after Brexit too.
    1
  1646. Het lijkt erop dat we nu geobsedeerd zijn geraakt door het voorbereid zijn op een volgende crisis. Tekorten laten oplopen ben ik ook geen fan van, maar we moeten niet doorschieten wat betreft bezuinigen.
    1
  1647.  @bosstowndynamics5488  Climate change is not our biggest problem when our population decreases at a drastic rate because people get too few children. Decline is good, but it has to be relatively steady decline to avert demographic chaos.
    1
  1648. In the Netherlands, the father also gets paid leave. I think it is the same in most of Scandinavia
    1
  1649.  @TheTeatimecrumpet  Jesus those turnout rates in the US are extremely low....
    1
  1650. Klopt. Ik heb toendertijd de debatten bekeken op BBC en het was echt om te huilen. Brexiteers zaten allemaal leugens te verspreiden over de EU en remainers waren alleen maar bezig met een beeld te schetsen van hoe desastreus brexit zou zijn en direct een economische crisis zou veroorzaken, etc. Allebei natuurlijk totale onzin. Ik heb nog nooit zo'n trieste campagne gezien vol onwaarheden en overdrijvingen. Vreselijk. En ik zag op TV ook nog een kiezer die werd gevraagd waarom hij brexit stemde en hij zei dat de overheid het toch niet gaat doen en als proteststem voor brexit koos haha. Die had het mooi fout
    1
  1651. Saying that you don't believe in diversity if you are against affirmative action is not even the bad part. If she has a decent argument to support her opinion, we may disagree but at least she has a well-versed opinion on the matter. The real issue is that she says this, but then dodges questions about it. This indicates she holds this opinion for the wrong reasons and is afraid of sharing those reasons. And that is unforgiveable.
    1
  1652. Denk is vele malen erger dan de PVV. De PVV doet regelmatig generaliserende populistische uitspraken, maar Denk gaat een stapje verder. En hoe. Stiekem fotograferen van stemgedrag Kamerleden, op basis van etniciteit. Valse beschuldigingen als deze, die buiten de Kamer gewoonweg als smaad/laster gezien zouden worden. Ze staan de media te woord door zo veel mogelijk vragen te omzeilen en over het algemeen kinderachtig te reageren. Denk is het absolute dieptepunt van de politiek, echt een schande dat ze überhaupt bestaan. De PVV is gewoon vervelend en populistisch, maar Denk... daar walg ik echt van. Ik vind het geen vergelijking.
    1
  1653. We need as little nukes in the world as possible. No more countries should have them.
    1
  1654.  @fogshadow9112  Not really. We trade with them and they have a massive trade deficit. They protect us for free and secure oil for us. In exchange we ignore their bullshit interventions and sometimes even support them. The EU got a lot more from the US than the other way around, so I wouldn't call that being anyone's bitch
    1
  1655.  @fogshadow9112  The moment they do something like that is the moment we break off from the US. As I said we're not their bitches. Just look at how the relations have gone sour with Trump and his sanctions and Iran. If the US does something against our interest, it is over. We are with them as long as they give us money and free protection. They need the EU if they want to keep their hegemony, otherwise they're desperately short on allies. If they alienate us too much they're done for. They can't take on the world by themselves. Plus with all those countries moving away from the petrodollar, the EU moving away from it would leave virtually no big economies using the petrodollar and could collapse the entire currency. They need us more than we need them. We can find allies elsewhere, they can't apart from small players.
    1
  1656.  @fogshadow9112  Yes, and it starts to show more and more that the US wants a submissive EU. Sadly for them, the EU is becoming more and more independent and they'll have to do better to keep it on their side.
    1
  1657. *bows down*
    1
  1658.  @jimbodimbo981  A vote of all or at least 2/3rds of member states to go to war would be good
    1
  1659.  @morpheussandman3984  EU can, but they refuse as long as they can comfortably depend on the US to defend them for free anyway. Big difference.
    1
  1660. I agree. Maybe then we learn to stand on our own, perhaps even grow to become a superpower ourselves.
    1
  1661.  @Ms123kill  Europeans and Kiwis live together perfectly fine. Wherever there are muslims there are either integration problems or they oppress minorities. Everyone can live with everyone, but muslims seem to be the exception
    1
  1662. Dat moet gewoon versneld behandeld worden. Geen uitgebreide zaak van maken maar even snel voor de rechter brengen wat er is gebeurd en dat bepaalt de rechter binnen enkele minuten of het het waard is nader te onderzoeken of er een exces is geweest. En ik weet niet hoe het zit met de verdachte, maar die moet er onder geen beding enig voordeel van kunnen krijgen. Dit gaat puur om het vaststellen of er een exces is geweest bij de politie, niet om vergoedingen, strafverminderingen en dergelijke onzin.
    1
  1663. Sure, buddy
    1
  1664. It's especially stupid here in the Netherlands. In the US I at least semi-understand them because the Republicans are like those anti-gay christians, but here... everybody respects gays except for maybe SGP. There's really no reason here to be automatically leftist as a gay person (frankly I think there's more reason to support the right here...)
    1
  1665. +Greeny202a Hmm, who to believe? Some random guy on the internet that adresses me with "dude" or PM May, who has explicitly stated nothing will change in how we work together militarily and in terms of intelligence? Difficult, that one...
    1
  1666. National Socialism places the means of production in the hands of a particular race instead of the working class. The economy is controlled in such a way to benefit all of a certain race. Members of that race are allowed to privately own the means of production, but may only use it in a predetermined manner that benefits the race as a whole. There is no hierarchy in that, except between different races.
    1
  1667.  @LibertarianLeninistRants  What's the difference between nationalising the means of production in name of the working class and nationalising the means of production in name of a race/nation? The only difference in my eyes is which group takes control of the economy.
    1
  1668.  @LibertarianLeninistRants  What you seem to be doing here is redefining socialism in such a way that any socialist state that ever existed doesn't even fall under that definition. There is no democratic control by the workers over the means of production in any socialist system. It has always been the dictatorial central government, in the form of a communist party, setting up a planned economy. Furthermore, there always will be classes and hierarchy, you can only stop them from exploiting one another, as socialism attempts to do. In socialist states, you still had government officials contributing to the planned economy, you still had factory managers, you still had workers. And the former got paid more than the latter for their work. In that sense you still had upper and lower classes. The difference is that the upper class using their property of the means of production to exploit the working class and live off others' work was not possible under socialism; the classes worked together for a common goal and the means of production was collectively owned. You got paid for your actual work, not merely for owning the means of production. The manager still got paid more than the worker for his work. Comparing that to National Socialism, you see striking similarities. Hitler hated the exploitation by corporations under capitalism, yet he also hated the universalist/egalitarian aspects of traditional socialism. National Socialism creates a system in which a dictatorial government, the NSDAP, creates a planned economy which takes control of the means of production to ensure they are used to the benefit of the German race (claiming this must be an economical category like the workers class seems arbitrary to me: the point of socialism is to stop the class struggle by having everyone work for a common goal). Farmers and factories get paid a fixed price for what they produce, exactly like under socialism. Managers and workers alike work for a common goal instead of exploiting one another in a class struggle, just like under socialism. The only difference in this regard might be the relationship between the factory "owners" and the workers. I'm unsure whether the wages in NS Germany were also fixed, in which case there would de facto again be no difference between traditional socialism and National Socialism, but if the factory managers (who were often government officials taking the place of the actual owner, but let's ignore that) could themselves decide the wages of the workers and how much they themselves would get, that'd be a clear difference. NS may seem like capitalism on the surface, but it really wasn't. Under traditional socialism the means of production would be nationalised, while under NS private property was still allowed. However, the owners of a factory were bound by the planned economy and were dictated how to use the means of production they owned. In practice, instead of outright taking control of factories themselves, the government simply "outsourced" their management, if you will (and a lot of the time even sent actual government officials to manage factories that were de jure still owned by private entities). The outcome is the same: government control of the means of production and prevention of class exploitation. The main difference between NS and traditional socialism is who takes control of the means of production (workers class vs a race or nation in fascism) and how the planned economy is organised (but to the same result). So yes there are some significant differences between the two systems, but mainly theoretical differences laid in the attitude towards nations and races. So I don't see why NS could not be called its own separate version of socialism.
    1
  1669.  @LibertarianLeninistRants  1. Regarding class and exploitation: what we say is the same. I wanted to say that class exploitation in capitalism is laid in the fact that the upper class not only manages the working class, but also owns the means of production. It's the owning of the means of production that causes class exploitation and solving this problem is the core of socialism. What you described here is exactly what I meant with the upper class being able to live off others' work if they were allowed to own the means of production, we absolutely agree on that. What I tried to say is that there is no such thing as a classless society. There will always be a hierarchy between more skilled/intelligent people that will occupy higher positions with more power (the upper class) and regular workers. And you might call the top members of the communist party the elite. What socialism does is in practice not abolish classes altogether, but to stop them from exploiting eachother. That was my point. The common goal is to organise an economy that serves the greater good of society, instead of merely a certain class or an elite. For National Socialism this was the same, but instead of all of society, they organised the economy only to serve the German race (which they eventually wanted to be the whole society anyway, by removing other races). 2. Regarding class collaboration/struggle, thank you for pointing out the difference. I was describing the practical reality in socialist states instead of their theoretical ambitions. And I think I see why the practice didn't correspond with the theoretical background: as I said before, a classless society is not possible in an developed and organised society (it would be in f.e. an anarchy or communist society, but not in a socialist state). If you have a government guiding the economy and if you have factories that need leadership to properly function, you have an upper and lower class. Hierarchies are not social constructs, they are facts of nature. You have more skilled/intelligent people and less skilled/intelligent people. The former will be placed in more important government positions and will be put at the helm of a factory with workers under him/her. The latter will be the workers. The former will always wield more power and have more influence than the latter. It is an inevitable matter of fact that you will always retain a certain degree of class distinctions. But practice aside and into the theoretical sphere, I think you pointed out one of the main differences between traditional socialism and NS/fascism. Whereas socialism seeks to create a classless society and rejects the idea of a social hierarchy, NS/fascism embraces the hierarchy and sees it as a central element of what makes for an effectively organised society. Or as I said earlier, Hitler hated the exploitative elements of capitalism (same as socialism), but he also hated the egalitarian elements of socialism. This may have been a more important statement than I initially thought. In theory, socialists want to move towards a fully classless egalitarian society, while NS/fascists absolutely do not. Regarding the difference between the working class and race, de facto they lead to the same situation: the economy is reorganised to serve the "common man" instead of a particular class and exploitation is stopped (and this reorganisation is done largely in the same way to boot). But I do agree that the theoretical element is significantly different. That again ties into the aforementioned class collaboration vs classlessness. 3. for the sake of brevity I will briefly respond to point 2 and 3 made here. Regarding point 2, my argument is that socialism has as a goal to enter into a classless society where there is no exploitation and the economy is organised in such a way to benefit the whole of society more or less equally and fairly. NS/fascism is the same, except you switch classlessness out for class collaboration and the whole of society is either a race (NS) or the whole of a nation (fascism). Therefore I'd say the three are very closely related, albeit also fundamentally different in other ways. Regarding point 3, there never was any democratic element to any socialist state to date, as far as I know. Workers never had direct say in their wages and whatnot, it was always a central government communist party doing what it saw as fair for everyone, without actual democratic legitimacy. Actual socialist states were like that and so was National Socialism. To conclude, I think we see two systems that are remarkably similar in many ways, but fundamentally differ particularly in the area of egalitarianism vs hierarchies. I can see why some people call both socialism, but at the same time I can see why others say they're just different enough to warrant separating them altogether. For me it's a grey area at this point.
    1
  1670. +The Slim Reaper Helaas, ja. Het parlement bestaat om dit soort dingen kritisch te bespreken maar het enige wat ze doen is ervan uit gaan dat het fout is (alsof dat evident is of zo) en Blok aanvallen. Geen kritisch tegengeluid, geen inhoudelijke argumenten, alleen afwijzing zonder enige grond. Blok heeft 100% gelijk en als ze niet van zijn opvatting houden zou ik zeggen houd een verhit debat over de inhoud en laat maar zien waarom je denkt dat hij niet gelijk heeft. Maar nee, alleen grondeloze afwijzing
    1
  1671. Well, four or so wars led to the Dutch invading Britain and installing him as king, so yeah. And even when we were friendly, our empires still competed, with or without wars
    1
  1672.  M33ble  "They already pay most of the taxes...like the vast majority of the taxes. What happens when you raise the taxes higher and the rich people just leave? Where's the money going to come from then?" In other words; "don't make us pay taxes or else we'll leave". You will allow yourself to be blackmailed like that? Because that's what it is. Corporations already evade taxes en masse with all kinds of constructions. Most don't even pay their fair share right now. Preventing tax haven abuse alone would raise billions, if not more in tax money. Blackmail by corporations undermining parliament from using its democratic power to impose taxes is not a normal thing. "We do not have a better system, the NHS is strained af. It can't cope." NHS is vastly superior to the US system. They pay a ridiculous amount more (literally twice) and get less coverage in return, often still having to pay thousands extra when making use of healthcare. Imagine having to pay hundreds of pounds per dentist visit out of your own pocket instead of it being a standard part of your coverage, while at the same time paying twice as much as you pay for NHS for your insurance premium. US healthcare is financially crippling just for basic care and potentially bankrupting if you get properly sick and need hospital treatment. It has gotten to the point where charity organisations that are normally active in Africa have to provide basic care for Americans because so many can't afford US healthcare.
    1
  1673.  M33ble  That is simply not true, dental check ups are not "hundreds of pounds" in the UK. I checked the NHS site just to be sure and it's 22 pounds for a visit. So again, imagine paying double what you do now for the NHS and when going for a simple dental check up still paying hundreds of pounds because the coverage you pay for is shite and you still have to pay a considerable amount of your treatment out of your own pocket. I'm not saying the UK system is perfect, I'm saying it's vastly superior to the American system, under which hundreds of thousands go bankrupt, tens of thousands die because they don't have healthcare and many choose to not buy medicine for illnesses like diabetus because insuline is so expensive. It's not even a contest. Hospitals in the UK are overburdened, true, but that is not an inherent result of the NHS. It can be fixed by investing in the healthcare system. And after an investment that'd fix the problems I doubt you'd be paying literally double you do now, so in the end a 100% fixed NHS would still be cheaper than US healthcare. They pay 17% of their GDP on healthcare, the UK 8%. Ramp it up to 10%, invest more in the NHS and resolve its problems, done. Nobody is stopping you from fixing these issues but yourselves. Rich people and corporations go hand in hand. (Very) rich people use their corporations to funnel money into tax havens and then straight into their own pockets. For some reason this is still legal. Hell, my own grandfather had a small business and even he had a foreign bank account just for one million euros. It's more popular than you think and not only done by the exorbitantly rich.
    1
  1674.  M33ble  You mean like how with private insurance you pay hundreds in monthly insurance premiums and then discover that your coverage is only perhaps a third of the medical costs, meaning you still have to pay hundreds for simple procedures? Under the NHS, the taxes you pay monthly are lower than the monthly private insurance premiums and what you need to pay for actually using healthcare is also lower than what you have to pay for procedures under private insurance. In total, the costs in the US are double at 17% of their GDP spent on healthcare compared ot 8% in the UK. So again your argument is moot.
    1
  1675.  M33ble  The UK spends 8% of its GDP on healthcare, the US 17%. From which taxes or insurance that money is sourced is absolutely irrelevant. Paying for other people's healthcare? Mate, what the hell do you think an insurance company does with your premiums? It pays the part of your and others' care that it covers with that shared money, plus takes a significant part of it for corporate profit. It's the exact same, plus worse. And you'd gladly pay double? Well, pay twice as much taxes to the NHS then and watch as they throw money at you like it's nothing. No matter how you spin it, the NHS as a system is vastly superior. Any problems you are experiencing with it are because of its funding, not because of the system itself. A well funded public healthcare system is always superior to the present situation in America. If you underfund the NHS, of course there are going to be shortcomings. But even though you spend half of what the US spends, the care the NHS provides as of right now still is arguably better than what the US gets. The coverage is certainly better, in any case. Insofar the quality doesn't equal the US, the answer is spending more. Whatever you choose to spend, you get more value for your money than the US gets. That is the main point. The system is superior; it produces better value for the money you put into it. If the Americans would spend HALF of what they do now, watch their system collapse. If you spend the same as what the US spends (being TWICE what you spend now), watch as the NHS provides services the US could only hope for. No matter the situation, the system fundamentally is superior to the US system. Canada is a great example too. Their system is objectively superior to the US, but they structurally underfund it, meaning the actual care you get out of it is arguably worse. The Canadians chose to keep spending the same from the 1970's onwards while their system clearly needs more spending. They also sit at about half the spending of the US. Now they have long waiting lines and other issues. They have a superior system in their hands, but chose to underfund it. That's their choice. Not a fault of the system. Corporations in the US easily raise prices as the market demands it, but in a public system the government will need to raise taxes to properly fund healthcare if the market demands higher prices. Sometimes that funding stays behind as the government decides to cut taxes or leave them as they are. It's stupid to blame the system for underfunding. You're essentially whining that while paying half, you don't get exactly equal treatment as in the US, therefore you want the US system. It's an illogical argument.
    1
  1676.  @CreepySilences  I could say the same about you, thanks.
    1
  1677. Ja ze zitten alles lekker voor de kinderen te verpesten, chapeau. Wat een ontieglijk gezeur en allemaal om niets.
    1
  1678. Gezegd* en politici zijn wel voor mindere dingen helemaal kapotgemaakt
    1
  1679.  said awdars  Het is een salafistische school, dat is op zich al iets wat we niet willen omdat dat een zeer fundamentalistische versie van de islam is. Maar ik heb het natuurlijk over de rapporten van de AIVD die erop wijzen dat bijvoorbeeld te inspectie in eerste instantie niet werd toegelaten en werd tegengewerkt en alleen op afspraak langs mocht komen (zeer verdacht en schandelijk dat de onderwijsinspectie überhaupt wordt tegengewerkt) en enkele leraren zelfs contact onderhouden met terroristen...
    1
  1680. +T_money_ THIRD "Haha, a family being ripped apart." Very funny indeed... you better watch out for karma
    1
  1681.  @michaelmich00  De boeren krijgen te weinig geld voor hun producten om meer te betalen. Dat is de hele reden dat ze de laatste decennia moesten uitbreiden: prijs ging omlaag, dus moet er meer geproduceerd worden om te overleven. Als de prijs omhoog gaat er de boeren met een kleine veestapel kunnen overleven, is er geen probleem. Het zijn niet de boeren, het is de huidige economische trend die staat voor massaproductie en massa-export. Boeren boeien het niet hoe ze overleven (grote of kleine veestapel, biologisch of niet), maar dát ze overleven.
    1
  1682.  @michaelmich00  Er is een belangrijk verschil tussen last hebben van en je hele levenswerk en toekomst moeten opgeven door. Er moet een oplossing komen waarbij boeren met minder vee kunnen overleven, oftewel meer geld krijgen voor het werk dat ze doen zodat ze met een kleinere veestapel kunnen overleven. Dan is zowel de boer als de natuur blij. Het enige wat we dan missen is export, maar dat is gewoon geld.
    1
  1683. "My husband is going head to head with a bear, let me just grab the camera"
    1
  1684. Juries are dumb and should be stopped entirely. Random people with zero knowledge of law have no business judging whether I'm guilty or not. Professionals do and are more equipped to judge cases.
    1
  1685. You can't, the UK has the EU. You can blockade the UK from the continent, but not from the sea.
    1
  1686.  @i_ased_i3705  Trade/economics are not accounted for in the scenario, because that would involve allies to begin with. That's like saying you can put a naval blockade around the US while ignoring that Canada and Mexico exist.
    1
  1687. @Karim Halaf Vrijheid van meningsuiting betekent niet vrijheid van kritiek. Slaat nergens op om opeens over vrijheid van meningsuiting te beginnen
    1
  1688.  @Ghastly_Grinner  Don't speak about things you don't understand, you're probably American.
    1
  1689.  @TheImperatorKnight  Your response seems to be targeting collectivist libertarian socialism and anarchism. I understand why you see no reason to distinguish between the 'public' in the sense of the state and the 'public' in the sense of for example a commune. Both are collectivist in nature, after all. Wouldn't entirely agree with the term 'totalitarian', but those are semantics. However, the real issue I have with your argument is that libertarian socialism doesn't require collectivised property, as you seem to imply. There is also individualist anarchism and left-libertarianism. These forms of libertarian socialism often espouse not public, but mutual ownership. The easiest example would probably be libertarian market socialism, in which (for example) worker cooperatives compete in a free market. This is socialism because the means of production are owned by workers. Essentially everyone who contributes to a company, shares in its profits (not necessarily equally by the way). Not the public, ONLY those that directly contribute to the company. This also means that capitalism cannot exist, because for someone to gain (partial) ownership of a business means they must be an active partner in it. Not just give money as a one-off and then enjoy the fruits of ownership permanently, even passively if they like. Capital investments can still exist in this market, but they can only be a service for which the company pays a reward, not a means to gain permanent ownership of the company. There are many more forms of libertarian socialism which do not have completely public ownership of the means of production. End goal of libertarian socialism is to take away what they see as exploitative relationships. Anarchism goes further and seeks to abolish all/most hierarchies in society. I.e. they see wage labour as exploitative because in principle capitalists see humans as mere economic input in their business, as a means to generate profit. With mutual ownership, all people that work for the company are seen as equal partners who together contribute to the company and are entitled to a reasonable part of the profits because of this contribution. I don't see how the simple act of seeing other humans with whom you create something of value as equal partners in business rather than economic input that you must pay the lowest possible wage in order to gain profit for yourself is 'totalitarian'. Or how a free market in which one enters into equal contracts with other people is 'public' while a free market in which people with a lot of capital are allowed to passively profit from ownership of others' companies because of initial investments is 'private'. I see both of these examples as 'private'. They are both free markets that simply operate on different ground rules on who is entitled to the profits of a business.
    1
  1690.  @bobhabib7662  _"If libertarian socialism doesn't require collectivized property, then why does it need income tax to feed it? lol - that's literally collectivizing someone's property is it not?" _ Libertarian socialism does not require that. I already named that market socialism in particular is really just a free market in which companies that are owned by those that directly contribute to said company compete with one another. Income tax or not. Could be a stateless society, even. Several forms exist. "Collectives are socialist ideas even if they might be applied in a capitalistic society." Are you one of those people that think "free market = capitalism"? Because that's untrue. Capitalism is just one of several ways to organise a free market. Capitalism is by far not the only type of free market and no, capitalism is not "just what happens" in freedom either. All myths that have come into existence after capitalism became the norm. We have come to see capitalism as so normal that we cannot imagine another type of free market anymore. Which is only natural when living under an economic system for so long. But it still is untrue. Capitalism is a free market which emphasises capital growth with elements like wage labour and the ability to gain passive ownership of a company by investment. A very specific type of free market. Solid system, because free market economics are great. But not without flaws. So to correct you, collectives are socialist ideas even if applied to a _free market_. Yes. That's why that form of a free market is not called capitalism, but something else. It's an anti-capitalist free market. "And no, just because you are a line worker at Amazon for example, doesn't mean you created anything. Yes, you may have pulled the packages so they can be delivered, but you are getting paid for pulling those packages. That is your contribution and you received payment for it. That's what you agreed to." Wage labour can exist within market socialism. The LITERAL only difference with capitalism is that all profits are divided among those that directly contribute to the company. And not equally, but fairly according to the actual contribution (at least roughly so, you can't "calculate" someone's contribution always, especially because the value we create is subjective). Obviously someone who does more valuable work will get a higher wage and probably a higher part of the profits too. The one and only thing market socialism demands is that it is impossible for third parties to passively take profits from a company just because they invested a bit of money. This permanent ownership, regardless of actual contribution to the business, is seen as exploitative by socialists across the board. Sure, the person that built a company and continues to be an important part of keeping it afloat deserves a much higher pay than a regular worker that stepped in doing an essential, but basic job. But does the capitalist who paid the person that built the company 10.000 dollars 30 years ago as start-up capital deserve 1.000.000 dollars pay from the coffers of the company that others have worked hard to build and expand over the years? No, not if all the capitalist did is pay the money and then sit on his arse doing nothing for the business. Providing start-up investments is an essential service in any market economy, but giving capitalists life-long ownership that entitles them to permanent passive profiteering off the work of others is a bit too much. The idea of giving people who have NOTHING to do with a company, part ownership of the company and a permanent entitlement to part of its profits is stupid. It makes no sense unless you're trying to create an economy that is massively skewed towards making already rich people richer. "You will never get rid of "exploitative relationships" as long as there are human beings. The best you can do is create an environment where if you think you're being exploited, you can change companies or start your own. Just another reason that capitalism is superior to collectivist thinking." There is nothing exploitative about starting a company and hiring people you see as partners together with whom you keep the business afloat. There is nothing exploitative about basic workers receiving significantly less pay than people doing more demanding/complex work, and/or people who gave a lot to build the business up. How this is divided? That's for each company to decide internally, as long as it's reasonable. What is exploitative is only this: seeing humans as nothing other than economic input for you to personally profit from. With a preference for passive profit from capital investment returns. That is not the standard for humans, not at all. And if you think it is, then you have a very bleak view of humanity.
    1
  1691. Kritiek op feminisme (wat je daar ook van vindt) betekent voor kranten als de Volkskrant kennelijk dat je gelijk een groot gevaar bent voor de samenleving en iedereen die niet blond is dood wil hebben. Als dit geen framing is dan weet ik het ook niet meer. Dit soort stukken is waarom Pim Fortuyn was vermoord, vergeet dat nooit. Als je als nazi wordt weggezet is dat niet alleen een belediging, maar ook een indirecte bedreiging. Je wordt dan namelijk geframed als een persoon met zulke gevaarlijke en racistische ideeën dat zelfs geweld geboden is om te voorkomen dat die ideeën tot uitvoer worden gebracht. Links zegt eerst "it's ok to punch a nazi" en dan noemen ze iedereen rechts van hen een nazi. Pure opruiing. Impliciet is iemand nazi roepen ook gewoon een geweldsbedreiging en dat moet iedereen die dit soort stukken schrijft begrijpen. Nadenken voordat je zoiets stoms doet. Straks schiet een of andere gek haar of Thierry Baudet neer omdat hij serieus gelooft een gevaarlijke, genocidale dictator te stoppen, op basis van stukken als deze. Kan echt niet. Ik noem Klaver toch ook geen communistische Stalinist of Maoist (met honderden miljoenen doden op hun geweten) omdat hij links is??? Leer het verschil tussen normaal links/rechts en extreem links/rechts. Erg belangrijk, maar kranten als de Volkskrant doen die grens vervagen, en bewust.
    1
  1692. I find it amusing how Peterson seems to describe religion as something very similar to the pre-christian belief systems in Europe, and then applies it to christianity. The divine being something like a subconscious and transcendental representation of our collective views and evolutionary history on what is "good" fits the pre-christian gods that all are clear metaphors for real aspects of life. For example, the greek goddess of Hygeia would simply represent our collective knowledge of hygiene. If the "goddess Hygeia" commands us to do something, then our collective understanding of hygiene tells us to do something that is "good" for the survival of our species. If religion tells us to praise Athena or Odin (god(dess) of knowledge), it would simply be telling us to value knowledge as a meaningful tool for survival, if you will. He is turning religion into more of a philosophical way of thinking rather than the literal reality of omnipotent beings present in the sky. This of course doesn't fit Christianity in the slightest, but looking at mythology and other more symbolic religions, it actually seems to apply to those. You can rationalise those deities as representations of real things, and you can even rationalise praising those deities as valuing what they represent. Actually an interesting take on mythology, if you ask me.
    1
  1693. Says the guy who tapped Merkel's phone and blew up the Iran deal with is worth 20 billion euros in European trade with Iran (of course the US only had a few million dollar worth of trade with them so they didn't care). You spy on us and steal economic allies from us.
    1
  1694.  @TakeQQQ  Nog steeds welvarender dan waar dan ook. Welvaart is relatief en wij staan ergens bovenin de lijst.
    1
  1695.  @TakeQQQ  Ga maar in een derdewereldland wonen en vertel me maar hoe verdomd goed je het had in NL vergeleken daarmee. Zelfs de armere bevolking in NL is welvarend vergeleken met de rest van de wereld. Dat bedoel ik ermee. Wij als land behoren tot de absolute top.
    1
  1696. That will only increase the issues. The problem is that there are only two major parties in the US. If, like in any normal working democracy, there are multiple parties, they are forced to work together to run the country. This will make the current hyperpartisan powerpolitics impossible.
    1
  1697.  @alyvanderboom340  De enige reden dat wij vrijheid van godsdienst hebben is het eindeloze moorden door katholieken en protestanten in het verleden. Dat is geen cultuur, het was een nodig middel om het geweld te stoppen. Geweld dat van een vergelijkbare religie als de islam kwam.
    1
  1698.  @alyvanderboom340  Nee, we moeten gewoon stoppen met al dat islamofobie gezever en de islam blootstellen aan serieuze kritiek. De islam heeft een verlichting nodig, net als het christendom in het verleden. Bovendien is de vrijheid van religie overbodig geworden. We hebben het om historische redenen die er vandaag de dag niet meer toe doen. De vrijheid van meningsuiting beschermt religie voldoende. Ik vind het onwenselijk dat wij ideeën die religieus verpakt zijn een speciale positie in de maatschappij geven. In theorie wordt ik als nazi bestempeld als ik zeg dat joden gedood moeten worden, maar wordt diezelfde uitspraak beschermd als ik zeg dat het god's woord is dat joden gedood moeten worden. En dan krijg ik nog extra voorzieningen om mijn achterlijke geloof te belijden ook. We moeten erkennen dat het een slecht idee is om bepaalde ideeën om arbitraire redenen van elkaar te scheiden. Alle ideologieën moeten met dezelfde maat worden gemeten, inclusief religies. Islam heeft een duidelijk probleem met fundamentalisme, maar op dit moment vrijwaren wij de islam van kritiek met onzin als islamofobie. Kritiek is wat de islam het hardst nodig heeft om het te liberaliseren. Alleen met een harde discussie en harde kritiek kunnen we de islam, net als het christendom (dat in het verleden minstens net zo fundamentalistisch en gewelddadig was!) naar het goede pad leiden.
    1
  1699.  @alyvanderboom340  Wat er in het midden oosten gebeurt heeft niks met de situatie in NL te maken. Alle meningen worden al beschermd door de vrijheid van meningsuiting. Niemand wordt vervolgd omwille van hun ideeën, waaronder geloof. De vrijheid van religie is een reliek uit een tijd waarin de overheden in vele Europese landen protestanten/katholieken afslachtten en het nodig was om als overheid vrijheid van religie te erkennen om het bloedvergieten te stoppen. De overheid mocht zich niet meer mengen in religieuze conflicten. Volkomen irrelevant dezer dagen. Het enige wat het doet is religies allerlei privileges bieden ten opzichte van andere ideologieën. Totaal ongepast als je het mij vraagt. Alle ideologieën moeten gelijk behandeld worden, ook religie valt daar onder. Er is geen risico op vervolging omdat religie net als andere ideeën reeds wordt beschermd door de vrijheid van meningsuiting. En die bescherming is voldoende.
    1
  1700. @madhatter 41 I wouldn't be so sure about that. Trump has shown a clear preference to keep the US military out of foreign wars. He does have a tendency to promote selling weapons, which may lead to (and has led to in Yemen) proxy wars. So he's not a pacifist by any means but in my book he's safer than somebody that supports the likes of Iraq and is highly likely to continue the destructive policy that basically all presidents before Trump have followed. I don't want another Syria or Libya and conflicts like that, with direct US involvement, are more likely to happen under Biden. Because he follows the traditional US foreign policy of removing opposing governments and upkeeping the petrodollar at all cost. Trump is America First.
    1
  1701.  @mjohanss1975  That's certainly a huge problem. America interestingly enough still has one of the highest emission reductions in the world under Trump, but there is only so much that local states can do when there is no coherent federal policy.
    1
  1702.  @ArchAngel781  IRL a soldier doing this will be shot within a very short period of time. If you spray machine gun fire all over the place, likely nowhere near the actual enemies, you're an easy target. You can't shoot in everyone's direction at once. So this was pretty much a suicide action by Arthur and he's lucky as hell the guys were gone already when he pulled this one.
    1
  1703.  @ArchAngel781  If they were amateurs that are easily scared by gunfire I could get behind that, but these are established to be WWI veterans. People who literally ran straight into machine gun fire and lines of infantry aiming right at them when going over the top, entered into enemy trenches and shot or bludgeoned enemy soldiers to death in very close quarters. WWI was no joke in terms of courage you needed to have to take part in the fighting. Possibly even the absolute worst war in this regard. In this situation Arthur would be incredibly easy to take out to any decent soldier seasoned by WWI warfare. Covering fire is meant to be aimed fire in the general direction of the enemy so they need to take cover. Like, shooting over their heads so they can't get up to shoot back. What Arthur did was shoot all over the place, which would always give a few guys the opportunity to pop up and kill him. Since he was just standing there in the open it wouldn't be a difficult shot and the chances of being hit in return would be very slim. So again, this is either unrealistic writing, or good writing to show that after all the issues with his wife, Arthur is now borderline suicidal and doesn't care much anymore for his own safety.
    1
  1704. +roni thacker The EU has an agreement with all mediterranean countries to stop migrants in exchange for economic investments. Then... the US fuels a civil war in Syria and US-led NATO bombs Libya, both partners in this agreement meant to keep Europe safe from migrants. And it is these EXACT two places from which we had a migrant stream... Only a true ignoramus would not see the connection. It is the US' aggression that is to blame for Europe's migration issues, whether you like it or not. They literally poked two wholes in an important security area around Europe, just for personal gain.
    1
  1705. You wouldn't want the EU in the fight. You'd lose that
    1
  1706. We still would back them up tho
    1
  1707.  @SF-hw7ng  It literally leaves our defence and intelligence cooperation unchanged. Only our economic/political relation is less close, but still very much allied. We're better allies with post-brexit UK than the US, but everyone believes the US will help militarily if push comes to shove.
    1
  1708.  @pduikelaar8604  Waarom doe je alsof die twee elkaar uitsluiten? Hij zegt dat wij met open grenzen bepaalde mensen hebben binnengehaald waardoor het homo-geweld en anti Joden gedachtegoed is toegenomen, wat helaas waar is, en dat het hypocriet is weg te kijken terwijl wij opeens optreden als een haatdominee komt. Dat betekent dat we het allebei moeten aanpakken. Maar wat wij met immigratie hebben gedaan is vele malen erger, dus daar moet ook de meeste aandacht naar uit gaan. Het is gewoon dom en onverantwoord om zo weg te kijken.
    1
  1709. So is most news in the US, so that's actually not that special of a statement. It's just the sad state of US "news" channels; 90% opinion, plenty of exaggeration, occasionally even complete make-believe and sparingly you might see quality journalism.
    1
  1710. The entire bloody internet is toxic as all hell for a number of reasons, they are just using this to attack gamers. The internet is anonymous, the internet has zero social consequences and zero social checks. This is a toxic cocktail that leads to people saying a lot of things they would never say in real life. Shame. But it's very wrong to single out games.
    1
  1711.  @Jess_ica2927  I agree that transitioning should not be rushed. It is a very intense and permanent process that only those who truly are gender dysphoric should go through. We should distinguish people with gender dysphoria from people who just want to be the opposite gender. The latter group is at high risk of regretting transitioning. This is why this procedure must imo always be preceded by medical professionals gauging whether the person truly has dysphoria.
    1
  1712.  @big_slurp4603  I know right... that one and "history is written by the victors" are so tiring
    1
  1713. Costly endeavour, this
    1
  1714. And how much is total defence spending of the US' GDP?
    1
  1715. Just like Scandinavian culture according to them, Scandinavian Airlines doesn't exist either ;)
    1
  1716.  @hussey4826  *looks around* What Communists?
    1
  1717. I much prefer fashion of that time to what we wear today. It's a lot more daring and full of variation than especially men's fashion is today. I hope more people follow in this man's footsteps
    1
  1718. Yeah ikr
    1
  1719. The end goal is making people believe non-whites are part of all white societies and always have been. Multiculturalism and the destruction of distinct cultures is the end goal. They don't want distinguishable groups with different cultures, they want us to be one group, one big melting pot. It is not about inclusion (otherwise they could have introduced some well-written Zerrikanean characters), it is specifically about showing black people as part of a white society. And for the Witcher this meant there would have to be blackwashing
    1
  1720.  @luaseast1251  Nope, we should respect their sovereignty and leave them be. They let us be, we wish others to let us be too.
    1
  1721. @ it has happened historically and it is happening today. In Rojava, conflicts between different ethnic groups have been at an all time low since they built an anarchist revolution. Because when all ethnic groups can freely self-organise there is no reason to quarrel over power. It isn’t perfect because nothing is, but it’s the best system for preventing such wars
    1
  1722. Joke's on you, WE HAVE NO OIL! Only Russia and to a much lesser degree Norway have oil.
    1
  1723. I'm just wondering whether Russia would double team the EU with the US or whether they would join the EU and forge an alliance. My guess is the latter because even though invading the EU might have short term gains for Russia, it also means they'll have the US as their direct neighbour afterwards. And Russia would be next. A powerful ally is more useful for them
    1
  1724. The US did all of that AND killed millions with invasions and proxy wars. Worldwide, not just regional like China so far. China and the US are both bad bullshit
    1
  1725. What could possibly go wrong? :D
    1
  1726. The right is worse at everything you named. It is illegal to teach about LGBT people in schools in Florida. Bud Light is cancelled intensely for... featuring a trans woman in a commercial (i.e. trans people are not allowed to exist by the right???). And trans kids do not get surgery. You know who does get FORCED sex change surgery? Intersex kids who are forcibly transitioned into a man or woman as a kid by the RIGHT, with often psychological issues later in life because they didn't get to choose themselves and their gender might mismatch their body.... And the social fabric... If you mean forcing women to stay at home and stuff like that then yes the left is destroying that. And that's a good thing. If you want a tradwife that's fine, just find someone that actually WANTS to be one instead of forcing everyone to fit conservative culture. The left has always been about freedom of choice and empathy. The right about imposing conservative culture of how it 'should be', regardless of whether that is good for the people involved (best example is MUTILATING intersex kids because their brain melts from the idea of a kid not being a man or woman, and then turning around and blaming trans people for exactly what they themselves do because their brain melts from the medical consensus around transness). In short, it is the right that is guilty of all you named in a much worse way than the left supposedly is
    1
  1727. Vreugdevuren zijn al duizenden jaren onderdeel van de Europese cultuur, sinds de voor-christelijke tijd. Het is niet niks om een traditie die zo lang bestaat zomaar af te schaffen.
    1
  1728. Make that 27. It's unsure whether the UK would support us (but if I'd guess they would stand up to any European invasion, even by the US)
    1
  1729.  @Kylo_Ren_2033  That's ridiculous. We're talking about an invasion of an EU member state here. Let me remind you that the EU also has an "attack on one is an attack on all" article, it is a military alliance too. The EU letting a foreign country invade one of their member states is simply never going to happen. What I can see happening is that the EU is too slow to respond to such an invasion because it is unexpected, but they'd never just sit by and leave Denmark alone. At the least we would see political and economic sanctions against the US, at the most a fully-fledged military attempt to take back the territory. I think the US definitely can take and defend Greenland if they go for a covert attack. If the EU has time to prepare a defence I don't know who wins.
    1
  1730.  @HemlockRidge  Mate we are talking about a possible Binkov episode about whether the US could take Greenland from Denmark + EU, this is obviously not a realistic proposition and nobody even mentioned Trump. It's just for fun
    1
  1731.  @SRad01  No. The radar tech that the British gave the US was not called "the most valuable cargo ever brought to our shores" by some historians for nothing... It was a huge deal and massive improvement over any crude pre-existing "radar". Absolutely central to US naval superiority in the Pacific to the point where you seriously have to consider how things would have gone without it. Jet technology was gotten from the UK, as part of the Tizard mission in 1940. I'd love to know how the US could have had jet prototypes by 1942 (look up: P59A Airacomet) using British engines when they got it from the Germans earlier. ONLY the Germans and British had been developing jet engines since the 1930s and they completed their first operational aircraft within weeks of one another, with the German Me-262 and a few weeks later the British Gloster Meteor. Fun fact: the Soviet MiG-15 used a backwards-engineered British jet engine that the UK granted the Soviets for use in passenger jets. Before that they only had poorly adapted engines inspired by those of the Me-262, though they never quite could copy them well. Jet engines were only developed by the Germans and British respectively, all of the surrounding powers got theirs from those two either by capture or by shared tech. Ah, about the nuclear programme I see you are partly right. I was under the impression it started in 1942 under influence of the Tizard mission, but in reality it was already started in 1939 and while there were little developments, the British shared one of their breakthroughs in 1940 that kickstarted the Manhattan project to greater heights. In 1944/45 the British shared all of their secrets, but these only sped up the process by a few months and weren't central to its completion. The first shared breakthrough, however, was. And finally about the supplies, I agree. I don't see how I said anything different. The US was surely the top industry of the allies and supplied others the most, but at the same time we must acknowledge the huge USSR industry at the time. And I don't know why you're naming Germany as challenging the US. The British produced roughly as much as the Germans in WW2 as far as I'm aware and neither of them held a candle to the USSR and US production rate. Essentially you had two massive industries of the US and USSR and the rest lagged behind. About American steel, American steel ore is as far as I'm aware inferior to European ore. It is not about the capabilities of the US industry, but about the geographical quality of ore. Reports I've read in the past from British records stated that American steel at the time was quite a bit inferior to their own. It's a small geographical limitation compared to for example the USSR and UK being dependent on the US for rubber imports (highly important for wheels and thus a proper supply line, perhaps the most important US supply to the allies of all) and the massive limitation that Europe in general had and still has regarding lack of oil (which arguably is the main reason the Germans lost the war: they failed to reach either Middle Eastern or Soviet oil sources in time and ran out of oil). So all in all the US had a great position in terms of supplies and I believe they were the only actual self-sufficient industry during the war. The rest all had some grave dependencies.
    1
  1732.  @olgajoachimosmundsen4647  Funding =/= strength. The EU has the same manpower as the US, a few less tanks, a few more warships and significantly less airpower. That certainly is not a 30-70 difference. The EU already has its own military missions going on, plus there is at least one French-led mission with only European countries going on right now in Mali. It's a matter of properly dividing the work and areas of operation. In the case of quick-response, only a few larger militaries could deploy to simplify the initial leadership, followed by a more structured introduction of the smaller militaries. Furthermore, the EU's quick response teams are already governed by a single leadership so at least the initial response would be structured. The problem is the following introduction of the national militaries. I agree that the EU has a disadvantage when attacked unexpectedly, a clear one, but to say it is impossible goes too far imo.
    1
  1733.  @VisibilityFoggy  This is not the 1980s and the US-UK relation back then is not the current situation in Europe. The UK is committed to protecting Europe from any foreign threat, be they in the EU or out. It is simply ridiculous to claim they would possibly support the US as the comment I responded to did and while it is possible that the UK would not militarily intervene it is at the very least a certainty that political and/or economic pressure would follow such a move. I'd even rate the possibility of military aid by the UK as fairly probable, though it would likely be a supporting role only.
    1
  1734.  Yen Feng  What surplus of troops? You had about the same amount of men in the military as the British Empire alone (British 15 million total served, US 16 million total served), now add roughly 3 million French men by 1945 and whatever the total amount of men that all the smaller allied nations at the time had. You would barely be able to get here in the first place as only the UK had highly advanced anti submarine tech that made German U-boats obsolete by 1944/45 (not sure if they shared this with the US, don't think so) and the Royal Navy was the main force fighting the Battle for the Atlantic. War is not about "sending troops", it is about being able to set up supply lines and bases in strategic areas. The US could do none of that without the UK at the time. Where will you send the troops? UK? Nope. North Africa? Nope, British troops stationed there throughout the war. Do you seriously think you can just ship men all over the Atlantic and stage a highly complex D-day style landing? You can't even do that TODAY, let alone back then. Nobody can do that. There were no "surplus men" to send, there were no logistical possibilities to get them there without the UK and there were no logistical possibilities to supply them without the UK. You can't just invade a continent from across an entire ocean... It was difficult enough from the UK to begin with. It's absolutely ridiculous and this is not even mentioning the USSR that would mix in the fights and kick both our asses, likely ending up taking all of Western Europe.
    1
  1735.  @SSPENGUIN1  You get credit as one of three main allies, each of which was absolutely indispensable for the war effort. Without any of the three big allies, the war would be lost. What people like some in this thread do is claim one of the three big allies saved EVERYONE, which is very inaccurate. The three allies did it together. I hate it when the role of the other allies are downplayed. And the UK did pay you back and BANKRUPTED themselves in doing so. It's disingenuous to frame US supplies as something that came from the good of your heart. It was pure business and you surely did good business with it. It almost single handedly bankrupted the richest nation at the time. The US was unmissable in the war effort against the Axis forces, the British Empire was unmissable in the war effort against the Axis forces and the USSR was unmissable in the war effort against the Axis forces. That is the one and only truth about the contributions of the big three allies. You can't claim any of them saved the others. I constantly see comments that either exaggerate how the USSR "saved Europe" and "took on 90% of the Wehrmacht"(lol) or comments that exaggerate the US presence in Europe as if they were like 90% of the forces and "saved Europe" or claim that US supplies were some kind of charity that was more important than the actual fighting. Especially the British Empire contribution is very often downplayed in a disgusting manner, but I also see the US contribution being downplayed by "USSR saved all" type of comments and the USSR contribution being downplayed by "US saved all" comments. It should stop. All three were roughly equally important to the war effort (yes, even the British Empire) and they succeeded together.
    1
  1736.  @DS9TREK  In your dreams perhaps. Reality is different.
    1
  1737. Agreed on the US history not being as invincible as some people think, but the UK has been invaded at least once within those thousand years. Technically, the Netherlands invaded London in 1688 and dethroned James II, after which a member of the Dutch royal family was installed as king of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. But this was done with support of English nobility that opposed James II. The throne was taken with a combination of politics and an invading force, not with a full-scale military campaign against Britain or something
    1
  1738. Nepgesprekken? Er is een fundamentele islam en er is een gematigde islam. Je kan allerlei meningen hebben over wat dan de échte islam zou zijn en welk percentage van de moslims daar onder zou vallen, maar feit is dan beide variaties bestaan. De één moet aangepakt worden, de ander veroorzaakt geen problemen. Onder de gematigde islam heb je onder meer vrouwen zonder hoofddoek die gewoon helemaal meedoen in onze maatschappij. Ook die moslims bestaan en er is geen reden te zeggen dat ook voor hun de islam verboden moet worden. Het gaat om bepaalde interpretaties.
    1
  1739. @The real Youtuber copyright claimer En jij dacht dat ik geen grap maakte?
    1
  1740.  @drawingdead9025  No it won't be, that is only the case for asymmetrical warfare. When two larger and more advanced militaries face off, it's incredibly difficult to achieve a swift victory and in many cases extremely toilsome to reach victory to begin with. Any large scale modern warfare would have so many casualties that it'd be a pyrrhic victory by default
    1
  1741. Zolang de gangstercultuur naar NL wordt gehaald (want de fascinatie met messen is veroorzaakt door drill rap, wat uit Amerika komt) is het dweilen met de kraan open. Je kan reactief optreden door messen te gaan verbieden, maar daar los je weinig mee op. Het probleem is hoe die kinderen worden opgevoed en ook waarmee ze vanuit hun omgeving opgroeien. Als ze het cool vinden om messen bij zich te dragen en naar muziek luisteren waarin met stoer rapt over andere lekprikken of wat dan ook, dan krijg je dit. Reactief hiermee omgaan is een verkeerde zet. Je moet VOORKOMEN dat dit soort trends ook in NL populair worden. Dat is moeilijk, maar dat begint met een goede opvoeding en positieve invloeden vanuit de maatschappij. De opvoeding ligt uiteraard vrijwel uitsluitend bij de ouders, maar de overheid kan een rol spelen in de vorming van een positieve maatschappij die kinderen normen en waarden bijbrengt. Dit gaat om het omhoog houden van onze cultuur. Want onze cultuur is duidelijk een positieve kracht als je het gaat vergelijken met gangstercultuur.
    1
  1742. That´s not something to be proud of, imo. I respect Britain more because they did NOT attempt to conquer all of Europe, even when they could.
    1
  1743. There´s also this story of an American doing the hitlergruß somewhere in Germany and getting the crap beaten out of him afterwards. Happened this summer
    1
  1744.  @mmaattoouu  iT's JuSt FaNtAsY It's a story that takes from Slavic folklore and European mythology and has a strong cultural charge. It is not "just a story", it is tied to Slavic culture so to make it authentic, properly portray it as a story that came from Poland. This is all just mental gymnastics to justify all these poor casting and atmosphere choices. You'll kill the spirit of the story this way because part of why it's so beloved is exactly its connection to Slavic culture and the folkmusic in the games, etc.
    1
  1745. How can fashion even be racist to begin with? Colours don't work well with black skin? This doesn't make any sense...
    1
  1746.  @maximus9812  Oh, I didn't know that. Curious that police forces are allowed to use it against civilian population then, but good to know
    1
  1747. +Vbosssbla That is why you need better healthcare for mentally ill AND better gun laws to prevent mentally ill from gaining hold of weapons.
    1
  1748.  @cs-rj8ru  Ah yes, the time the UN sent underequipped troops to the middle of a warzone to 'protect' the muslim population from a military force far outnumbering and outgunning them. They also refused air support to them. The Serbs simply sat on their hills firing artillery at the Dutch. Nothing they could do but endure. Muslims were killed of course. Pretty shitty move to blame the Dutch troops involved for a mistake so clearly on the side of the UN underequipping them for the mission and adding insult to injury also denying them necessary support when requested. The UN left them to die, sent them on an impossible suicide mission. Bit more respect for those troops would be in order.
    1
  1749. Yennefer is fine, Fringilla is the one I have a problem with
    1
  1750. To be fair, we Europeans also had our "we're starving, let's eat anything in sight" moment during the last ice age. It spawned the practice of drinking milk ;)
    1
  1751. United States vs Saudi Arabia
    1
  1752.  @zacbouch42  I'd prefer him to win, yes. I want everyone to realise neoliberalism is dying.
    1
  1753.  @tinkertailor7385  What if I told you that forms of socialism without a state exist. Even free market socialism exists. You don’t know what socialism is if you say that
    1
  1754. A Bridge Too Far is my all time favourite war film and you've mentioned it yourself a few times in reviews. I'd love to see an in-depth look at it soon!
    1
  1755.  @valens5287  Yes. We also randomly came up with religion, so...
    1
  1756.    Mail voting is illegal here in the Netherlands because of the suscepibility to fraud. It was a very bad idea to introduce it this way in the US. Now they're stuck with this mess
    1
  1757. Okay, I guess occupied Palestine belongs to Israel now?
    1
  1758. Can't even list the NATO countries right.... that is no detail
    1
  1759. "Hey the most popular sport in the world is called football, let´s call this new sport I just created (and kinda copied from rugby) football, even though feet are rarely even used in the first place!"
    1
  1760.  @mycelia_ow  It's true... here in the Netherlands our resident "far right" political party essentially is a bit more leftist than Obama. American politics are extreme by our standards and even the most right wing parties agree on gay rights, universal healthcare, basic social security and more. The main political debate is not about "social security yes or no?" but "how much social security?". But the absolute minimum of social security that every party stands for is a proper safety net for all and decent healthcare for all. How much coverage your healthcare has, how much wealth distribution there will be and such questions are subject to discussion. It's crazy that the question WHETHER to have universal healthcare and other basic social security is a thing in the US to begin with.
    1
  1761. He is strategising to make sure we don't have to rely on the US anymore, which would take many problems away. Don't forget who caused the wars in both places from which the migrants came.... Our "ally" the USA.
    1
  1762. De Gouden Eeuw mag niet meer zo heten want "slechte dingen" Dus.... De Verlichting mag niet meer zo heten omdat er toen ook armoede en oorlog en wat dan ook was? De Renaissance? La Belle Epoque? De Oudheid is dan wel weer neutraal dus die mag blijven. En hoe zit het met de "Dark Ages"? Mag die term niet meer gebruikt worden omdat er ook positieve uitvindingen en ontwikkelingen zich voordeden gedurende die periode? Wanneer snapt deze oetlul dat wij die periodes vernoemen naar hun onderscheidende kenmerken? De Gouden Eeuw heet niet zo omdat er alleen maar rijkdom e.d. was, maar omdat we in die eeuw bijzonder opbloeiden op het gebied van cultuur, wetenschap en economie/macht. De Renaissance heet niet zo omdat we na de Middeleeuwen als een prachtige lente hergeboren waren en het alleen maar mooi was, maar omdat zich een heropleving van opvattingen, kunst en cultuur uit de Oudheid voordeed. En de late 19e eeuw wordt ook wel met La Belle Epoque aangeduid omdat die tijd simpelweg mooi was vanuit economisch en koloniaal opzicht voor Europa, wederom niet omdat er geen armoede of oorlog zou zijn. De Dark Ages verwijst naar de vroege Middeleeuwen waarin in vergelijking met de Oudheid minder wetenschappelijke ontwikkelingen en meer waren, maar ook dit betekent niet dat er letterlijk niets was uitgevonden en er geen vooruitgang was (alsnog best veel). Wij noemen periodes naar bijzonderheden. Armoede is niet bijzonder. Oorlog is niet bijzonder. Noch is economische voorspoed en wetenschappelijke vernuftigheid bijzonder. Tenzij... één van die onderwerpen BIJZONDER VAAK/INTENSIEF VOORKWAM IN DIE PERIODE. Zoals... economische/culturele/wetenschappelijke voorspoed tijdens de Gouden Eeuw. EEN ACCURATE NAAM DUS.
    1
  1763. Socialism doesn’t mean “when the government nationalises things”. Firstly this ignores the many libertarian forms of socialism, especially anarchism. And secondly all socialist experiments and ideological texts are deeply connected with the progression towards communism, a stateless and moneyless society that is thought to be the logical successor of capitalism. The reason why people don’t regard NS as socialism is because it completely falls outside of this tradition and weirdly uses “socialism” outside of the context of it being a transitory and temporary state meant to precede communism. The ENTIRE point of a socialist state, as per ALL leftist theory preceding the NS, is to build communism and guide society towards it with its policies. NS use “socialism” to describe their end goal state, which is already a massive departure from leftist theory and uproots what “socialism” even means at a fundamental level. Thirdly, Hitler calls Marxism “international Jewish finance” for no apparent reason. This sentence makes zero sense. There is no coherent idea behind this except racism against Jews “therefore they’re evil and Marxism is part of the evil international Jewish plot or something”. This isn’t a serious critique of Marxism or a serious leftist disagreement with Marxism. It’s a reactionary dismissal of Marxism, based in racism. So in short I think it’s great you point out that they nationalised the industry, but they have ZERO ideological connection to socialism/communism except very superficially using the name and some collectivist talking points. It’s a stretch to call them socialist
    1
  1764. +cgdude yo I get what his point is, but he is saying it to defend firearms, while the fact that there always will be violence is not relevant in that regard. Yes, there will always be violence, but that doesn't mean we should allow people to own even more destructive weapons so that the violence they commit is more easily carried out and carried out to much greater effect. If the Columbine shooters only had knives, how many less would have died, if they even would have decided to do it at all? If the Las Vegas shooter had only knives, it would have been impossible to carry out his attack at all. If gangs in general had limited access to guns, there would be much less killing in cities like Detroit. Besides that he is comparing the most violent city of Britain to New York, which has been remarkably safe since a few years, especially for an American city. So it's also a cherry-picked false comparison at that.
    1
  1765. +Jeff Dean Why should they? Firearms make it much easier to kill for criminals, while they have no real use to upstanding civilians other than in "what if"-scenarios. Besides, it is not up to civilians to keep the streets safe, it is up to the police. Keep in mind that even the police doesn't carry handguns in the UK and they manage to keep the streets much safer than the US police can. All civilians need is a simple hunting shotgun or bolt-action hunting rifle. More than that is unnecessary and would only make it easier for criminals to attain firearms. It does more harm than good.
    1
  1766. +Patrick buchler ehb Here in Europe we also hunt and we also have gun ranges. The difference is that we hunt with hunting shotguns or bolt-action while and American wants to take his semi-automatic AR-15 for a spin. We can also fire a multitude of more advanced weaponry, but only in gun ranges. Americans can take them home and use them as they please. The European system can meet all the American needs.
    1
  1767. Juist, er zijn te veel fundamentalistische stromingen van islam die bevochten moeten worden. De meer normale stromingen zijn okee
    1
  1768. +Billy Sherman Lol, I think the guy that uses "he's a gay guy with mommy issues" as an argument to counter that Macron is a legitimate world leader is the one nobody can take seriously....
    1
  1769. Yes! Over Gibraltar
    1
  1770. Are you seriously even entertaining the thought of anarcho-capitalism? Capitalism is only acceptable when you keep the corporations somewhat in check while still leaving them free enough to innovate and create wealth. Left unchecked, capitalism is some distopic shit, with massively powerful corporations that'll do anything to maximise profit. I don't understand why anyone would even consider such a system. Capitalism is very good at innovation and wealth-creating, but some very serious side effects are that 99% of wealth eventually ends up in the hands of the 1% and that as corporations get more powerful they start to drown out small and middle-sized companies with vicious tactics. Capitalism only works when you find a good balance between regulating its flaws (really skewed wealth distribution and tendency towards monopolies/oligarchies by drowning out the competition) and leaving it unregulated enough to allow its benefits to flourish (massive wealth creation and very good innovation). In its core unregulated form, capitalism is hell for all except the 1% that amasses an ever increasing amount of wealth and power. If overregulated, the benefits of capitalism are killed as wealth creation and innovation is stifled. Anarcho capitalism is absolutely unacceptable as a means of government, it's a seriously bad idea. Oh, and socialism is not just "government does stuff". Socialism means that the entire economy is collectivised for the working class and all means of production are used by and for the working class. Other classes don't exist anymore and an egalitarian society without private ownership of any factories/etc. is created. Wealth is distributed purely by how much your work is worth. All wealth first goes to the government and is then redistributed. The US military is not "socialist" just because it's the government organising something. Socialism requires an entire economic revolution. A capitalist system with social policies or a generally big government is still capitalism; see most of Western Europe, capitalist social democracies. Essentially, their balance between regulating capitalism and leaving it free, skews more to the regulating side than it does in the US. It's really nothing more than that.
    1
  1771. They're not calling the choice for Brexit or Trump dysfunctional, they're calling the current state of politics in both countries dysfunctional and divided. And they're correct about that. Parliament is hopelessly divided on Brexit and Trump doesn't get along with congress.
    1
  1772. Whatever man, if this commercial would be about the US it'd be true. You're an immigrant country and the native culture was wiped out. All culture came from outside and was added to the melting pot, creating a new American culture. Of course the inventions part would still be bullshit but on the culture end it wouldn't be far from the truth. The problem with this woke shit is that American concepts of being a multicultural immigrant country are being applied to native populations in western Europe, which is highly inappropriate.
    1
  1773.  @paulrollings9606  You can't talk with everyone. Sometimes war is inevitable and we'll never grow past it
    1
  1774. I believe the strait of Hormuz video already exists
    1
  1775.  Goorpijp Wessel  Na twee of drie boetes lijkt me dat inderdaad gepast. Gewoon sluiten
    1
  1776. Het grootste deel van Nederland is heel kritisch tov de EU, maar niet voor uittreding. Dus ik denk dat dat één van de redenen is dat veel FvD'ers thuis zijn gebleven
    1
  1777. No it's not the feminists. It's the SJW postmodernists, in other words the people that think reality is whatever you feel it is. Men literally are believed to be women because they identify as such. People literally invent new genders because they feel whatever they describe. Some even say they feel like a different gender each day and are "genderfluid". They believe that all that reality is is our interpretation of it, no objective facts that everyone can agree on. It's all just interpretation. So if I believe I'm a woman today, it's true because that's what I feel. No XX, no XY, just whatever you identify as. That;s the problem, because objective facts DO exist.
    1
  1778. His description of god is more an explanation of why we humans created religion than an argument for the literal god being real. Strictly speaking I think he is correct in how he describes religion and what it represents, but connects the wrong conclusion to it (it therefore being "real"). God is not real, he or they - whatever form of god or spirituality your culture may adhere to - are made up beings reflecting the collective views, archetypes and evolutionary instincts of the specific culture the god(s) in question belong to. I would agree with that, but that doesn't mean god is "real", it means god is nothing more than a symbol of our collective conscience. Or in other words religion is a metaphorical representation of our culture and collective beliefs on what is right and proper. And by what is right and proper I mean what is good for the survival of our species: usually including being honourable or a good person, in certain religions also including hygienic rules or other rules that are thought to be beneficial to follow for our survival, all coupled with a punishment for non-compliance (hell, not reincarnating or reincarnating into a lower status, karma, etc.). Problem is that unless your religion adapts to the time and circumstances, you can be stuck following an outdated set of rules that may be counterproductive to the wellbeing of your society. This problem is specifically seen with abrahamic religions that have set scriptures that claim to be the one and only truth. Other, more loose belief systems, evolve with the society it belongs to and change with the times. In my opinion, religion is not bad per se when seen as a set of moral rules for society, as long as there is no scripture (as soon as scripture turns up, you are morally stuck in the times the scripture was written). At any time, rational thinking should prevail over religion.
    1
  1779. He is a muslim. I blame the muslim community for creating an environment where fundamentalists are thriving.
    1
  1780. 1. Your first point about politicians always lying is rather broad. Having watched most discussions, the lying in this particular campaign was extremely intensive, far more so than during any normal political discourse. I've honestly never seen such a horrible campaign. Remain falsely painted a doomsday picture and leave falsely painted a picture of paradise. And they did so with very extreme lies. I don't think this is relevant to the question whether a second vote is warranted, but just wanted to point this out. 2. About the second vote, I think it is not necessarily against democratic principles at this point. The point of democracy is not only that we can vote on certain issues, but also that we can change our mind once the situation changes. This of course doesn't mean that we can have referenda and then immediate second referenda on the same issue if the vote is not pleasing to the government. But what it does mean is that after enough has changed and/or there is enough progress with Brexit, there could be a second vote. Considering the years that have passed, the progress Brexit has gone through in terms of negotiation and more, I think there is no democratic reason to oppose a second vote. What in my view decides whether a second vote is legitimate or not is the measure in which the situation surrounding that issue has changed and/or the measure in which the previously chosen policy has crystallised. This must be enough change to constitute a significantly different situation, truly something new to vote over. At the same time one must be wary that such a vote doesn't undermine the earlier vote. Since 2016 a lot of things have been clarified or changed. We see the unrest it has caused in Parliament and the political deadlock it created. We see that the economic impact has been relatively minor so far (especially compared to the Remain arguments). We see that a soft Brexit is no longer on the table. We know May's proposed deal. We see a possible no-deal scenario happening. These developments are enough to justify a vote in entirely new circustances. There is no democratic argument against first voting on general policy on such a large issue and 3 years later voting on the progress of that policy and, considering any new developments, on whether to continue that policy or not. Denying a second vote at this stage is denying the voters a say on government policy so far. I also don't see where the argument against the second vote ends. You say after Brexit has been completed, but I don't see a functional difference between voting now, in the light of all developments, and voting for example just after the completion of Brexit. We'd still not know what the effects of Brexit would be and would only have an extra option to rule out in terms of deals. I think placing the threshold there is rather arbitrary. The difficulty of deciding when a second vote is acceptable on an issue like Brexit is that its effects are drawn out. It takes years to prepare, can the people not vote on how the government handles this stage? After the deal is made it takes years more to actually negotiate the trade relationship. Can the people vote in this stage? The true effects of Brexit probably won't be felt until decades later. Must we wait on those before we can vote? Brexit is no clear-cut process. It's a vague policy that continuously crystallises over the course of many years. It's a gradual process. There is no clear point out of this process you can point at for the right moment to have a second vote. I do think enough has changed to warrant a sufficiently different situation for a second vote, but this vote mustn't overrule the earlier vote without the outcome of that vote to have properly had a chance to take shape. I think Brexit is a uniquely difficult subject in this regard. On the one hand enough has certainly changes to warrant a vote on the direction Britain is going, but on the other hand the original vote hasn't fully come to pass yet. It's very rare that those two overlap. Normally by the time signifcant changes have happened, the original vote was already respected. Because of this overlap, I think a compromise is the only viable outcome. I don't think we can deny the populace a vote on the current direction of Britain, yet I also don't think we can overrule the first vote before the process has been completed. Both can be respected by allowing a referendum on how we should leave, without a remain option. So a referendum on soft Brexit, hard Brexit, May's deal, just custom's union, etc. etc. etc.
    1
  1781. The problem is not our low birthrate, it's the rest of the world's high birthrate. I'd still say our birthrate in Europe ought to be higher and everyone should at least get one child, because 1.4 is too rapid of a decline. 1.8 or so is better. The rest of the world should get on that level too, because there are too many humans right now. Further growth will only lead to food issues. Africa is going to have issues with their massive growth and it's likely we in Europe will be seeing huge migration streams in the future. That is what we must stop and the answer is not to compete with Africa but to stimulate birth control there so that their populations have a better future inside Africa. I hope the world population stagnates and goes into a steady decline just like Europe.
    1
  1782.  @6ftofmisery636  Oh thanks, for some reason I thought something else at the time
    1
  1783. Beide visies hebben een punt, zowel Baudet als de anderen. Maar toch vind ik het specifieke gewaad dat ze draagt iets te veel. Ze had ook voor de middenweg kunnen gaan door een ingetogen hoofddoek te dragen, misschien in de stijl van de Iraanse vrouwen die ze zo laag mogelijk dragen. In dat geval laat je zien dat je het land waar je in bent respecteert, doch tegelijkertijd laat zien dat dat respect niet overvloeit tot een vorm van onderdrukking. Dat gewaad is gewoonweg een volledige knieval voor die geestelijk leider, maar gewoon een respectvol signaal terwijl je toch zo veel mogelijk jezelf blijft was veel beter geweest. Ik vind dat ze best wat meer had kunnen spelen met een balans tussen respect voor het land waar ze is en een punt maken over wat zij vindt en wat haar normen zijn op dat gebied.
    1
  1784. +talkhtw55 Iran is confirmed to have lived by its commitments perfectly. If you're referring to that Israeli liar and his presentation, those facts he showed were from before the deal... And if you're referring to the ballistic missiles, well ballistic missiles are in themselves not nuclear weapons and not part of the deal either. Yes, Iran is aggressive, but this deal is the only thing we have to prevent them from being an aggressive country that also has nukes. And Saudi Arabia is no saint either, they're in a power struggle with Iran in the Middle East and while I won't comment on which is worse, I know they're both bad. What Trump essentially did is break up the deal now that Iran already has its billions of dollars back. Now we have to renegotiate, except we have MUCH LESS leverage than we did during the last talks. Yet Trump expects to somehow get a BETTER deal? That's not how things work. Either we get a worse deal or we get no deal at all and Iran starts making nukes.
    1
  1785. Neanderthals were a separate human species that all Europeans have at least some DNA from. They were blonde, red haired or brunette. Seems like Europeans got a lot from them, maybe the skin too.
    1
  1786.  SeventhkeyOmega Revenge  Ok that's surprising. I saw all European mutations in Neanderthals already, so I thought perhaps there was a connection. Hmmm.... Guess it's a later mutation then in Europeans, or Austronesians are the ones to mutate/evolve away from Neanderthal heritage while Europeans kept it despite lower DNA percentages.
    1
  1787. America owns nothing, they´re not even the most influential country in the world at the moment
    1
  1788.  kuvikina  Your M60 tanks wouldn't be of much use anyway
    1
  1789. You've a very biased view of this debate. I watched it too and Biden certainly is nothing to write home about either.
    1
  1790.  @wildginger07  The statement that Trump only cares for himself is quite ridiculous. He changed American politics completely. His ideas of America First nationalism have so far transformed American policy in many deep ways. Yes, Trump actually does stand for something. It's clearer with him than any other president out there, even, exactly because he's such a drastic departure from the previous political norm of global neoliberalism. This is one of the most important US elections in modern history because normally you get to vote for neoliberals or slightly more left-leaning neoliberals. This time you have the choice between nationalism and old school neoliberalism. A choice that will define the political future of America. This election matters more than any other recent one. To say about Trump of all people that he has no real views for the country and is only in it for himself, is just ill-informed. He changed the country drastically and has started a complete political shift the intensity of which we've not seen in modern American history. The real question is, what political future do you want for America? Trump's vile personality fades in significance compared to the ideological changes he's causing. This election is about ideology, not Trump or Biden's personality. Either way just go and vote, because this one matters.
    1
  1791. @Jack Jack Vliegen doe ik niet meer, auto wel gewoon. De grote boosdoeners zijn niet de burgers, het is globalisatie en massaal gebruik van vliegtuigen en zeeschepen dat een absurd groot aandeel van de uitstoot is. De bedrijven moeten worden aangepakt, niet jij en ik. Dat 15 zeeschepen meer uitstoten dan alle auto's op aarde (wat er waarschijnlijk miljarden zijn!) zegt heel veel over hoe het NIET de burger is die zijn zaakjes op orde moet hebben, maar de overheden en internationale bedrijven!
    1
  1792.  @XTheFinalEpisodeX  Volgens mij is het efficienter als elk continent zelf-voorzienend is. Dus dat er bijvoorbeeld een Europese markt voor speelgoed is en een Noord-Amerikaanse in plaats van van alles over die oceaan te vervoeren. Als wij ons eigen speelgoed kunnen produceren en dat zelfs al doen, waarom moet het speelgoed van de Amerikaanse markt er dan nog bij? Onnodige toevoeging. Leuk voor diversiteit, tuurlijk, maar dat is mijns inziens niet de vervuiling waard. En wat wij niet zelf kunnen maken kunnen we verhandelen en vervoeren over zee of per vliegtuig, dat zal nu eenmaal moeten. Ik ben geen nationalist maar zeker ook geen globalist. En ik claim ook geen oplossing te hebben, ik constateer alleen het probleem dat we hebben met de huidige globalistische wereldvisie. Diverse economen hebben al een nieuw systeem voorgesteld waarin we niet meer voor eindeloze groei gaan, maar een circulaire economie waarin wij een specifiek doel voor ogen hebben (X GDP voor een bevolking van Y) en dat doel als status quo pogen te behouden. Het is dus mogelijk om buiten de box te denken. We hebben zelfs een partij in de tweede kamer die tegen de eindeloze kapitalistische groei is en ziet dat we het ook anders kunnen doen (PvdD). Denk buiten de box. Als er genoeg politieke wil is kunnen we alles wat we maar willen. Wij hebben dit systeem bedacht om ons te dienen en als het systeem ons niet meer dient veranderen we het systeem!
    1
  1793.  @XTheFinalEpisodeX  Dat is het probleem van die landen. Dit is een oplossing voor ons in Europa. Een ander fundamenteel probleem met globalisme is dat het ervan uit gaat dat alle landen uiteindelijk rijk kunnen zijn, maar ook dat is onmogelijk. De wereld kan als ik het goed herinner de EU levensstandaard voor maximaal 2 of 3 miljard mensen bewerkstelligen (qua beschikbare middelen, nog niet eens de ecologische omstandigheden in acht genomen). We weten dat het niet kan, dan moeten we ook accepteren dat er armoede (relatief gezien dan) in de wereld altijd zal bestaan. Of we moeten allemaal even arm willen zijn. Er zijn simpelweg te veel mensen op deze wereld om allemaal een "goed" leven te geven, als je "goed" definieert op basis van geld en luxe, waar ik het niet mee eens zou zijn... Bovendien, als je als continent niet de eigen mensen kan ondersteunen, dan betekent dat dat op dat continent overpopulatie heerst. We doen ons best om het te omzeilen, maar ook op ons hebben de wetten van de natuur toepassing.
    1
  1794.  @GRB-tj6uj  He's just a regular guy. I don't think anybody sees him as an intellectual heavyweight
    1
  1795. +Levi Hoegen Dijkhof Rustig aan, het is maar een vermoeden. We zullen zien of het gerechtvaardigd was
    1
  1796. En ja hoor. De branden zijn aangestoken in niet alleen Göteborg, maar diverse Zweedse steden. Allemaal in achterstandswijken met hoofdzakelijk migranteninwoners en allemaal in gebieden waar migrantenjeugdbendes actief zijn. Ook gooiden ze stenen naar politieagenten. https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/jongeren-steken-in-diverse-zweedse-steden-tientallen-auto-s-in-de-brand~be50213f/
    1
  1797. ​ @ronram8513  Jesus Christ..... you know you're far gone when you seriously say that having an intelligent and capable PM is a bad thing just because that PM doesn't have the same political beliefs as you do. You must think that these guys are "literally Hitler" to say something so abhorrent and anti-democratic.
    1
  1798. Africans more than others though. The Arab and Atlantic slave trade had a pretty big impact on their development as a continent. Not so much for Europe, which basically faced internal slavery and after that was abolished only some relatively minor pirate slavers. Some European regions were more heavily impacted by Ottoman slavery though. But for the continent of Europe as a whole, slavery is just not a big part of our history. Including the Atlantic slave trade that was only a fraction of our economy. For Africa though, it changed their development drastically, causing a period in which tribes were waging war to capture slaves and sell to Europeans, Arabs or other Africans. It's really a big thing in African history.
    1
  1799. This is my favourite video of you yet! Very engaging and deeply interesting
    1
  1800. It's about finding a decent balance between collectivism and individualism. Too much individualism breeds a cold society wherein nobody cares after the other and many individuals will actually suffer under this. Too much collectivism crushes individual freedom in unacceptable manners. What is the point of being part of a community when that community crushes you if you deviate from their norms? Don't we want to be part of communities for support in our individuality rather than to be forced to conform to something? I would say the atomised society of the modern world can definitely be damaging and a bit more collectivism could be a very positive thing, but when collectivism shoots too far we suffer deeply as individuals. We should not forget that and balance the two properly.
    1
  1801.  @jaafster8629  Waarschijnlijk wel. Haar werkethos is beroemd, dat kan niemand zo lang volhouden
    1
  1802. Why are redcoats representing the US? I thought the revolutionaries had blue coats?
    1
  1803. +Manic Demise It's you who is confused. This woman is out of prison already and she has no idea where her child is. She was detained for a couple of weeks and released. Now she has lost her child, seemingly forever. The child has been placed in a foster family, away from its biological mother.
    1
  1804. We are not spending on the military because we had free protection AND a huge trade surplus with the US in exchange for supporting their bullshit foreign interventions. When that is over (looks like Trump has no intention of continuing that) the EU has the funds and technology to have a military roughly comparable to the US. But eh, that's such a waste of money
    1
  1805. "Socialism has killed over 100 million people" just quit the propaganda. Communist Russia had socialism, Communist China has socialism, but also Western Europe has a variation of socialism and those are systematically the countries with the most quality of life on the planet. It's not that one sided.
    1
  1806. Why... PVC? A moving peace of plastic on the beach, what if it accidentally moves into it? Should have made it with hollow wood, it's comparable material but biodegradable
    1
  1807.  @runswithbears3517  Die opmerking was juist in Jip en Janneke taal. Hij noemde euthanasie "zelfmoord die gefaciliteerd wordt zodat de kinderen niet meer voor de ouders hoeven te zorgen". Dat is een zeer ongenuanceerde opmerking die je niet zou verwachten in zo'n essay. Inmiddels heeft hij in dit programma verduidelijkt dat hij daarmee de cultuur bedoelt van "ik wil jullie niet tot last zijn, dus euthanasie (of bejaardentehuis) als het zover is". En daar heeft hij zeker een punt. Sterker nog, dat herken ik in mijn eigen moeder. Maar dat kwam gewoon niet duidelijk naar voren in dat essay. Het was ook maar één zin, dus ik neem het hem niet kwalijk, maar ik vond dat een vreemde uitspraak die ik niet helemaal kon plaatsen. Ik zou het zelf op een andere manier geformuleerd hebben, maar dat maakt verder niet uit. Het gaat erom dat iedereen zijn punt begrijpt en na deze uitleg komt dat goed over.
    1
  1808.  @nicklammers3633  Waarom willen wij eindeloze groei? Wanneer stopt die groei? Wanneer hebben we een punt bereikt dat we gewoon als status quo willen behouden? Groei zonder einde is niet in lijn met de realiteit.
    1
  1809. Een belangrijk onderdeel van de reden dat ze nee stemden was nu juist de EU. De EU werd als grootste reden aangehaald om niet onafhankelijk te worden en nu trekt vooral Engeland Schotland met zich uit de EU. Dat is wrang voor de Schotten. Nu hebben ze laten zien dat de meerderheid waarschijnlijk voor een Schexit of hoe je het ook wil noemen is.
    1
  1810.  @xerakis5620  Getting elected is only a small part of running a country. The political reality of the country can interfere with your election promises. And once it does, you as the leader of a country must accept that and not have the country suffer under your inability to fulfill every single promise. Sometimes you just have to soldier on and accept a loss.
    1
  1811.  @xerakis5620  You're not making any sense here. Close to a million people are temporarily out of a job and god only knows how many companies/"makers" are suffering damages due to the gov not being able to f.e. grant them permits for anything. Who is this helping? Nobody. Say whatever you want about the wall, but there is not enough support for it in congress so it makes no sense to push for it this hard. They won't cave and this only has people suffer, the makers not the takers.
    1
  1812.  @xerakis5620  You really aren't too bright, are you? Sometimes a company needs a permit to be able to conduct certain business. You get that permit from the government. With the shutdown, every company that is waiting to acquire a permit is stacking losses. For example, there is a real story of a beer brewery in the US that purchased all their equipment and pays the rent of their building, but can't brew the beer because they need a permit but can't currently reach the government. They're stacking losses and their workers are temporarily out of a job. There are many more instances like this. It is not just the gov that is shut down, it is also all companies and people that currently need something from the government to further conduct their business. What do you think the government does? Nothing? That it's literally 100% about the private sector with zero dependencies on the government? Now that is what I would call a child-like understanding of the world. "Big bad government does nothing and only taxes us"
    1
  1813.  @xerakis5620  Probably based on the Commerce Clause of art. 1 (8) of the Constitution, the government uses that a lot. I read constitutions plenty times, including yours, I study them....
    1
  1814.  @xerakis5620  ​ Your founding fathers were shit at properly conveying the spirit of the law. Your constitution grants vague and very broad competences to the government. Highly unorthodox for any constitution to do, especially for a federation.
    1
  1815.  @xerakis5620  The Netherlands and I don't care, I just comment on it as I please. And there is no disagreeing to the fact that the US constitution is... special. Take gay marriage for instance. The Due Process clause grants the Supreme Court the ability to essentially think up its own fundamental rights and interpret them. So they thought up the fundamental right of marriage and interpreted it so that every state would have to recognise gay marriage. I've yet to see another country in which the judiciary so blatantly takes on a political role and decides on such a precarious issue without any democratic legitimacy whatsoever, not interpreting the law but creating its own law. We'd have a constitutional crisis over that here. Yeah your constitution is vague and strange. Not bad though, just strange.
    1
  1816.  @xerakis5620  It hasn't gotten unconstitutional at all, your founding fathers gave the government far-reaching competences. Very vague, very broad, completely open to interpretation. If you're going to whine about how big the government is, blame your founding fathers for making such a strange constitution. And no I didn't make that point with Obamacare, that was a clear overreach in power by the government. The Commerce Clause grants the gov the power to regulate trade in the US. With Obamacare, the gov tried to create an obligation to buy healthcare. The Supreme Court stated that with this, the gov would not regulate but create trade, which would be an unconstitutional expansion of their powers. I completely agree with that. Still, your loss that it was unconstitutional. Obama tried to copy our healthcare, which is one of the best in the world. Everybody has to have healthcare here and it works great. Prices are low, healthcare is great, no waiting lines like you see in some nationalised healthcare systems like in Canada. Really, your loss that it was unconstitutional.
    1
  1817.  @xerakis5620  17 million. Insofar you're going to try and make the excuse of the US having too many people to properly provide healthcare for, I'll just say ahead of you that there are well over 300 million people in the EU who all have better healthcare. It shouldn't be an obstacle.
    1
  1818.  @xerakis5620  Our system uses the free market, but just regulates it. It's not a nationalised healthcare system. We leave healthcare to the market, BUT everyone has to buy healthcare somewhere. This creates a highly competitive market on which health insurance companies engage in a race to the bottom in terms of price. Healthcare is cheap and everyone got it. You can get all sentimental about what is a right and what isn't, but in the end we just have higher quality of life ratings here in western Europe. Why? Because we care for eachother. If my country becomes a better place for it, I'll pay some more taxes willingly. A lot of people in the US don't even go to the dentist because of the cost. My dentist visits are fully insured. It's good for dentist business, good for insurance business and it provides the general populace with care-free dentist visits (no fear for a huge bill). Everyone wins.
    1
  1819.  @xerakis5620  What a stupidly simplistic view of the world you have. Our system is objectively one of the best of the world. Your system is objectively one of the worst of the world. We have better quality healthcare AND cheaper healthcare, period. This is the undisputable truth. You can spurt some generic nonsense about the free market "always being better", but it just isn't. Sometimes regulation is better, sometimes nationalisation is better, sometimes the free market is better. Which is better differs per subject. There is no absolute "best" policy to apply to literally everything, of course not. You seriously think you run a country by saying "oh just leave it to the free market" to everything???
    1
  1820. It is already common knowledge who had a hand in this war and who escalated it. Nobody needs reporting about that again... I'll never understand the "fake news" crowd. Do you want this video to go accopanied with an hour long documentary on how Syria came to be and who is responsible? We all already know it...
    1
  1821. Political deadlock over the wall I guess
    1
  1822. ​ @dmeolu  Dan hebben die "hoogopgeleide" vrouwen geen besef van demografie. We zitten juist goed nu, of zelfs iets te laag. 2 kinderen per gezin betekent stabiliteit, we zitten nu op 1.4-1.6. Dat betekent dat we krimpen. Vind ik allemaal wel best, het is hier te druk. Maar als we lager dan dat gaan, dan is onze samenleving in serieus gevaar. Als onze geboortecijfers bij de 1.0 aankomt dan HALVEERT de Nederlandse bevolking iedere generatie. Dat is catastrofaal. Dat betekent ineenstorting van de samenleving. Minder minder is niet altijd beter. Als je een kleinere bevolking wil, moet dat gestaag gaan met een geboortecijfer van ongeveer 1.8.
    1
  1823.  @jannijhof2083  Dat klopt, we groeien nog steeds door migratie. Alle groei die wij nu hebben komt door migratie, want het geboortecijfer staat nu op redelijk flinke krimp. Als we zouden stoppen met migratie zou onze bevolking krimpen. Maar als we doorgaan met de migratie van nu zitten we in 2050 met 24 miljoen man in Nederland... Ik vind 17 miljoen eigenlijk al te veel voor ons land. Ik vind dat we moeten stoppen met migratie en het geboortecijfer op peil moeten houden of iets laten groeien. Dan krimpen we gestaag. Ik wil geen land waar we de veluwe moeten gaan volbouwen om de huisnood het hoofd te bieden. En ik ben het ook met je eens dat we geboortebeperking nodig hebben in het buitenland. Europa doet het goed qua geboortecijfers. Alleen migratie moet ook stoppen en dan zit het goed.
    1
  1824.  @dmeolu  Het is het tegenovergestelde. Vrouwen laten werken verdubbelt (althans in theorie) het aantal mensen dat werkt. Vrouwen laten werken is voor een betere economie. Families stichten is om de bevolking op peil te houden en indirect ook voor de economie. Ik denk dat we naar een samenleving moeten die vrouwen niet oplegt het één of het ander te doen. Je hoeft geen carrière te hebben, maar ook geen familie. Gewoon doen wat je wil. Ik vind niet dat we moeten doen alsof huisvrouw zijn slecht is en een carrière najagen de enige goede keuze. Noch vice versa. Maar nu zijn we geobsedeerd door carrières. En dat geldt overigens ook voor mannen. Er moet ook geen taboe staan op huismannen of parttime werkende mannen die ook voor hun familie zorgen. Het antwoord op onderdrukkende gender rollen is niet om vrouwen de genderrol van mannen op te leggen (carrièretijger). Het antwoord is om zowel man als vrouw vrij te laten in wat ze willen en te vertellen dat ze juist geen carrièretijger hoeven te zijn, maar wel kúnnen zijn.
    1
  1825.  @jannijhof2083  Baudet beklaagt zich niet over wat bereikt is, hij benoemt de keerzijden van wat bereikt is. Dat betekent niet dat hij vrouwen achter het aanrecht wil zien. Het betekent dat hij goede dingen ziet in de liberalisering en slechte dingen. Die slechte aspecten benoemen is niet hetzelfde als tegen die vooruitgang zijn. Als ik zeg dat het goed is dat vrouwen vrij zijn te werken, maar ook zeg dat dat ten koste gaat van het familieleven, dan zeg ik niet dat het slecht is dat vrouwen kunnen werken. Dan zou je woorden in mijn mond leggen. Dat doe je bij Baudet.
    1
  1826.  @jannijhof2083  Ik zie die lijn ook. Hij is daar zeker kritisch over, maar ik zie niet hoe hij tegen is. Dat zijn twee verschillende dingen. Ik vind het heel vergezocht om te zeggen dat Baudet is voor een autoritaire anti-liberale staat. Hij heeft slechts kritiek op hoe ver liberalisering is gegaan. Terechte kritiek. Want niets heeft alleen maar voordelen, de wereld is zo simpel niet.
    1
  1827. Klopt. Dat is weer typisch Amerika. Gelijk ras erbij halen
    1
  1828. IF they have such equipment, they would be prototypes for future production use. Or in other words: there would only be a relatively small number of them anyway. Perhaps Germany already has some next gen Leopard 2 prototypes laying around, perhaps they even have the new 130mm planned tank gun laying around. It's not unrealistic, but wouldn't make a difference in war (unless you take into account that all they'll produce from that moment would be those new tanks and if the scenario takes years)
    1
  1829. +Nutty Paco Lmao
    1
  1830. +jerus titus Because she IS mixed race. Born to a black mother..... and you forgot something: a white father! Stop trying to claim she's black, it's stupid and a bare faced lie. You probably tell this lie only to make yourself feel better about a "black" person becoming a royal, one of "you". She is both black and white, a mix. It would be equally pathetic to see white people claim she is FULLY white just to hide that the royal family is getting some admixture. Just stop it, she is mixed.
    1
  1831. ​ @mephistosinner2  I'm Dutch, we experienced both nationalised healthcare and (currently) moved to a privatised system (pretty much what Obamacare tried to copy). We have known something other than socialism, not having had any healthcare 100 years ago and today having a semi-free market with all-private insurance companies and hospitals/doctors. I've never had a waiting line, my doctor knows me personally (has been my personal doctor since I was a child) and I can always stop by when I please (with a minor affliction or even just a hunch that something is bad). Treatment is relatively cheap and so is the insurance cost (bit over 100 euros per month for pretty broad coverage. All regular costs like going to the dentist regularly, all basic treatments most people encounter in their lives and going to your personal doctor whenever you please are covered. The rest usually partially covered). You have a choice in insurance company and package you want, as well as doctors etc. you want to go see (the higher the package, the more choice usually, but even the lower packages have plenty of choice preventing you from having to travel far). It's superior to the US system in just about every single way. And there is a debate going on whether the nationalised system we used to have was even better and should be reinstated.
    1
  1832. Libya: US-led NATO destroys a key partner of EU in protecting Europe against migrants (EU has a deal with all mediterranean countries to turn back migrants) Syria: US fuels civil war in Syria, also an important member in the EU deal with mediterranean countries for them to stop migrants in exchange for economic investments. Result: migrant crisis. Conclusion: the USA is the enemy of the European people!
    1
  1833. The US wants a weak and divided Europe that they can dominate
    1
  1834. Can NATO respond to a military threat? "aS nAtO dOeSN't HaVE aN aRmY, NAvy or aIR fOrCE, tHe AnsWeR iS nO"
    1
  1835. This film is a part of that hypersexualisation. Perhaps it even goes further in that than our actual culture does, because those scenes are insane and I quite frankly don't believe that really happens. Then again I'm not from the US, so perhaps my culture is not as perverted in that area (yet?).
    1
  1836. Multi-etnisch, tuurlijk. Maar wat voor etniciteiten? Wat boeit het dat Nederland verschillende Germaanse etniciteiten kent? Of verschillende Europese? Dat zijn etniciteiten die qua cultuur altijd al heel dicht bij elkaar lagen. De vraag is: hoe ver kan je gaan met multi-etniciteit? Want niet alle culturen zijn even verenigbaar, en dat zul je ook moeten erkennen. Wanneer samenleven lukt moet je het toegeven, maar ook waar het niet lukt moet je dat toegeven in ingrijpen.
    1
  1837. +Dennis Molema Die kneedbaarheid zit 'm in de Nederlanders die veranderen, niet in buitenlanders die naar Nederland komen en weigeren te integreren. Cultuur evolueert, maar evolutie betekent dat het bestaande verandert, niet dat er wat bij komt dat niet past. Ik vind zelf dat ook niet-Europese etniciteiten heel goed kunnen samenleven in Nederland en onderdeel kunnen worden van de Nederlandse cultuur, maar één groep lijkt dat niet (goed) te kunnen en dat zijn over het algemeen migranten uit moslimlanden. Het probleem is dat zij zo veel waarde hechten aan hun geloof dat ze dat als identiteit zien boven hun nationaliteit (en in veel gevallen zien ze zelfs hun etnische afkomst ook nog als identiteit boven hun Nederlandse nationaliteit, zoals de Turken die over het algemeen heel nationalistisch zijn). Dit cultuurverschil maakt dat ze heel moeilijk integreren. Wij vragen van hen dat ze de Nederlandse cultuur volledig aanvaarden, maar hun eigen cultuur gooit zand in het eten. Zij hebben een sterke identiteit die ze zelfs in het buitenland met zich dragen. Andere migranten hebben dat niet en doen het veel beter. En die cultuur van onveranderlijkheid en aanhankelijkheid aan die identiteit van het moslim zijn en/of de nationaliteit van de voorouders is onverenigbaar met onze cultuur van "als je goed integreert in de Nederlandse samenleving hoor je erbij". Wij vragen iets van hen dat heel moeilijk is voor ze, omdat dat ook betekent dat je je Nederlander voelt en niet bijvoorbeeld een Turk.
    1
  1838. +Dennis Molema In dat geval zou ik zeggen stop immigratie van overal, in de Japanse stijl. Migranten die een buitenlandse identiteit aanhouden terwijl ze vaak zelfs in Nederland zijn geboren wil ik hier niet hebben. Die leveren spanningen op binnen de samenleving. Ik vind dat als wij een goede samenleving willen, we moeten voorkomen dat er gesegregeerde groepen bestaan binnen die samenleving.
    1
  1839. EU (+ UK) vs Russian invasion. No help from the US or other allies
    1
  1840.  @felipevillalba9311  France in WW2 was still tired of WW1 and using hopelessly outdated tactics against revolutionary German tactics at the time. Today there is no such disparity in tactics and France is a lot more powerful compared to Germany now than it was then. WW2 was a fluke, it was an amazing feat by Germany that is highly unlikely to ever happen again.
    1
  1841.  @makky6239  Canadians are actually very good when in combat. They proved this in WW1 especially that they are a fierce bunch and exceptional fighters
    1
  1842. +AugustusPugin Video about misbehaving migrants in our country: "Truth! Get them out!" Video about an orphaned migrant child: "Propaganda to make us feel sympathy!!!" You're just a hypocrite. BOTH are true. If this video is propaganda to make your feel sympathy, then all those videos about how migrants are problematic is propaganda to make you feel negative towards them. In reality, neither are propaganda. The world is not black and white. A lot of migrants misbehave horribly and are nothing but an annoyance and burden to us, yet there are also true refugees among them that really need our help and are willing to assimilate into our countries. This video is not propaganda, it's one of the few videos on youtube to show the other side of what migrants can be. Youtube is mostly littered with negative videos and while they can have a point, we mustn't forget that there are also people like this among migrants. Don't be one of those close-minded people that instantly ignore any video because it is either positive about migrants or negative (those that ignore the negative are worse though...ugh).
    1
  1843. +F8oK8 So you want to genocide the white race out of existence... ? Wtf? I don't know if you're from America, where they're an immigrant nation and probably will eventually be brown, but here in Europe we have no such intention. That'd be like shipping so many Europeans to Africa that the locals eventually lose their race; that is called genocide. I don't want any race to disappear. In America it's fine because it's a melting pot and never truly was a white nation anyway. But in Europe you have many ethnicities that have existed and lived here for thousands upon thousands of years. That should not be destroyed
    1
  1844. Just go third party
    1
  1845. Islands like Guam, territories such as the Phillipines, protectorates such as Puerto Rico. Yup, empire
    1
  1846. Definition of empire: an extensive group of states or countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or a sovereign state. America: a sovereign state that controls islands like Guam, has protectorates such as Puerto Rico. Empire. Though a small one even by today´s standards.
    1
  1847. You know, BBC... You could've just gone across the English Channel to find the exact same pictures in the Netherlands and probably the same algae were on your very own shores as well.
    1
  1848.  Pagan Cloak  Ik ben half zwart dus... hmm
    1
  1849.  Pagan Cloak  Je noemt me een typische blanke racist, maar ik ben niet eens blank. Laat zien wat voor wilde aannames je doet.
    1
  1850.  Pagan Cloak  Dus, jij noemt me een Nederlander die racistisch is jegens zwarten en zegt nu serieus dat dat NIET impliceert dat je dacht dat ik blank (of in ieder geval niet zwart) was? Kom nou...
    1
  1851. Here in the Netherlands, standard procedure for a person with a knife is a warning shot, followed by a leg shot. If you outright shoot and kill a suspect for no valid reason, you are put before the court like a regular murderer. In the US the officer just says "just want to get home to my family" and is usually not even prosecuted...
    1
  1852.  @landz2228  If you steal someone's land today, no matter the skin colour, they should get reparation for it. I think it's fair to redistribute the land since SA's racist past has distributed it in a unfair way, but current owners must be compensated if parts of their land are taken. This is not about the past, this is about people today getting their land taken away by the government.
    1
  1853.  @rickchipo4140  All Bantu people are originally west African and migrated into South Africa, conquering some local tribes. You also have many modern migrants from elsewhere in Africa that moved into South Africa. People who, if you would be honest about this, should not have any right to land just because they are black. Why should black-on-black conquest not be compensated in the same way and why should migrants who have no history whatsoever in colonial South Africa get free land? To me you sound like a racist. You don't want the TRUE victims of colonialism and racism to get compensated, you want EVERY black person in South Africa to get all white property without even compensation. You just want white people gone or impoverished.
    1
  1854.  @tentimesful  En het klimaatbeleid van GroenLinks is dat dan niet?
    1
  1855.  ROET  Walgelijk ben jij
    1
  1856. Diversifying the channel to include comedy, I see :)
    1
  1857. Wierd Duk mist iets: wij horen alleen over aanslagen in de westerse wereld. Het gaat niet om moslim of christen, maar om de plek waar het gebeurt. Of het daar vaak gebeurt speelt ook mee. Heel soms horen we van een grotere aanslag in bijvoorbeeld Afghanistan, als er meer mensen dan normaal overlijden, maar dat is het wel zo'n beetje. Het nieuws zendt iets sneller uit als het 1. abnormaal is (een plek waar nooit aanslagen plaats vinden) en/of 2. het een bondgenoot van ons is of een land dat dicht bij ons ligt. De aanslag op het strand in Tunesië werd bijvoorbeeld veelvuldig in het nieuws uitgezonden. Ook de aanslag in Egypte op de Kopten. Dat gebeurt in die relatief veilige landen niet vaak én het is redelijk dicht bij Europa. Over Libië horen we natuurlijk niets, want ja daar worden aan de lopende band mensen vermoord op dit moment. Dan vindt de media het niet meer nieuwswaardig. Het heeft echt niets te maken met religie of wat dan ook en er is geen dubbele standaard.
    1
  1858. +Xeino Doing good does not excuse doing bad. Here in Europe we've invented countless more things than the US has (as much 81% of the most significant scientists are European, which reaches 94% when you add in the US) , but that doesn't mean we have a free pass to start murdering people in the Middle East. Horrible behaviour is horrible, no matter what other good things you do besides it. There is no excuse.
    1
  1859. Doe niet zo idioot, Bernie is niet eens een socialist (al noemt hij zichzelf om tactische redenen wel zo), laat staan een communist.
    1
  1860. +Lemon Turtle KOM OP DAN!
    1
  1861. Hah, guess who is going to use their veto?
    1
  1862. You know how US carriers have consistently been sunk by subs in training with allies? Even by outdated 70's subs. Just one. I think aircraft carriers are dead on arrival against any modern military with well trained sub crews. If the location is known and a sub manages to catch a carrier strike group, chances are the carrier will go down. Binkov gives anti-sub warfare WAY too much credit. Subs are extremely difficult to find and highly lethal. In the Cold War Dutch subs even used to surface 1 meter next to Soviet ships in order to spy on them. Never spotted. In fact, once they had intel that a Russian sub was supposed to be somewhere and a Dutch sub lay in wait. They eventually got the Russian sub on sonar and followed them around unnoticed for several days to gather intel. What did that Russian sub do? Sailed straight up to the USS John F. Kennedy (aircraft carrier) and carried out what seemed to be a mock attack. They probably did this more often. You can find subs if you have an idea where they'll be, but otherwise they are extremely difficult to counter and carriers are NOT safe from being sunk.
    1
  1863. +Scuba Steve The same holds true for the far right TV channels and other media. I agree it probably comes mainly from America, which is extremely polarised at the moment, but it is important to note it comes from both sides of the political spectrum. I've never had the displeasure of watching a greater difference between news reporting than between CNN and Fox. It's like they're living in different worlds, which might not even be that far from the truth (left wing and right wing world). And indeed, CNN reports negatively about Trump most of the time and often neglect staying impartial and Fox reports positively about Trump most of the time. It sounds like a dangerous situation that could tear apart a nation and threaten the proper functioning of democracy. We need candid discussions, not polarisation and separate worlds.
    1
  1864. Well as a Dutchman I can tell you this isn't fake news. He got a very hot welcome from Dutch press here on his first day for the lies he spread, it was hilarious he just didn't know what to say
    1
  1865.  @nhk9334  Er is maar één reden waarom de PvdA aan de zijlijn staat en dat is omdat ze geen zin hebben om te regeren met partijen die een totaal andere visie van NL hebben. En terecht. Je moet niet gaan doen alsof de VVD de enige 'echte' optie is voor een regeringspartij. Ze zijn alleen de grootste. En vanzelfsprekend zijn partijen die heel anders in de politiek staan kritisch op hoe de VVD en cohorten het doen... dat betekent niet dat die partijen wanneer zij de kans krijgen niet de handen uit de mouwen kunnen doen. Dat kunnen ze wel.
    1
  1866. Vind ie leuk
    1
  1867. Klopt, heel vervelend. Zo komen we nooit bij een oplossing
    1
  1868. +Dylan Walsh Awww, Trump fans desperate for recognition. America and China played their role in forcing North Korea into talks, but Moon is the one to actually do the talking and the one who has been pushing for talks since the very beginning of his time in office. Trump sure did help though with the sanctions. But to say Trump did it all... a bit arrogant maybe? Then again we're used to that from Americans...
    1
  1869. +Dylan Walsh Lol you mean that Fox news report that takes a regular compliment to Trump from Moon and blows it way out of proportion? Moon compliments Trump on the good role he played and now Trump did EVERYTHING? Man you Americans sure like to talk about yourselves. And I'm not an anti-Trumper, I give credit where it's due and that would be Trump and China forcing North Korea into talks with the South. Trump played an important role, but desperate Trump fans seem to insist that he did EVERYTHING out of pure arrogance. But again, we're used to that from Americans
    1
  1870. +AWResistance And here comes yet another gun nut defending his firearms rather than thinking about a proper solution to prevent these tragic events from happening again.
    1
  1871.  @bikes02  What if I told you that the political side of the EU is a direct result from the economic union? All politica powers of the EU come forth from the single market. Things like an EU-wide law on the quality standards for food for example (this takes away the ability of individual nations to make their own laws) are a direct result of the economic union and the fact that in a single market you also need the same food standards everywhere. The EEC aleady "took away powers" before the EU and basically did the same. It's just that the EU does it more openly. All their powers derive from the single market. And I say "their" but the EU literally makes laws by all countries sitting together in a room and voting, so it's not really taking powers away to begin with.
    1
  1872. And quick and relatively painless. I honestly don't know why they don't bring back the firing line. I'm against the death penalty but if I had a choice for my own death if I was in death row I'd 100% pick the firing line
    1
  1873. The British shaped the modern world with industrialisation. 90+% of inventions come from Europe, take Britain out of that and you lose a lot of important advancements
    1
  1874. I don't think it's fair to say Peterson is in any significant way responsible for those taking normative leaps based on his words. When I listen to that infamous interview about men and women working together, I don't at all sense that he's suggesting that because of the issues he described we should give up on the idea of women working and have them manage the household again. I simply interpret it as him saying that after centuries of living under a more strict christian concept of male/female gender roles we have to find our place in this new world in which all are free. Of course such a big break with previous value systems is going to lead to at least some issues, and we'll have to find out how to deal with that, but that doesn't mean we should bring that old value system back. Insofar Peterson is truly suggestive, I'd say he's bearing some significant responsibility for how his words are used, but I don't see that suggestion in his interviews or lectures. And I don't believe he himself is in favour of reintroducing strict gender roles either.
    1
  1875.  @CountScarlioni  That and geopolitically, France and Britain could never allow Germany to expand like that. It'd be like the US during the Cold War staying neutral and allowing the USSR to spread communism freely and then acting surprised in the end that the USSR is the main global superpower. Makes zero geopolitical sense to allow this. So France and Britain would intervene in any case. If they weren't attacked, they'd probably have more time to build up their militaries and prepare a proper invasion of Germany. This scenario would definitely works against Germany rather than for htem.
    1
  1876. +Che Guevara Revolutionair You can analyse his financiers all you want, but there is only one thing that matters: does he have a point? Yes he does. He has a point, whether he is a zionist or not doesn't even matter.
    1
  1877. The EU literally is that international cooperation. The EU is just a bunch of countries sitting around a table voting on laws. Some want the EU to go further and become a superstate, though. That I am against.
    1
  1878.  @wolfkipwolfkip9952  Dat doen duizenden vrouwen letterlijk in Iran, bijvoorbeeld. Ze demonstreren voor hun recht zich te kleden zoals ze dat willen, maar krijgen een enkeltje naar de gevangenis ervoor. Wereldwijd worden miljoenen vrouwen gedwongen zichzelf te bedekken. Bij wet of door sociale druk. Dat is een feit. Je hoeft alleen maar naar de wetten van landen als Saoedi Arabië en Iran te kijken en de sociale omstandigheden in fundamentalistische landen als Pakistan, waar je voor de minste dingen sociaal geëxcommuniceerd wordt. De feiten staan aan mijn kant. Het enige wat jij kan doen is zwakke drogredeneringen presenteren en mijn woorden verdraaien. Je weet dat ik gelijk heb. En "ik was er niet dus hoe kan ik dat weten"? Wat een rotargument. Ik was er ook niet in Friesland in 2000 voor christus maar toch weet ik vrij zeker dat de vrouwen in de stam die daar woonde geen hoofddoeken moesten dragen. Dat heet archeologie, geschiedenis en kritisch denken. Iets wat duidelijk moeilijk voor je is. Ik vermoed dat je niet voor jezelf denkt, maar slechts blind je religie verdedigt. Alleen dat kan dit soort onzin produceren. Denk na, denk kritisch, zoek de waarheid. Je blijft maar met kinderachtige en zwakke drogredeneringen komen. Jouw lage discussievaardigheid en blind ideologisch gezever is mijn aandacht niet waard. Kom maar eens met serieuze argumenten.
    1
  1879.  @wolfkipwolfkip9952  Haha, gaan we weer m'n woorden verdraaien? Eventjes "elke dag" ertussen proppen om m'n punt in een kwaad daglicht te zetten. Triest mannetje ben jij. Geblindeerd door je idiote ideologie, die je zonder na te denken verdedigt met alle rot trucjes die je hebt. Maar logica en waarheidsvinding zit niet in je trukendoos... Maar goed, geniet ervan, eentje van vier jaar geleden, eentje van een jaar geleden en twee van vorige week. En ik dacht, waarom ook niet eentje van 40 jaar geleden?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=721DE13YNCU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb1ServMSAw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teI1ekSLvrg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K50JASjt3X0&t=54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxGYLk92edY
    1
  1880.  @wolfkipwolfkip9952  Ik heb letterlijk video's in mijn comment gezet die overduidelijk hoofddoeken als onderwerp hebben. De demonstratie waar jij naar verwijst is iets heel anders... Je wil de waarheid niet erkennen. Dit keer was het verdraaien van mijn woorden niet voldoende, dus negeer je maar wat ik je heb laten zien en verwijs je naar iets heel anders. Diep triest. Je brein is aan het rotten van die ideologie van jou, de waarheid heeft geen effect meer op je, zelfs als ik het in je gezicht duw dan negeer je het willens en wetens. Ik hoop van harte dat je ooit het licht zal zien en voor jezelf begint te denken
    1
  1881.  @wolfkipwolfkip9952  Komen we weer met verdraaien van woorden. Miljoenen vrouwen wereldwijd wordt opeens "alle moslima's". Je bent werkelijk diep triest. Je kan niet argumenteren zonder vieze tactieken. Het gaat je niet om de waarheid, het gaat jou om het blind verdedigen van je ideologie, koste wat kost. Verdraaiingen, drogredeneringen, niets ligt beneden jou... Je bent een walgelijke verschijning. Ik zeg niet dat alle moslima's gedwongen zich bedekken. Ik zeg niet dat we hoofddoeken moeten verbieden. Ik zeg dat wereldwijd, miljoenen vrouwen worden gedwongen zichzelf te bedekken en dat wij die vrouwen moeten bijstaan.
    1
  1882. @Said Boudriz Nederlanders die zo "gepest" worden en geen integraalhelm of balaclava mogen dragen hebben ook geen aanslagen gepleegd. Wanneer snap je nou dat het gaan om identiteitsverhullende kleding, ongeacht waarom die kleding gedragen wordt? Je doet alsof dit een soort gerichte aanval op de islam is of zo. En "het westen" is geen homogeen blok, verschillende landen waren en zijn tegen Amerikaanse interventies en de burgers van de meeste landen zijn dat al helemaal (incl. Amerikanen zelf, tegenwoordig).
    1
  1883. @Said Boudriz De ontstaansgeschiedenis heeft niet veel te maken met de huidige inhoud. Wilders wilde er heel wat anders mee, maar de wet gaat om identificatie en niets anders dan identificatie.
    1
  1884.  @ZorbaTheDutch  Weet je dat zeker? Er wordt hier "zwarte piet is racisme" e.d. tegen kinderen geschreeuwd en ten minste eentje begint te huilen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X23y5ubuGDU
    1
  1885.  @ZorbaTheDutch  Het gaat erom dat ze tegen kinderen schreeuwen en het feest voor ze verpesten, bijdehandje.
    1
  1886. I´ve heard of people disliking people wearing shoes in their home, but people getting mad for taking off your shoes... ? Wow
    1
  1887. +janissary Dat klopt niet, het is illegaal om iedereen te beledigen. Belediging is illegaal, belediging van de koning is ook illegaal (staat iets meer straf op, enige verschil). En ja je mag een religie helemaal kapot schelden, want waarom niet? Kritiek op religie is belangrijk
    1
  1888. Soon China will be stealing our personal data too and attempt to lock countries in neo-colonial debt traps. Choosing between the US and China is like choosing between typhus and tuberculosis
    1
  1889. Wonder why... :) With the UK Russia would have little chance. And there's also very little reason not to include countries like Spain. I hope he makes the full EU video soon because here it's almost like he cherry picked EU countries that would together barely match the Russian military
    1
  1890.  @Steallio  It aged terribly because it claims that the war would last months while in reality Russia blitzkrieged Ukraine in one day, reaching a bunch of vital cities. Now we're getting into urban warfare, which is always tricky, but it all happened much quicker than Binkov predicted. Ukrainian defence is not as organised as estimated and Russia also used Belarus for a much quicker route to Kiev. So overall it was a bad prediction in that it massively overstates how long an invasion would last. Cruise missiles did a lot to incapacitate the Ukrainian military in the early stages, response was too slow to stop Russians early. But having said that, the response seems to be getting better now. Russia will have a hard time in urban areas.
    1
  1891.  @YraxZovaldo  Dus je wil zeggen dat de burgemeester van Tilburg een ondemocratische beslissing heeft genomen? Ik zou zeggen ga naar de bestuursrechter en kijk wat er gebeurt. Als rechtenstudent zal ik je een tip geven: de beslissing kan makkelijk onderbouwd worden in overeenstemming met het recht. Stop maar met willekeurige dingen te verzinnen over de democratie.
    1
  1892.  @YraxZovaldo  Ik wil je aanraden je begrijpend lezen eens bij te spijkeren. Vanaf het begin af aan heb ik gezegd dat demonstraties als deze verplaats KUNNEN worden met het oog op de openbare orde (iets wat gemakkelijk te verdedigen is als je ziet wat voor rotzooi er bij zo veel intochten heeft afgespeeld de laatste paar jaar) en zelfs verboden kunnen worden als je kijkt naar confrontaties met hooligans (maar nogmaals, ik zou zeggen dat de politie er goed genoeg mee om is gegaan en een compleet verbod niet nodig is). Wat jij zei is dat dit alleen bij "uiterste noodzaak" kan gebeuren, maar dat is simpelweg niet waar. In Zaanstad hebben demonstranten met extreme veiligheidsmaatregelen bij de intocht kunnen demonstreren. In Tilburg is ervoor gekozen om de demonstranten een plek toe te bedelen weg van de intocht. Beide beslissingen zijn gewoon democratisch en volledig wettelijk. De burgemeester is niet gehouden om een fort van de intocht te maken en veel geld te besteden aan de beveiliging alleen om een demonstratie bij de intocht goed te laten verlopen, hij/zij kan er ook voor kiezen om op een andere manier de demonstratie goed te laten verlopen. Jouw insinuatie dat het verplaatsen van de demonstratie ondemocratisch is en alleen bij uiterste noodzaak kan, klopt niet. Als de burgemeester vindt dat demonstraties de intocht niet ordelijk zullen laten verlopen en dat kan beargumenteren (makkelijk naar aanleiding van eerdere gebeurtenissen), dan mag de demonstratie verplaatst worden naar een plek waar het de intocht niet verstoort. De burgemeester in Zaanstad heeft ervoor gekozen voor extreme beveiligingsmaatregelen, de burgemeester in Tilburg heeft ervoor gekozen de demonstratie te verplaatsen en de burgemeester in Rotterdam heeft er volgens mij voor gekozen het zonder beveiliging door te laten gaan (en inderdaad... confrontaties daar...). Allemaal volledig legale beslissingen. Er is niet één "goede" beslissing. Het enige wat ik zei is dat als ik burgemeester zou zijn ik voor het verplaatsen had gekozen, wat naar mijn mening de beste oplossing is.
    1
  1893.  @YraxZovaldo  De burgemeester heeft zelf de keuze hoe hij/zij de demonstratie wil laten verlopen. Je kan de wet lezen en doen of je 'm begrijpt, maar dat doe je niet. De burgemeester van Tilburg heeft ervoor gekozen de demonstratie te verplaatsen. De burgemeester van Zaanstad heeft ervoor gekozen de intocht zwaar te beveiligen en de demonstratie bij de intocht plaats te laten vinden. De burgemeester van R'dam heeft ervoor gekozen veel minder te beveiligen maar toch demonstraties bij de intocht plaats te laten vinden (en ja, hier kwam het weer tot een confrontatie...). Al deze beslissingen lagen gewoon binnen de bevoegdheden van de burgemeester en ze hebben allemaal de demonstraties op hun eigen manier veilig proberen te laten verlopen. Ik zeg dat de oplossing in Tilburg het beste is, dat vind ik. Die vind ik het beste met het oog op de openbare orde en veiligheid. Dat is mijn standpunt en duidelijker kan ik 'm niet maken. Ik kijk uit naar je volgende comment waarin je mijn standpunt weer probeert te vertekenen en/of de wet weer verkeerd interpreteert.
    1
  1894.  @christinadoxstader3004  Imagine how many people in the countries that actually can't afford healthcare they could go and help if the US got its act together...
    1
  1895. Aside from the questionable acoustics, I agree. Not all modern architecture is bad, certainly not. But in EVERY case it is bad when a monument is defaced with modern renovations or when certain hideous styles are used
    1
  1896. All of Europe did that, not just you. 90% of modern inventions/concepts are from Europe
    1
  1897. +Patrick McCallum Too bad for you that international law doesn't give two shits about congress and when you sign it you are simply bound by it. It is no excuse from an international law standpoint. You can blame Obama for it, but the deal stand and is fully legal no matter what your national laws say. It doesn't work like that.
    1
  1898. Kijk, ons eigen dodendraad langs de grens. Eerst mochten de Belgen Nederland niet in van de Duitsers en nu mogen van ons Duitse zwijnen er niet in. Of zullen ze zich net als miljoenen Belgen toen onder de stroomdraad heen weten te wroeten?
    1
  1899. I agree with your take on National Socialism being a form of Socialism (or at the least a similar social revolution), but you're missing something. Socialism is not just about state control, that is merely one of several elements of it. The most important element of socialism is the ideological reasons for designing the economy the way they do. It makes a lot more sense to not only point out the lack of free market, but also explain the ideological reasons for it and how similar those are to marxism. And there are enough similarities to either say Nazism is socialism or at the least that Fascism is its own third ideology besides socialism/capitalism that is in many ways related to socialism. You can have state control while being capitalist, for example the war economy in the US during WW2. But if that state control goes coupled with an ideological social revolution, it's no longer capitalism. This is the case for Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and the USSR, none were capitalist. To complete your argument, spend more time explaining the social revolutions. And about your points regarding Cambridge/Oxford, I don't know why you're surprised they publish books that are contradictory to one another. They aren't one homogenous group of scholars, they educate many different kinds of scholars with different opinions. Your point about Keynesians distorting history to defend their views MAY be true for some scholars, but it's a very bad idea to claim that the entirety of Cambridge somehow teaches this and they're all elites with the same views.
    1
  1900. Sure... and if you´re visiting European countries they are not "rich and free" so things that can be done in America can´t be done here? You´re making no sense whatsoever. It has NOTHING to do with riches or freedom
    1
  1901. Fantasy needs to be grounded in the current reality? That's funny because most fairy tales are ancient stories that range in age from a few hundred years all the way to thousands of years, yet they always remained relevant and an important part of our culture in Europe. The Beauty and the Beast, for instance, is believed to be 4000 years old and Disney made a film about it a few years ago. Good stories don't have to be grounded in the current reality at all, they need to speak to us. That's all. They need to be great stories that speak to us. Timeless stories. And this is true for fantasy and fairy tales more than anything, because they heavily draw on ancient stories and lore. Elves, dwarves and other characters you always see return in fantasy are from thousands of years old European mythology, not "grounded in current reality". Many of the stories in The Last Wish are adaptations of ancient fairy tales, again thousands of years old usually. And even many of the themes are very old. There is such a thing as timeless stories and that is what fantasy is supposed to be. The Lord of the Rings will always remain a good story. If you infuse ideology into it, it will only be regarded as a good story as long as people identify with that ideology (which even today is already a problem). They took an amazing fantasy story and ruined it, if they've infused ideology into it. Politics is fine, as long as they are themes that are timeless and closely tied to what it means to be human. Yes, all stories have some degree of politics in them, but no not all (very few in fact, as this is a relatively new phenomenon) have ideology shoved in them. That is a very important distinction to make. And lastly I would also argue that dealing with fantasy/fairy tales comes with a responsibility towards the culture they come from to respectfully draw from that story. Fairy tales and mythology/folklore were not just written down in the 1800's by some brothers named Grimm, they are ancient stories that were often orally passed down from generation to generation for literal millennia before finally being written down. These stories are not just stories, they are part of European culture or whatever culture you draw the folklore from. Modern fantasy heavily draws from this folklore and I am not a fan of using the popularity of these cultural stories to spread some ideological message that has no place in fantasy. Fantasy should be authentic, in my opinion.
    1
  1902.  @Giby86  CURRENT reality. Most fairy tales take from reality to some degree, otherwise the themes would be completely foreign to us. But my comment was against the idea that fantasy has to take from CURRENT reality, which is nonsense if you look at what fantasy is about and how old the most loved and well known folk tales are.
    1
  1903.  @Giby86  The Witcher never was about present-day political issues. The books have more generally applicable political themes running through it and even thousands of years old political themes (i.e. the elves as hunter-gatherers making place for farm-based more complex societies, which is something that happened long long ago irl, and even the toll this takes on nature is touched on a bit in the early books. I suppose the latter is still applicable today as we continuously expand). I can't spot an in-your-face political narrative in the Witcher that is about something very modern. So politics? Yes. But present day? No, they are more generalistic themes that we could probably still identify with in a hundred years' time. Or could have identified with decennia ago, for that matter.
    1
  1904.  @Giby86  None of those are particularly current subjects. The role of women in society even played a role 2000 years ago when our mostly more women-friendly paganism was replaced with christianity which was a lot harsher. And I guess Plato and Aristotle writing about the role of women in society also counts as "current politics" in your book. The themes you see in the Witcher have been prevalent for millennia, they are not current per se. The problem with the trailer so far is that it seems to include politics in such a way that it doesn't fit the lore and presented time period. If you make dryads black characters for diversity politics reasons, but you end up making them look like Ofieri or something, you hurt the story telling. And if they choose to implement modern-day feminist allegories into the story, that would also not be appropriate. It all depends on how they do it.
    1
  1905. @Water & Sky Ja dat vind ik een prima standpunt. Als het maar een optie voor ze is vind ik het goed, maar of wij daar dan geld aan zouden moeten uitgeven is een tweede.
    1
  1906. +Mary Christine Happened on the kalverstraat once. Can't find the story, though, sadly. Anyway it's an extreme example that I read some time ago. I can find stories of the kalverstraat becoming so crowded that police had to close it off for safety, however, such as this one: https://www.telegraaf.nl/financieel/17536/kalverstraat-drukker-dan-ooit
    1
  1907. A constitution is not just written. There can be unwritten rules. Some constitutions even run on unwritten rules largely or completely. The British constitution is an example of a constitution that is almost 100% unwritten and the country largely functions purely on conventions instead of hard written rules. Of course one can't simply make a rule up, but if there is a longstanding behaviourism (not nominating a SC judge right before elections) and a logical reason why that rule fits within the 'spirit' of the constition (f.e. democracy is an important principle within the US constitution and waiting for the people to vote for their political preference before appointing a political judge would be best done after the election if you base your judgement on this matter on democracy), then there is a good argument to call this an issue of constitutionality. America has one of the most rigid, written constitutions, which is why I understand why you THINK that the written aspect is the only one that matters, but in the rest of the developed world it's very common to have even absolutely central aspects of the constitution be unwritten conventions. In American politics, everything that is not a written hard rule is consistently broken if party interests clash with the rules, so you ought to be extremely happy with the way your constitution is built, but yes unwritten rules exist too and they can be important. It's just that in the US the major parties will break them in a heartbeat if it suits them, while in f.e. the UK politicians not only respect unwritten rules but their entire government runs on them. Technically, documents asserting human rights and important constitutional issues like the limitation of power of the monarchy are simple laws that can be repealed just like any other law. But because of the highly important role they play within the British constitution, it is an unwritten rule that they are never to be tampered with. Such unwritten rules can be anything from very specific and small things (like don't do X right before an election) to huge aspects of the constitution. I'm not saying that there is a constitutional norm not to elect a judge right before an election in the US, I just want to say that the discussion about the existence of such a norm is possible. In practice, this would of course immediately be highjacked by party interests though so it's a discussion that's going to be limited to constitional law circles. Neither of the big parties really care about the constitution enough to respect unwritten rules, so they'll just bend them to fit their own agenda. This is very different in other developed nations.
    1
  1908. Sanders is goed, Yang is goed. Er zijn fantastische kandidaten, het is gewoon dat de Democratische partij niet wil dat zij de president worden. In 2016 had Bernie gewonnen maar is Hillary alsnog naar voren geschoven. De partijen daar zijn veel te machtig en verpesten de democratie
    1
  1909.  @SDeww  Ik mag dan wel in een instituut zitten, maar mijn psychiater heeft me vorige week uit de dwangbuis gelaten dus het gaat heel goed in mijn bovenkamer!
    1
  1910.  Sonny Burnett  Not in this context. If I say London is no longer English, I am not talking about white versus black, I'm talking about the English ethnicity versus the others, including non-English white ethnicities in London.
    1
  1911.  Sonny Burnett  I agree, because non-westerners have a hard time integrating or simply don't want to integrate, which causes a lot of issues in our countries. But that is not a racial issue, it is a cultural issue. Their culture is not compatible with ours and it shows when they come here. European cultures are broadly compatible. Not the same, but they are adaptable to one another. Non-westerners don't have this and clash with our way of life, especially people from islamic countries.
    1
  1912.  Sonny Burnett  Culture and ethnicity/race are linked in that a particular ethnicity creates their culture. So yes, a culture is going to reflect many aspects of a particular ethnicity. But ethnicity and culture are still separate in the sense that if you raise an African in Europe from birth, there is not going to be some kind of innate ethnical discrepancy that precludes them from being integrated into European culture. The problems we experience from mass immigration are not because of race, they are because of culture. The solution to the problem is the same: less/no immigration. But it is still important to point out, because the idea that people innately can't be in Europe just because of their race is wrong.
    1
  1913.  Sonny Burnett  That is not how demographics work. We are VERY far off from even the American demographics, let alone replacement. It is simply not going to happen in a thousand years. What happens in our cities is not happening on a national scale. And about our current demographics, the most multicultural European country which also has the highest amount of muslims is..................................... Russia. Yet there are all kinds of replacement conspiracies about Western Europe and Russia is often seen as the way to go in terms of nationalism. The difference between Russia and Western Europe is not one of numbers, it is how we deal with migrants. We are extremely lenient compared to them, so we get a lot of misbehaviour. I still agree with you that the idea of multiculturalism is dumb, useless, has almost zero benefits opposed to several serious downsides and damaged the cultures you do it to. But on the other hand, no we are not even remotely close to being replaced in any kind of way. But migration should still be drastically toned down or stopped because of the effect it has on our countries. Poorly integrated migrants flock together in cities and end up in criminality en masse because of their poor integration. And why are they poorly integrated? They either don't want to or can't. It kills the culture of our cities as they all turn into the same multicultural melting pot mess (in that regard you are correct about parts of our culture being destroyed even now; it is not happening nationally, but it is certainly happening on the city level). I think mass immigration is a crime against the culture you do it to. Once cultures start losing control/influence in their own countries because they have become a melting pot, you have LESS diversity in the world and absolutely not more. And I believe it is a tragedy to see a culture fade away or even disappear. It's all part of this sick idea that we all want to be like America even though we are different and are not compatible with multiculturalism. It doesn't work, as even politicians like Merkel, Cameron and more have openly stated. We are not immigrant nations like America, so we should not be trying to become melting pots. It's a crime to turn a native country into a melting pot like it was a crime to turn native America into what it is today. Because part of turning a native country into a melting is inflicting heavy damage onto its culture so that it can make place for multiple cultures to coexist in one nation. So I guess we agree on the anti-migration stance, but not on why. The "great replacement" is a lie, but at least it gets right that multiculturalism is a danger that ought to be stopped.
    1
  1914. The epitome of arrogance is to state that all other creatures on this earth were literally created to serve the humans' interests. And it led to a lot of destructive behaviour too.
    1
  1915. Annoyance on Trump's end. They get a kick from that
    1
  1916.  @sherminehsamadany-fard7410  Ja, Nederlandse kunst.
    1
  1917. EU migrants were temporary migrant workers who came purely for work and then returned. Now the UK imports migrants from mostly Africa for jobs, this immigration went up to compensate for the loss of European ones. If you're anti migrant then Brexit made no sense, at least the EU ones were temporary.
    1
  1918. neuN  So an eye witness account is not evidence according to you... got it. Little tip: dictionaries are completely irrelevant to this question, it is about what is accepted as evidence under the law .
    1
  1919. neuN  It is evidence, just useless evidence. The law states that an eye witness on its own can't lead to conviction.
    1
  1920. Ikr, Binkov really underestimates subs in general. Subs are insanely powerful and yeah if the US tries this they'll have a few billion dollar seabed decorations afterwards.
    1
  1921. Not even a contest
    1
  1922. RUSSIAGATE!!!1!!
    1
  1923. +Stephen Jenkins Fuck off. The USSR was supporting the reigning government in Afghanistan against insurgents. They weren't "conquering" it. This "evil USSR, hero US" mindset it retarded. Both sides did good and bad things you idiot.
    1
  1924. +Lics Norgi Lol... You think pissing your allies off gives you MORE power over them? Are you even serious? The EU is trying to circumvent US sanctions on Iran (the EU has never stood against the US like this!), Tusk said about America in its current state: "with friends like this who needs enemies?", Juncker even spoke of dropping the petrodollar and the general consensus in Europe right now is that we need to become more independent from the USA... Trump is pushing the US away from Europe and I'm sure the same thing is in the minds of your other allies. He may be the golden messiah within the US for many people, but for the US' classic allies he is the antichrist. But he's your president and you shouldn't vote based on what your allies think, but in any case don't lie to yourself about inceasing US influence because it is dropping like a brick
    1
  1925. +Merkel's Fourth Reich Yeah, they always will. I love Trump because he is destroying US influence worldwide and finally pushed the EU to be more independent. I hope he stays in power for another term and the EU breaks off the "special relationship" with the US. We can be allies, but right now we are just too dependent on them. I hope we can be allies with both Russia and the US and act like a diplomatic power that prevents issues. Like what the EU did in the Iran deal. I just want less US aggression in this world and less conflicts overall. Almost all conflicts today can be traced back to some US intervention a few years or decades ago...
    1
  1926. +Metal Man and his Atheist Religion It is you that is delusional if you think you are any better than those bastards. America is at the moment the most cancerous country on the planet. Constantly invading/intervening abroad for personal gain while causing chaos. You are no better than the Soviets, two sides ofthe same coin. It's funny that you say it is Europeans that can't take responsibility when it is so obvious... To you, saying that neither the USSR nor the US were the "good guys" is equal to "sympathising with the communists". It's just pathetic, you're living in a fantasy world.
    1
  1927. This person is great, so I can't wait to invite a bunch of Islamic fundamentalists over. Surely they will be as succesful in our society as this person? Open borders are so amazing, I thank the BBC for opening my eyes
    1
  1928.  haus _gattaca  Scandinavian countries are capitalist though, so yeah. Social policies in a capitalist system is not socialism. Socialism is a full on revolution that overthrows capitalism as such. We live in social democracies (capitalist), not socialist states. From what I know, socialism as it is supposed to be done (an already rich state transitioning to a socialist economy) has never been done. It's always been poor unindustrialised states going socialist way before they have the necessary wealth to pull it off. No developed state has gone socialist.
    1
  1929. +Pasquino Marforio Tusk and Juncker were elected by our national governments and then approved by a majority vote in the directly chosen EU parliament. So it's a form of indirect democracy.
    1
  1930. +Pasquino Marforio: US government officials of any kind (i.e. a secretary of defense like Jim Mattis or advisors like John Bolton or even Supreme Court judges) were 'chosen'. There was no list that the people of the USA had a choice to choose from. They were chosen, and then ratified by an elite with no say by the people of the USA. 'Indirect Democracy'. The Soviet Union (and the USA, and Europe, and any democratic country on earth) had the same indirect democracy when Stalin was the only candidate for election. See what I did there? The EU is literally modelled after any democratic government you see. People elect parliament, the government is made up of chosen people (either from the parliament or chosen themselves) and the bodies that were elected directly can also elect people for more specific functions within the government, which is called indirect democracy. Every single democratic country has this, otherwise we'd all have to vote for every single minister in the cabinet and every single secretary of state. If you don't know what you're talking about, don't speak. Here in the Netherlands we have a saying that goes "Spreken is zilver, zwijgen is goud". Go for the last part.
    1
  1931. +Pasquino Marforio You need to work on your reading skills. I'll keep it very simple for your simple nature: did you or did you not directly vote for Mattis to be the United States' secretary of defense? I'll help you: you did not. He was chosen by people that you chose before. That is called indirect democracy. People like Juncker and Tusk are chosen in the same way a secretary of defense in the US would be chosen: indirectly. You should take a bit more time to read, perhaps you'd actually understand others if you do so.
    1
  1932. +Pasquino Marforio You can't seriously be this thick.... Juncker and Tusk work at the pleasure of the European Council, which is all of our directly chosen leaders sitting together. Our national leaders decide what political course the EU takes and what the policy of the EU is concrete situations, and the EU Commission follows that, with Juncker (elected by our directly chosen natonal governments and approved by the directly chosen EU parliament) at the top. An example: Juncker can't on his own accord do something about the migrant crisis. Our national governments have to come up with a policy on that and Juncker only gets to carry out the policy .
    1
  1933. +Pasquino Marforio YOU STILL DON"T GET IT PASQUINO: Mattis' and Bolton's only constituency and the only people they answer to is the US government. NOT The American People. Did you ever notice that the US doesn't have referendums of ANY SORT ? The EU is literally designed to resemble the way our national democracies work, but on an international level... It's the exact same concept. Not only do I live in a democracy, I have more democracy than an American does.
    1
  1934. +Pasquino: EVERY LAW IN THE EUROPEAN UNION WAS MADE AND PASSED BY VOTES OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL OF MINISTERS AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, BOTH OF WHICH ARE CHOSEN BY THE CITIZENS OF THE EU.
    1
  1935. +Pasquino Marforio Ah that explains a lot. Mate, that video is complete and utter nonsense. The Internet Censorship Bill is pushed by our national governments. Countries like Germany want this. The European Council of Ministers (our national governments sitting together) voted in favour. The European Parliament (directly voted for by the people) has now rejected it and will vote again on an amended version in september. It's unsure whether it will make it. Short explanation on how laws are passed in the EU: European Council (our national leaders, like Merkel, Macron, etc. sitting together) draws a political goal for the EU. European Commission (Juncker and his commissioners) make up the actual law that represents the Council's views, then they do a proposition of law. European Council of Ministers (our full governments sitting together) vote on the contents of that proposition of law. The European Parliament (directly chosen representatives) also vote on the contents. Both have the power to amend the law as they see fit. That video of yours is nonsense. Our national governments are the biggest proponents of this new censorship bill, they are the pushing force behind it. The EU parliament temporarily stopped it. The Commission merely carried out the wishes of the likes of Merkel. Our national leaders are the most important factor in the EU, they guide it. Saying "the EU" made a law is not accurate, because our national governments and the EU are not separate; they are intertwined. Most people we vote for in our national government also play important roles within the EU. And then we have the directly chosen EU parliament. There is no such thing as "EU bureaucrats telling countries what to do", the bureaucrats ARE the countries. So if you criticise this bill, criticise countries like Germany for wanting it
    1
  1936.  @HannibalBarcaRTW  No, the reason these speeches appeal to you is because they distract from the true reason behind these issues. Yes, quality of life is decreasing that is true, but why? It’s because of capitalism increasing wealth inequality more and more, forcing our governments to placate big businesses more and more. Big businesses are getting more powerful, especially with globalism they are becoming impervious to government regulation. If we do something they don’t like, they can move their business elsewhere, outside of our reach. We now need to court businesses to settle in our countries, to choose us over other countries. They are the true global leaders and they’re united in having interests in policy that benefits their profit margins. Why do immigrants come here? Two answers: businesses want them here for cheap labour (notice how after brexit, the UK simply replaced eastern european immigrants with African, Indian etc immigrants? It’s because corporate interests require immigrants to do cheap labour, regardless of what the people vote for) and businesses keep those third world nations poor by extracting their resources, giving VERY little in return and pocketing all the profits. Africa is insanely rich in resources, but when a French company mines them, they employ a small number of your people maybe and pay a little tax, but 90% of that wealth is gone. Extracted never to be seen again. And if they revolt against this system? Get ready for regime change. Need a loan due to how little you profit from how we extract your resources? Here you go, except there are conditions attached that further ensure you remain poor (mostly we impose austerity measures which make investment in developing their economies impossible). So conditions are terrible there and en masse these people seek to escape this economic trap by moving to rich nations like ours. We created these conditions, our institutions like the IMF and our businesses. This is not to speak of warzones we created, like Libya, and all the refugees coming from these places. We created this issue ourselves, largely. We chose profit and the result is mass immigration. 95% of Africans coming here would gladly stay home if they could build a decent life there. And with their resources there is no reason why they can’t… IF businesses stopped exploiting their land and shipping the profits abroad. In short, we the people are NOT in power. Not even our governments are in power. Global capital interests are in power and decide most of our economic and political life. Even our cultural/social life. We are entirely dependent on placating them to grant us their business and some taxes. And with globalism this dynamic has reached new heights, enabling businesses to pit countries against one another and forcing us to beg more than ever for them to keep their business in our nations. THAT is the core of the issue. Everything from immigration to decreasing quality of life traces back to this issue and why we can’t fix it as long as we remain capitalist
    1
  1937. +loyal to the end It's our fault, it's Russia's fault for responding the way they did and of course the US had a hand in it as well. We tried to move Ukraine to our side so we could have a buffer state between the EU and Russia (easier to defend the EU in that situation), Russia didn't like it and responded in a fairly extreme way that the EU and US just couldn't accept. The downing of MH17 especially didn't help our relationship either. As with most international conflicts, everyone is at fault and it's an unfortunate outcome that the relationship turned cold. And now, Russia is constantly trying to meddle in elections so they're really not helping in fixing our relationship. Anyway, in due coarse we'll be friends again
    1
  1938. We moeten stoppen zo afhankelijk te zijn van de VS. Tijd om onze eigen broek op te houden en onze eigen interesses te verdedigen op het wereldtoneel.
    1
  1939. Because a hurried impeachment, rushed through to get Trump impeached before elections is not rigging? Don't keep lying to yourself: American politics is a corrupt cesspool of party politics and corporate "donations". There is no good side in this. Democrats swiftly put together a brittle impeachment based on flimsy evidence instead of taking the proper time to carefully prepare it and charge Trump as he ought to be. The impeachment of a democratically chosen president is not to be done lightheartedly, it is to be done with the utmost care and consideration for the stability of the country. They rushed it for political reasons, they rigged it. And now the republicans are rigging it too. It's a den of disdainful party politics that completely leave national interests behind them. It's a disgrace to democracy and the rule of law. Both of them are. What America needs is more political parties, not just to vote the republicans out.
    1
  1940. Hij gebruikt geen gevoelige woorden. Veelal worden zijn woorden gevoelig gemaakt door allerlei vreemde interpretaties. Soms gebruikt Baudet ook daadwerkelijk gevoelige woorden, maar meestal ligt het toch echt aan de politiek die die woorden op een bepaalde manier belicht.
    1
  1941. They are creating worse than just nationalism with this, they create literaly far right nazis who believe that there is a leftist establishment that literally want to genocide Europeans. And honestly, with this behaviour and extreme mass immigration I understand why those conspiracy theories came to life and became to popular. People creating commercials like this are absolute idiots, extremists who push others to become extremists too.
    1
  1942. Als we de grenzen gaan bewaken volgens de Visegrad-idealen dan ben ik voor. Potdicht
    1
  1943. +Danita L Twedt It's art. Yes, it's going to be multi-interpretable, but no it's most certainly not meaningless. The original artist had an intention with his art, but the art has many more layers that the artist originally didn't foresee. His audience or even himself at a later stage might uncover these alternate ways of interpreting the piece of art. This video clearly attempts to convey a message, which confirms it is in fact art and it's up to us to find what that message is. Or rather, to form that message for ourselves.
    1
  1944. Corporations going political... not something we should want in democracies if you ask me.
    1
  1945. @stray dog7 Yeah... that infamous "97% of scientists agree with climate change", based on a disingenuous interpretation of a study
    1
  1946.  @Bear-form  Jongeren zijn doodziek van dat globalistische establishment, dat is waarom je dat ziet. De rechtsere/nationalistische jongeren zullen fan van Trump zijn, de linksere/progressieven voor Sanders. Hoe dan ook haten jongeren aldaar het establishment, dat is duidelijk. Het is tijd voor een nieuwe politieke wind in de VS.
    1
  1947.  @wendypeeters3675  Olie is nog steeds heel waardevol en zal dat voor tientallen jaren (zo niet een paar honderd) blijven.
    1
  1948.  @wendypeeters3675  Andere landen zullen het nog nodig hebben én er zal overal zeer lange tijd nog in verschillende sectoren olie gebruikt worden. Denk aan militaire voertuigen e.d.
    1
  1949.  @user-dw8us4ix2h  It's world heritage with a multicultural past, not "yours". If a world heritage site is on your land, you can't just do with it as you please, you have to respect its history. For instance, the Mona Lisa belongs to France, but they can't just alter the painting in ways that ruin it, they have a duty to take proper care of it and keep it in its original state as much as possible. Ruining world heritage is a bad thing, who owns it doesn't matter.
    1
  1950.    You're right. It's an unfortunate decision that I hope will be reverted in the future. I had the pleasure of visiting Istanbul this february and I luckily did visit Hagia Sophia and also a lot of beautiful mosques. It's a shame how Erdogan continues to trample Atatürk's legacy.
    1
  1951.  @kennethschaijk8698  Ja precies..... die verdomde polarisatie overal
    1
  1952. I'd say he's intelligent, a good statesman and let's just say he has Russia under hisfirm control. I don't like what he's doing with Russia and especially not how aggressive he's been towards the West lately with all the hacking. I wish one day we can just be allies again with Russia
    1
  1953. If your country's interests are destabilising other countries, then yes you're aggressive ;)
    1
  1954. Good, the UK should not be punished for the failings of AZ. Especially not considering the UK needs vaccinations a lot more than we do in the EU due to the new variant.
    1
  1955. In Africa Jesus is portrayed as African, in Asia Jesus is portrayed as Asian, in Europe Jesus is portrayed as European. In truth, he was a light brown-skinned Jew from the Levant region. Get over yourself. https://www.nairaland.com/240898/interesting-many-faces-jesus
    1
  1956.  @milad-wm3pi  Zij discrimineren helemaal niemand, ze hebben kritiek op de islam. Islam is niet iets wat verbonden is met kleur of afkomst of zelfs cultuur (je hebt islamieten vanuit vele culturen). Wilders is tegen de islam als ideologie/religie, niet tegen mensen met een bepaalde etnische afkomst. En Baudet al helemaal niet, die is zelfs niet tegen de islam an sich (hij wil de koran niet verbieden, zoals Wilders dat wil) maar alleen tegen fundamentalistisch islam. Je bent echt walgelijk bezig hier. Baudet noch Wilders hebben ook maar iets met geweld te maken. Als jij hen verbind met dit soort terrorisme, moet je ook de islam verbinden met moslimterrorisme. Je bent een vuile hypocriet
    1
  1957. Er zit weinig verschil tussen gereserveerd zijn en in jezelf gekeerd/introvert zijn. Verwarring is makkelijk
    1
  1958. +m sg And you think those e-mails are real? Because elaborate child trafficking ring among elites sounds... a bit grotesque. And whatever is a "satanic spirit cooking monster"? It all sounds like a load of bullshit, to be blunt. Not everything on wikileaks is 100% true, even if wikileaks itself tries to be honest, there's always a chance some other force has forged some e-mails and led wikileaks to believe they're real. As for Trump, the economy and unemployment are mostly growing because of policies of his predecessor. Besides causing that massive surge in US stock markets, Trump hasn't done big things yet to the economy. HIs planned overhaul of infrastructure is very promising. The best thing Trump has done so far is deal with North Korea. He did a good job getting the international community to impose max sanctions to force the North Koreans into talks with the South. He did a fine job with that.
    1
  1959. +Jeff Kay Too bad it was America that ignited the Syrian civil war and indirectly caused the migrant crisis, not Europe itself. We don't control what others do, so we must protect ourselves and our borders. It's not as simple as "stop bombing them".
    1
  1960. @Bhigr Bond You don't understand that Declaration at all. I guess according to you article 3 ("Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.") means the death penalty or even the police shooting criminals is illegal because it takes lives, prison sentences are illegal because they limit liberty, etc..... The UDHR doesn't work like this. Hell, the UDHR doesn't even have legal power in any country. It's exclusively used as a basis to prosecute extreme breaches of human rights without specific laws prohibiting it, to counter the "I just followed orders/the law" arguments of Nazis. The UDHR just indicates the vague existence of universal human rights, floating somewhere above all legal structures. Meaning that following the law under a Nazi system doesn't mean you escape punishment for serious cirme because "well I didn't breach any law in my country". Nobody can derive any specific rights from the UDHR. The UDHR is deliberately vague and without any legal power. America already breached half of it within seconds of signing the thing, with its segregation, torture, the US constitution slavery as "illegal except for prisoners", etc. No such thing as absolute freedom of speech exists. In virtually the entire world, it's limited. In most of the world, hate speech is not allowed. And for good reason. And as a side note, even in countries where holocaust denial is illegal, it's NOT illegal in a scientific context . So if you in good faith want to challenge the views on the holocaust and provide proper evidence to support your views, it's allowed. People like you, who just spout denialist talking points are RIGHTLY BANNED.
    1
  1961. If you think betraying America's most valued allies is "right" for American citizens I don't know what to tell you. It'll cost you dearly in the long run
    1
  1962.  @ismailabdukadir1130  You make a joke of this as if fascist is a fun insult, but a fascist EU would be your deepest nightmare. Fascists would brutally respond to actions like this and it's not fun to have them as neighbours, or to live under them for that matter
    1
  1963. Civilisation has caused people to lose all interest in a tight society. We live in an age where selfishness and personal accomplishment trumps all. It is about profit, economic growth and personal comfort, to the detriment of the planet (agriculture, pollution, deforestation, urbanisation, industrialisation, etc.). We even wage or support wars and kill thousands up to millions just for money and comfort (latest example is Jemen, in which thousands have died and millions are starving. We don't speak up, because of lucrative arms deals with the Saudis). Civilisation has also brought us advanced medicine/technology, very high levels of comfort and (at least in the West) very high levels of safety (though the violence in the era before industrialisation wasn't bad either, even if you go further back in history the violence is usually exaggerated). The culture of greed we have today is rotten to the core, the disdain for nature is at an all time high and like always we still murder eachother frequently. Is this worth the comfort civilisation brings? I personally believe that while civilisation brought both good and bad, we took a turn for the worse with industrialisation in particular. We need societies in which we care about eachother, instead of the culture of greed we have now. And we need to understand the consequences of our actions, the consequence of pushing for constant economic growth and constant population growth. We deem ourselves separate from or even superior to nature, but we are still subject to her laws.
    1
  1964.  @jasonbrody4702  Funnily enough your description better fits advanced civilisation than the way it was before. There is more disregard for the well-being of people and immorality now than ever. We have become individualistic and selfish. The main problem before civilisation was disease, not immorality and especially not disregard for other people. We're talking about close-knit societies in which you can leave your door unlocked at night, not a spaghetti western filled with violence. But as always, civilisation and the time before it is always either glorified or painte black. No middle ground nowadays. I honestly don't know how you can describe it as "murder, theft, general disregard for the well-being of people and immorailty". How biased can you be? Truth is that both have their downsides and benefits.
    1
  1965. He was born in 1928 and speaking about how the situation then was worse. Communism had been alive since 1917 already, it was not 'rising' at this time. Also, fascism is rising today and communism is not so that is the more relevant topic as well
    1
  1966.  @paullambert8183  Fascism saw an explosive surge in the 1930's. Communism was more stable expansion. So Fascism still would be perceived as the largest threat at the time
    1
  1967.  @douglasmurdoch7247  I'm not talking about being born somewhere, that is irrelevant. I'm talking about culture. If Daniel Craig was raised in China, speaking perfect Mandarin and was culturally indistinguishable from true Han Chinese then yes he is Chinese, but not 100% Chinese as the ethnic Han Chinese are. What makes up what a people is is not only ethnicity but also culture. The two of these is what makes us a distinguishable people.
    1
  1968. I have analysed this channel and found it features too many men. This is extremist material. Gad, I'm going to have to ask you to feminise yourself to please the equality gods
    1
  1969. Buy European!!
    1
  1970. +Kurt S Where he lives, no children are taken away from their parents without a legitimate cause.
    1
  1971. Ik vind dit moeilijk. Baudet heeft zeker een punt als hij zegt dat men zich niet moet laten leiden door (terroristische?) aanslagen en zelfs dat men juist na zo'n aanslag gesprek moet voeren. Maar aan de andere kant moet je er dan niet politiek gebruik van maken vind ik, zeker omdat het nog niet eens zeker was wat de toedracht precies is. Dan gebruik je de situatie om politieke puntjes te scoren. Maar ja, FvD deed het over het algemeen respectvol. Het enige waar je vraagtekens bij zou kunnen zetten is dat ze uithaalden naar het CDA en VVD, dat hadden ze gewoon niet moeten doen. Gewoon een neutraal gesprek proberen te houden over wat er politiek misgaat in NL qua integratie/immigratie vind ik gepast, maar dit moet dan ook weer niet gebruikt worden om andere politieke partijen aan te vallen.
    1
  1972. That must be why you switched to 5.56 a few years later... Hell, today you're thinking of moving to 6.5mm, which is a lot like .280 British. This was disgusting and toxic politics, ot something that gave anyone an "edge".
    1
  1973. Nah, the wokists wouldn't see it as a stereotype. That is their actual view of what black people are like and they'd call it "representation". Wokists are basically using racist stereotypes all the time and call it representation
    1
  1974. 3 people die in a shootout in Europe, it's world news. 3 people die in a shootout in America, it's business as usual. That tells you something
    1
  1975. Hagia Sophia is one of the most impressive world heritage sites. It's not the same
    1
  1976.  @sirorangutan7949  Voting by mail is illegal here in the Netherlands and I think most of the western world as well because its susceptability to fraud and the general mess we;re seeing in the US right now. Not saying there was fraud, but voting by mail is a very flawed system and should not have been implemented this way in the US.
    1
  1977. Still waiting for those billions to be put into the NHS, are we?
    1
  1978. Breaking news: "Rich man gets killed in Ukraine" Thanks for the important update, BBC.
    1
  1979. +Horumarka Dalka Maar Wilders is geen Hitler, dus.... Je kan niet mensen uitsluiten van de macht alleen omdat JIJ het niet met hun eens bent. Doe je dat wel, dan heb je klaarblijkelijk geen democratie.
    1
  1980.  @Eliisthegoat1234  There were some Canadians who were already there to train UKrainian soldiers, but I imagine they left already
    1
  1981.  @Inhetmidden  Nee, niet in de zin van fascisme of socialisme/communisme. Die gaan veel maar dan ook echt veel verder daarin.
    1
  1982.  @Joesolo13  And you can use them to attract US forces to a place where you can sink them with subs.
    1
  1983. They'll never give Trump a peace prize. He did good work on North Korea but at the same time is causing shitstorms with his protectionism, we're at the brink of a trade war between the EU and US. Moon is a more logical choice, his role is more on the foreground too.
    1
  1984. Fuck off. All John Allen Chau did was tell the natives to receive, believe and die of a disease he brought to the island. He was a fool who risked the lives of the entire tribe and tried to destroy an ancient culture by getting as many tribesmen as possible to leave their culture and exchange it for Christianity. What he did was disgusting
    1
  1985. Right and legal? That is a very bold statement, to say the least... Intervening like this in case of an alleged humanitarian rights abuse is highly controversial, especially with limited evidence and no UN mandate whatsoever. Is it perfectly legal to bomb the US because of Guantanamo Bay?
    1
  1986. A Bridge Too Far!
    1
  1987. Vond ik over het algemeen een heel goed debat van beide kanten, dit is een beetje de rechtse versie van hoe Baudet in de linkse media wordt neergezet. Wat mij betreft was dit onnodig
    1
  1988. Actually Russia has a very formidable military that within proximity of its own borders can give NATO a very hard time. Especially short term, they actually have a decided advantage. But long term they are absolutely hopeless against an EU war economy alone, let alone all of NATO.
    1
  1989. America caused the migrants that Hungary must stop to come in the first place, so shut up.
    1
  1990.  @bigsmoke8816  No, because unlike the black German soldiers there was an entire battallion of female snipers. That means the Russian snipers depicted in BF1 are just from that particular battallion. Black German soldiers were rare soldiers among many white soldiers in the same company. And I'll also mention we're not talking about thousands of soldiers, nor even hundreds and possibly not even over a dozen black German soldiers here. Seeing more than one black German soldiers at once would not make sense. Seeing many Russian female snipers together does make sense because they formed an entire battallion of exclusively female snipers.
    1
  1991.  @Chuck_Hooks  That's cute... you think 28.000 US troops have stopped a NK invasion and not the 464.000 man South Korea military. Next you're going to tell me a few thousand US troops have stopped a Russian invasion into Western Europe instead of the 1.6 million strong combined EU military. But you're absolutely right that the main aspect of the credible US deterrent is its expressive political support for South Korea (demonstrated by frequent training and such) and its actual technical capability to transport men and equipment there. The men stationed there now are useless. Nothing more than a political gesture that the US has SK's back.
    1
  1992. Positief puntje: iets minder toeristen in het Rijksmuseum
    1
  1993. Interesting experiment
    1
  1994. +greathey1234 It's quite bold to state that 100% is white when the dark net hides the identity of its users, so I guess those numbers only represent the offenders that were actually caught? And it just so happens to be that only the US and EU even TRY to hunt down these internet criminals, so only their subjects are in danger of being caught. The governments in non-white countries don't even pursue dark net criminals like the EU and US do, so it's an unfair statement. We don't know who is active in a paedophile ring unless either the US or EU tracks them down, and those authorities can only track someone down when they committed a crime within their jurisdiction. And those that fall within their jurisdiction are predominantly white.
    1
  1995. +greathey1234 You posted a news article but it doesn't feature any numbers regarding race of those arrested. That investigation was of the EU, with cooperation from the US and Australia, all of whom arrested people in their own countries. I don't see how this is supposed to disprove what I said. If anything, it supports my claim that they only arrest people in their own jurisdiction. It is an investigation that involved the EU, US, Canada and Australia and those same countries arrested people in the EU, US, Canada and Australia. What exactly are you trying to show? This is exactly my point: only those white countries investigate and only their subjects are investigated to protect the children in their own countries (and eachother's).
    1
  1996. +greathey1234 Again, you provide studies carried out in white countries. The first study is carried out in the UK and states that Asian men (predominantly referring to Pakistanis and in some cases Afghan) are 3 times more likely to molest a child in groups, but white men are the only ones doing it out of paedophilic interest. It completely doesn't broach the subject of lone child abusers, which is the main form of child abuse anywhere, and the article itself states that it is not representative of child abuse in Great Britain and should not lead to any conclusions. Yet you do draw a conclusion. So paedophilic sex rings in Britain (about 90% white country) are white and you conclude that therefore all international sex rings must be predominantly white? And you ignore that even in that 90% white country, Muslim men are 3 times more likely to abuse a child in groups... But probably it's white men that abuse lone children more, for which figures are not shown, so the full picture is probably not that bad for Muslims. No conclusions whatsoever can be taken from it. In any case, you can't take figures from a 90% white country and apply it to the entire planet.
    1
  1997.  @wendigo017  I don't see anything good that christianity has brought us, but we didn't have already in pre-christian Europe. And I like how you're describing pre-renaissance/enlightenment Christianity there, when talking about Turkish rule.
    1
  1998. Hij had Suriname geen failed state moeten noemen, maar voor de rest had hij volkomen gelijk
    1
  1999. +Diego Revius Dat multiculturalisme spanningen creëert tussen botsende culturen en er om die reden (vrijwel) geen vreedzame samenlevingen zijn waar multiculturalisme leidend is. Multiculturalisme creëert sociale problemen en het was nooit een goed idee om ermee te beginnen. Dat xenofobie in onze genen zit. In ons onderbewustzijn zijn we negatief over groepen die er niet zoals ons uitzien. Gelukkig kunnen we dat met gezond verstand tegen gaan, maar het is er wel.
    1
  2000. +Diego Revius Dit is onderdeel van mijn studie, rechtsgeleerdheid. We leren dat de manier van denken in de wetenschap (en dus het recht) niet hetzelfde is als de standaard manier van denken. Ons brein is geëvolueerd om cognitieve shortcuts te maken, in plaats van alles op een logische manier te analyseren en op basis daarvan een besluit te nemen. Die evolutionaire cognitieve shortcuts is waar vermoedens, vooroordelen en dergelijke reacties vandaan komen. Dat zijn onze cognitieve instincten. Bijvoorbeeld, ons schrik instinct. Als een roofdier onze kant op sluipen, rennen we instinctief weg, of dit nou een logische actie is of niet. Dat is omdat ons brein in een fractie van een seconde de beslissing voor ons neemt. Zouden we dit instinct niet hebben dan zouden de eerst kijken wat voor dier het is, bedenken of het dier een bedreiging is en vervolgens bedenken wat de beste actie is. Dit proces duurt natuurlijk een aantal seconden en in de tussentijd ben je gewoon dood. Hierom is ons brein geëvolueerd om niet alleen logisch na te kunnen denken, maar ook om in andere gevallen zo snel mogelijk te beslissen , zonder logica. Dit instinct hebben we eigenlijk met alle vooroordelen en alle instinctieve reacties, ook in de sociale context. Vertrouwen we iemand? Wie heeft iets misdaan, etc.? Degenen die het meest voorzichtig waren zouden natuurlijk eerder overleven. Nu op het punt van xenofobie, deze evolutionaire cognitieve shortcuts zijn ook daarop van toepassing. Degenen die vroeger andere stammen en onbekende mensen minder vertrouwden zouden ook meer overleven en zodoende zit in ons brein, in ons onderbewustzijn, een inherent wantrouwen van het vreemde. Instinctief zijn wij allemaal xenofoob. Dit instinct kun je onderdrukken/neutraliseren door logisch na te denken, maar iedereen heeft ditzelfde instinct. Iedereen heeft vermoedens over wie de moord heeft gepleegd, iedereen heeft een natuurlijke schrikreactie op iets wat door het brein als een mogelijk gevaar wordt gezien en iedereen is op het eerste gezicht sceptisch over het vreemde. Dat is een gevoel waar je niet vanaf kunt. Dus ja, xenofobie zit in onze genen. Maar hoe je je gedraagt ligt eraan of je op je instinct afgaat of een stap terug neemt en logisch nadenkt. In de wetenschap kies je uiteraard altijd voor het laatste, maar het alledaags leven is over het algemeen geleid door onze cognitieve shortcuts.
    1
  2001.  @qwertyuiopzxcvbnm9890  Yeah, UK is still committed to Europe's military cooperation. Them leaving the EU did not change a lot in this regard
    1
  2002. Heb je de hele video gezien? Hij laat zowel pro- als anti-Trump retoriek zien en probeert daarmee te zeggen: het Amerikaanse politieke landschap gaat steeds minder over de inhoud en meer over persoonlijke aanvallen en theorieën. Niets mis mee.
    1
  2003. +Sizano Green I agree individuals can transfer cultures, but we are talking about groups here. It's much more complex. Migrants who come here and are even born here do not "live with the natives", so to speak, they live amongst themselves. A migrant child is raised by his migrant parents, often even raised with a foreign language first and Dutch second. Migrant children live in two worlds: their home, which is filled with their migrant culture, and the outside world, which is filled with Dutch culture. As a child they are influenced by both and as a consequence, will adhere to somewhat of a mixed culture in the end (some may attach more to their home culture, others may attach more to the culture of their peers. And a side note on the peers; those may be migrant children too instead of Dutch children, in which case even the outside world would be a non-Dutch culture). The exact problem we have with integration here is that migrants do not live with the natives, they live in their own neighbourhoods. We tried scattering them on numerous occasions using different tactics (which are limited in a democratic country for obvious reasons, we can't forcefully remove people from their homes), but in the end migrant neighbourhoods formed again. They love cities and particularly parts of the city where many migrants live. On some occasions, Dutch people are even pestered away from those neighbourhoods! We ask them to ditch their culture and adapt to ours, but they won't. They prefer not to (and as I said before, I don't blame them). And in a democratic country, we of course can't force them to come "live with the natives". They choose to live in separate colonies within the natives' land. You choose the example of the US, but that's where you make a grave error. European nations aren't the US. We aren't melting pots, we are 90-95% white (talking about the multicultural European countries. Non-multicultural European countries are 99% white). The idea of multiculturalism here is that everyone comes here and they adapt to our culture; a very specific culture. In America there is no specific culture to adapt to, only a rather broad one that is very quickly and easily adopted. Here, the idea is that our native culture rules. In the US the idea is that a lot of cultures come together and essentially have one core thing in common: their love for America (broadly speaking, there is more to the US than that). If a culture is too different from ours, we essentially ask of people that come here to go directly against everything they believe and adopt our culture. This is too much to ask. Multiculturalism works in the US; an immigrant nation. But it doesn't work in Europe; native communities.
    1
  2004. Yeah that's a pretty poor explanation of Hitler in those schools. Almost makes him sound like a comic book villain... The real question is WHY was Hitler anti-Slav and anti-Semite? Because he believed there was a race struggle going on in which the interest of one race is always counter to the other. He believed that because of shrinking markets he needed autarky to ensure the survival of the German race (i.e. to ensure Germany was fully self-sufficient and could feed itself and produce industrial goods for itself). He believed nations (races, in his mind) would have to fight to achieve self-sufficiency by grabbing enough resources to form an autarky and that the races that would fail to do this, would go extinct as they would starve. National Socialism is also anti-capitalist and shares the same criticisms of owners of the means of production exploiting the workers as Marxism does. At the same time Nazis were anti-Marxist because of their egalitarian and globalist views. So, why anti-Slav hatred? Well, Eastern Europe had agricultural lands Hitler needed to form a Germany that could feed itself, so he planned to pretty much murder out the Slavs from Eastern Europe and take it as Lebensraum. So this is associated with the idea of autarky and that different races had to fight over resources to feed themselves so they could survive. Slavs had resources Germans needed to become self-sufficient, therefore they were the enemy and had to be fought. Another factor is the USSR that Hitler hated. Essentially, in Hitler's mind it was "either the German race starves out due to lack of agricultural lands, or I take agricultural lands from the Slavs and they die out". And, why anti-Semitism? Considering the Nazi idea of different races struggling over resources to survive, the idea of members of a different race living within German society is nothing short of parasitical. They believed the Jews' very existence in Germany was them being parasitical on the survival of the German race. They believed that to survive, the German race needed to control a certain amount of resources or else they would eventually starve to death. So there could be no other races competing for those resources from within German society. Because race = nation in National Socialism, you can't have two races mingling in one area. Every "nation" would have to be racially pure and using the means of production and resources to further the survival of that race. The German race didn't want to use their resources to further the survival of another race, the Jews. They were their competitors. Another factor that made their hatred for the Jews even worse was the fact that Jews were overrepresented as businessmen. So they were not only seen as a foreign race benefiting from German resources, but also as a foreign race directly exploiting the German race/workers for their own survival/monetary gain. The Jews were pretty much the ultimate example of what National Socialism was against. I think it's very sad that schools today essentially teach "he was just insane" because that doesn't properly portray how screwed up and dangerous the National Socialist ideology is. Hitler was not "just insane", he followed a very clear and consistent ideology. An ideology we should understand to avoid. When you call Hitler "just a monster", people are more likely to question why Hitler really did what he did or even deny it altogher because it's pretty illogical unless you understand the ideological reasons he did it. That is the danger of not properly teaching the ideology of Nazism and why it leads to more holocaust denialism: because without understanding the ideological reasons behind it, killing 17 million people is so random and so illogically evil that some start to question "this is so absurd, did it even happen at all?".
    1
  2005.  @Valorian He is correct in assessing where Russia would attack, but massively understated how swiftly and effectively Russia would do this. It's not over yet, but the front progressed VERY quickly in comparison to what Binkov predicted. So Binkov should analyse what happened/happens and adjust his other predictions accordingly. There is no shame in having it wrong, because modern war is difficult to predict. Early WW2 most officials thought it'd be a trench war again and those were professional tacticians. So why chastise a YT channel for not being dead-on accurate?
    1
  2006. Why he should call him Rocket Man of course
    1
  2007. Why so defensive? Migrants should come to no place in Europe, France nor Russia. And in the case of both it should be reported
    1
  2008.  @lilmovieperp3599  Family has not been "defined", it's an existing phenomenon created by nature. And it's central to humanity. We did not "create" the concept of family, it is an inherent feature and necessity of our species. Creating a family and taking care of the children together is not done for no reason. It goes so far that children literally have a biological need to grow up in a family unit with a mother and father figure (if you ask me, those roles can still be fulfilled by two men or women, as long as those roles are properly fulfilled within a family setting). A child with a one parent household has a demonstably worse upbringing in several aspects and always turns out lesser than they could have been. A proper family upbringing is literally a biological need for children. Asking why humans create families is like asking why penguins raise their children in pairs or why other species do it alone. It's an inherent feature of our species and has been since the beginning of time. It's ridiculous to even question it because that directly goes against our biology and the psychological needs of our children. Nobody "defined" family and nobody can alter the definition of what a family is without the consequences.
    1
  2009.  @lilmovieperp3599  Good argument you have there.... maybe provide an actual comment with substance next time.
    1
  2010.  @lilmovieperp3599  You're calling me a kid while writing things like "megalol" and evading the argument... okay, buddy. What we call family is not something we ourselves created, it is something that came to be naturally and is part of our biology. Do tell me the origin of family units if you think differently, instead of acting like a child.
    1
  2011.  @lilmovieperp3599  No...
    1
  2012.  @lilmovieperp3599  Stop nagging my inbox please. Someone who seriously asks for sources whether children in the past were raised by parents and/or extended relatives (family) is not worthy of any response. I'm not even going to bother looking for "sources". I guess I'm afraid I'll find out about the truth of how 2000 years ago, all children were left on the streets and raised in orphanages or left in the wild before we humans invented the concept of raising them ourselves in families... /s And to find the well-known literature on how single-parent upbringings are inferior to two-parent upbringings, google is your friend. It's one of the most basic findings within psychology, to the point of literal children writing school essays about the subject. I don't even want to enter into an argument with someone that does nothing other than laugh, evade arguments and deflect by asking for "sources" for the most simple of concepts, so don't respond.
    1
  2013. +Nico NL Wat een leven... wat een "droom". En dan, nadat je zoveel tijd van je leven hebt verspild aan werken in plaats van leven, dan heb je geld. Joe facking hoe. Is alles waar het jou om draait geld? Ik vind een land waarin je met een normale baan deugdelijk kan verdienen en een goed leven kan opbouwen meer op een droom lijken dan een land waar je je hele leven wijdt aan werk en dan super veel geld verdient (als je werk van de grond komt dan).
    1
  2014.  @Dryloch  True, dumping the neolib interventionist foreign policy and also standing up against pro-corporate free trade deals that only siphon jobs away for max profit is pretty damn nice about Trump. Problem is you have to get over his other idiotic behaviour before you can stomach voting for the guy. I do respect people that vote for him.
    1
  2015. Waar zie jij mensen die dit doen? Ik zie niks verkeerds in deze video...
    1
  2016. That's his point; he connects all social aspects of being a woman to the biological origins of those social gender roles, then states that simply adapting the social gender role without also having the underlying biological groundwork for those gender roles can't be done. I.e. only biological women can be women in the social sense because the social is tied to the biological. At least I think that's what he's trying to say.
    1
  2017.  @etistone  Yeah it's clear he can't properly voice his point here. He puts too much of an emphasis on giving birth, as if that's the centre of our social life or something
    1
  2018.  conan263  Then life has no meaning but to exist and preserve the existence of humanity. And of we don't find meaning in the existence as such, then why further it? If passing on genes is what society would think is the point of all life, it'd collapse quickly due to nihilism. You're essentially saying existing is the point of existing, living is the point of living. That just doesn't cut it.
    1
  2019.  conan263  We've outgrown religion, at least the monotheistic kind. It's not coming back. What we need is spirituality.
    1
  2020.  thesatanic6  Not reproduction, just your XX chromosomes. Anyone with those chromosomes is a biological female, reproduction or no reproduction.
    1
  2021. On the fall*
    1
  2022.  Szymon Lech Dzięcioł  Hmm, I always imagined them as Middle Eastern/North African, but people from those areas can still have blonde hair so maybe their skin is still darker.
    1
  2023. On which point?
    1
  2024. Of iedereen gaat meteen elkaar neerschieten om duwtjes en beledigingen. Kan ook.
    1
  2025.  @ENoob  In 1918, the influenza epidemic went similarly, disappeared during the summer but returned with a vengeance in winter. That's when most of the deaths happened. Let's hope corona stays limited to one epidemic.
    1
  2026. And... ?
    1
  2027. This is why Bernie is losing. Defeatists like you making the youth not turnout as much. Before you can enact change, you have to believe in it.
    1
  2028.  @nrsrymj  If his strategy failed, it's because the DNC sabotaged him. I get you wanted him to be more aggressive in attacking Biden (I'm guessing it's this), but in the end he chose to stick purely to the substance and refrain from personal attacks. Perhaps he just wanted to wait for the debate, which would clearly show Biden is the inferior candidate. Perhaps he wanted to lure Warren in for an endorsement (a fierce anti-Biden campaign would scare her off. Endorsing a Bernie that stays civil against Biden, she could still endorse him and afterwards grab a spot on Biden's team by stating she'll bring progressive support to his team). Perhaps he just didn't want the establishment to hate him too much, for the future. It was a viable strategy, he was clearly the better candidate and he showed this. Any informed person would see this. Losing with that strategy is only possible with active subversion by the DNC. Being more aggressive would risk Bernie's message coming across the wrong way and would open him up to all other kinds of DNC/corporate sabotage narratives. I think he chose the best way to go about this by staying civil. He has the substance advantage, all he needed to do was get his message across, not necessarily attack Biden. Biden attacks himself enough. What he truly needed was a debate. It was what he counted on, I bet. There is still a chance, but insofar his strategy is failing it's not due to the strategy itself but the DNC sabotage.
    1
  2029. En toch heeft Viruswaarheid op dit punt 100% gelijk. De Raad van State heeft dit zelfs van tevoren al geadviseerd aan de overheid; dit is de verkeerde grondslag en het parlement kan niet zomaar buiten spel worden gezet. De rechtbank kwam tot hetzelfde oordeel en dit zal ook vrijdag weer gebeuren. Want het is zo, ze hebben eens een keertje gelijk. Dat kan ook gebeuren.
    1
  2030. Oh yeah? We´ll see about that... starts WW3
    1
  2031. A cover for what? You're trying to tell me Hitler just randomly wanted to kill Jews for no reason and invade the USSR for fun, even though he literally shared a consistent ideology that explains pretty much everything he did from the war to the holocaust and the way he designed the economic system?
    1
  2032. Nice wild assumptions you have there
    1
  2033. Yes, facts Vanster73... I'd love to see them, but here I see none
    1
  2034. Zwarte Piet is zo oud dat Romeins historicus Tacitus omschrijft hoe een Germaanse stam hun gezichten zwart schminkt voor een duizenden jaren oud decemberfeest dat overeenkomsten toont met Sinterklaas. Dat was in het jaar 98. Het zwarte gezicht heeft niets met slavernij te maken (kroeshaar, rode lippen, oorbel, etc. mag van mij weg). En een duizenden jaren oud gebruik veranderen voor een paar roeptoeters in 2018? Over mijn lijk. Zie hier voor de traditie waar ik naar verwijs en zie het tussenkopje "oorsprong" voor wat ik bedoel: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilde_Jacht Stop met culturele tradities proberen kapot te maken
    1
  2035. Especially considering Reinbert de Leeuw, known to be one of the best pianists to play Satie, died last Valentine's day. I don't know whether she used his performance of Gnossienne no. 1, but it sounds like one I've heard before.
    1
  2036. You don’t understand socialism. You’re absolutely correct that so long as we remain in capitalism, “social” reforms can and often do have long term knock on effects. Absolutely correct, because they do nothing to change to fundamentals of capitalist power dynamics between capital owners and the rest of society. It tries to mitigate the effects of a system that fundamentally always leads to those effects due to this power imbalance and how we structured the entire economy to placate those few capitalists. It’s fighting windmills and may often enough even exacerbate those effects. Your example of rent controls and the housing market is an apt one. But what you fail to see is that there are more options than simply accepting capitalism and introducing social policies within that capitalist context. We can also critique how capitalism works on a more fundamental level and seek fundamental changes in how our economic system functions. And by this I don’t mean having the government plan the economy. If we learn anything from the 20th century it should be that planned economies do not work. It is important to realise that every type of economy, including capitalism, has certain ground rules that can be altered. Whether or not something as basic in our present economy as the ability to own ideas should exist at all, was a major discussion in the late 1800s. Intellectual property is not a natural part of the free market, it’s a rule we created ourselves and chose to enforce on society, thereby shaping the basics of our present economy. And yes, even property as such is such a constructed rule. Many types of free markets exist, including markets much more free than capitalism is. Market anarchists for instance propose a free market based on usufruct: whoever uses something owns it. I.e. you own your house not because of a piece of paper that says you do, but because you actually live there. And yes this is a form of socialism because the people that operate a business, own it because they operate it. And all people engage with one another on the basis of free exchange and market dynamics. Without property existing. There is only one thing prohibited: you don’t forcibly take something that is used by another. That’s theft. This funnily enough makes property a form of theft, as Proudhon famously wrote. In short, many types if markets are possible, and capitalism is but one of them. We decide on which basic rules an economy functions. Property is a made up rule based on state violence enforcing it upon us all, and that is what determines much of how our market functions. Different rules can be enforced or no rules can be enforced at all (except no theft/violence) and we can have free markets that function very differently. You don’t like publicly traded companies for example, this is another one of these made up rules that exists only by virtue of state violence enforcing it. Most rules do, down to the very basics of property itself.
    1
  2037. This channel is such a gem.... always something new and surprising
    1
  2038. Wat een onzin weer. Baudet en Hiddema hebben duidelijk uitgelegd wat de achtergrond van die kritiek is en dat het een plek heeft binnen de FvD. Hiddema heeft zelfs gezegd dat hij vindt dat Otten een punt heeft. De onrust is veroorzaakt door het overmaken van 30.000 euro vanuit de kas, door Otten. Je zit FvD hier echt te framen als van alles en nogwat
    1
  2039. +CEOofFRESH1 Exactly. American media is now divided between right propaganda and left propaganda. It doesn't matter anymore what you watch. Just see how intrinsically anti-Trump the audience is, as well as of course Trevor himself. Look at how intrinsically anti-left other shows are. It's not to be taken seriously anymore, neither one of them. Neutrality doesn't exist in America anymore. Just crippling polarisation
    1
  2040. This is a problem with America itself, not Trump. Your system is rotten to the core in many ways, not only the prosecutors but much more.
    1
  2041. While Tucker is suspicious for sure, most of the statements he picked here could very well be statements of a regular civic nationalist rather than a full on white ethnonationalist with deeply racist views. There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying a country should protect its heritage and culture. That same sentence can be used by white supremacists as a masked way of saying a country should preserve its main racial group and keep the nation "pure", which makes things difficult. But using that sentence along is not white supremacy. It depends who uses it and why.
    1
  2042. Yes the climate always changed. Yes, during the middle ages it was way warmer in Europe than it is today. And yes, we're just out of a small ice age (1800's) so it is only natural we warm up again only to cool off later as the climate always does. But the key to understanding why the current climate change is problematic is not THAT we warm up, it is the rate at which we do. We warm up faster than the climate normally does, and that warm-up period aligns perfectly with the industrial revolution and increased oil use. That's a strong indication we have a hand in this. I absolutely agree with you that climate science is too difficult to simply claim CO2 is nothing but bad and we're 100% certain the cause of this all or at least a significant factor, but there is a good chance we actually do influence the climate with our behaviour.
    1
  2043. De beste manier om mensen met gender dysphoria (transgender) te helpen is om ze bij te staan in de transitie. Hun stoornis is best kut en ze kunnen er beter mee leven als ze de transitie doorgaan. Ik heb wel eens gelezen dat ze als man met een vrouwenbrein zijn geboren of vice versa en daarom een heel sterk gevoel hebben dat ze eigenlijk vrouw/man zijn maar gevangen zitten in een man/vrouw lichaam. Ze weten zelf ook wel dat ze altijd biologisch hun originele sekse zullen blijven, maar we kunnen ze het best helpen met een transitie. Wat onzin is is die genderneutraliteit. Zij hebben geen echte stoornis zoals transgenders, maar bedenken gewoon hun eigen genders uit het niets. Als zij bijvoorbeeld een vrouw zijn met een best masculine persoonlijkheid (wat gewoon normaal is en best vaak voorkomt), dan zeggen ze niet "ik ben een vrouw met mijn eigen persoonlijkheid", maar "ik ben geen vrouw maar genderfluïde, dit dat zus zo, mijn pronouns zijn zhe zher". Totale onzinnigheid. Ze willen gewoon een label plakken op hun persoonlijkheid terwijl dat totaal niet nodig is en alleen tot problemen leidt. Er zijn betrekkelijk mannelijke vrouwen en omgekeerd en daar is verder niets speciaals aan, dat is gewoon hun persoonlijkheid en ze blijven gewoon hun eigen sekse ipv een nieuw bedacht gender... Je bent man of vrouw, en dat is het.
    1
  2044.  @landornan  Als wij een duizenden jaren oude traditie die we lange tijd niet hebben uitgevoerd weer beginnen te beoefenen in 1990, is de traditie dan duizenden jaren oud of 29? Het antwoord is duizenden. De paasvuren e.d. in het Oosten zijn een voorbeeld van vreugdevuren die ononderbroken al (waarschijnlijk) duizenden jaren worden gedaan. Vreugdevuren zijn onderdeel van de Europese cultuur en kunnen herleid worden naar voor-christelijke tijden. Ook als ik vandaag besluit in mijn regio weer jaarlijks een vreugdevuur aan te steken moet dat worden gezien in de context van die oudere cultuur. Die twee staan namelijk niet los van elkaar.
    1
  2045. ​ @floydlooney6837  I.e. feudalism is a form of ancapistan according to you as long as the royals legally own the land their serfs work on based on a voluntary contract to provide the fruits of their labour in exchange for a right to live/work on the land. At this point are you not making a mockery of the "anarchist" principles of ancapitalism? And what once this relationship has become the norm and serfs only get to choose which landowner they get to serve? No coercion because you get to choose your lord by moving? That is not anarchism but quite literally feudalism.
    1
  2046.  @Official_Happy_  Not only that, but to think the UK would support ANY aggressor attacking free western democracies that are also its allies is simply insane. Obviously the UK would fight against the US in this scenario. I'm deeply surprised people even consider that the UK might join the US at all. That's completely out of the question.
    1
  2047.  @glendepoorter1493  Krampus hoort bij Sinterklaas. Hij is de Duitse versie van onze Zwarte Piet. Sterker nog, mogelijk hadden wij in NL ook Krampus, voordat Zwarte Piet hem verving
    1
  2048. A-10s get put to shame by any kind of AA system, they only work when you destroyed all AA in advance. And those boats have AA on board. A-10s stand no chance whatsoever, it'd be an incredibly dumb move
    1
  2049.  @MrC00kieM0nst3r  De plaats van de vrouw in het Europa van de jaren 50 was grotendeels beïnvloed door het Christendom en de bijbel. Daar staan vergelijkbare passages in over vrouwen als in de koran. Het was geloof dat ons ertoe heeft bewogen om vrouwen te onderdrukken. Dit is hetzelfde als vrouwen forceren om henzelf te bedekken. Het is geen "keuze", het is sociale en vooral ook religieuze druk. Als je religie je voorschrijft iets te doen en je doet het, is het niet een échte keuze. Je kiest ergens voor als je volkomen vrij bent het niet te doen en er geen druk is. Niet vanuit je sociale omgeving noch vanuit de religie die je volgt. Het dragen van bedekking is net zo vrijwillig als huisvrouw zijn in de jaren 50. Beiden religieus geïnspireerd, beiden door sociale druk in stand gehouden. Net als de feministen in de jaren 60 zal iemand die sociale en religieuze druk moeten doorbreken voor bedekking van vrouwen. Je moet kritisch kunnen kijken naar wat je doet, zonder invloed van buitenaf, en op basis van wat je echt wil besluiten wat je gaat doen. Iets doen omdat je religie het voorschrijft is geen vrijwillige keuze, iets doen omdat iedereen om je heen het ook doet en van je verwacht dat jij dat uiteindelijk ook zult doen is geen vrijwillige keuze.
    1
  2050. +Bert We slowed it down with the deal, so use this time to devise a plan to stop it instead of speeding it up!
    1
  2051. +Dylan Walsh The EU? What the hell are you on about? France claimed it had proof of a chemical attack and then convinced the UK and US to join in. What does the EU even have to do with this? Are you one of those idiot Americans who think the EU is a country?
    1
  2052. Uit respect moeten we meedoen en samen met de mannen hun vrouwen slaan
    1
  2053. What the hell...
    1
  2054. +The Slim Reaper Niet de schuld van de NOS dat alles wat niet voorgekauwde rechtse onzin is als "vooringenomen propaganda" wordt weggezet door mensen als jij. Er bestaat linkse propaganda (bijv. CNN), maar er bestaan ook neutrale nieuwszenders die ten minste proberen het nieuws ongekleurd te brengen. En ja, dat betekent dat jij als kijker geen kant en klare mening krijgt voorgeschoteld en je eigen oordeel zult moeten vellen. Leer het verschil tussen propaganda (echt een linkse/rechtse mening doordrukken, zie CNN of Fox news) en meer neutrale zenders. Zenders kunnen nooit 100% neutraal zijn (laten we eerlijk zijn, journalisten bij zenders als NOS en BBC over het algemeen zijn wat aan de linkse kant, wat doorschemert in de reportages en nieuwspresentatie), maar toch.
    1
  2055. ​ @C_R_O_M________  So you want to live under the tyranny of corporations then? Doesn't sound like real anarchism.
    1
  2056. @Manannan anam Yeah that's what it is in practice. I was talking about the theory of multiculturalism, which even if it works perfectly is also a very bad thing because it turns every country into the same melting pot and thus kills cultures. What makes multiculturalism even worse is that it doesn't even work and indeed we see subcultures constantly clashing.
    1
  2057.  Amuro Ray  You don't understand the difference between natural multiculturalism (for example ancient Rome, where people from all over the world were drawn to do business) and ideologically forced multiculturalism. The first will always exist and isn't a bad thing. The second is terrible and involves mass immigration and the subversion of your culture, based on the idea that the original culture must make place for foreign cultures to exist besides it on an equal grounds.
    1
  2058.  Amuro Ray  No, most people BY FAR come from safe countries. This is happening because our governments actively let them in and in some cases even actively brought them in. But you're right about one thing; I and other citizens never had a say in this practice. Becoming a multicultural country was an ideological choice and continuing the mass migration is an ideological choice too. Refugees rarely come and when they come they rarely outnumber the ones that are let in/brought here by the government. Refugees are not and never were the problem.
    1
  2059. Verwarde man met geweer.
    1
  2060. Populism is saying what the people want without being able to deliver it. Populism is the ultimate way for people to lose confidence in democracy. Not all populists are bad, but the Italian ones are horrible. They want to lower taxes, lower retirement age, introduce a minimum wage, etc. etc. It's all money that Italy does not have . It can even lead to a crisis
    1
  2061.  @Melnek1  That may be the case, yes. I know a lot returned to the Netherlands, but I'm unsure about South Africa. By far the most returned to the Netherlands, but they've also gone to Australia, America and South Africa. Though I do not have exact numbers for those.
    1
  2062.  @mniskin  In an economic system in which we deliberately deny people basic necessities, we weaponise the threat of starvation to force them into working under the conditions of our system. The choice to not participate does not exist. If all land already is owned, you are denied access to the means of freely cultivating food for yourself. You are forced to acquire food by exchanging something for it to someone who owns the land and sets the conditions under which you can acquire your basic needs. It always is coercive. The only non-coercive system might be one in which ownership rights do not exist. Ownership rights inherently require coercion to protect (i.e. removing someone from an empty house that is owned by you but not actually used by you). Ownership rights can also be abused by owning many things you do not actively use and dictating conditions under which others may acquire/use your unused goods/amenities. If these are basic needs of others, they can even be used to exert serious power over have-nots that need something you have ownership over. That inherently also is coercion.
    1
  2063.  @fazole  You can't in a system in which it is possible for random people with capital to buy land they will never use themselves, only as a means to dictate to those that will work the land under which conditions they are allowed access to that land. As long as ownership rights are protected (which inherently requires coercion anyway), you cannot assume that there will be no coercion in the economy
    1
  2064.  @snex000  If I weaponise them to force you to do something, yes they are. I.e. needing food is not coercion, but someone buying up all land so that you cannot produce your own food and forcing you to perform certain tasks in order to gain access to food can be coercion by the monopolist. It depends how much control one or a few owners have over resources. Control over resources places individuals in positions of power over others. Especially when their control is only based on the ownership they have on paper, which is very different from an individual who farms land asking you compensation for the fruits of their labour.
    1
  2065.  @dickcheesehead9714  Ik geloof in een land met gelijke kansen waar iedereen kan kiezen wat hij of zij wil gaan doen en daarbij puur en alleen op hun kwaliteiten worden beoordeeld. Als er ongelijke kansen zijn, vind ik dat een probleem. Maar als er simpelweg meer vrouwen of mannen in een positie zitten dan vice versa dan zie ik geen probleem. Ik wil niet een soort van 50/50 arbitraire verdeling van alle baantjes. Dat is nergens op gebaseerd. Ja er zijn biologische verschillen tussen man en vrouw, waardoor het meestal de vrouw is die kiest op parttime te werken (gemiddeld meer affiniteit met en interesse in kinderen), waardoor er uiteindelijk minder vrouwen zijn die een echte carrière maken (kan niet als je er niet eens voltijd bent). Als vrouwen daar expliciet zelf voor kiezen, dan is er geen probleem. We moeten niet een samenleving die vrouwen min of meer forceert huisvrouw te zijn inruilen voor een samenleving die helemaal de andere kant op gaat en vrouwen juist meegeeft dat ze móéten werken. Het gaat om die vrije keuze. Partijen als D66 zien een 50/50 verdeling van man/vrouw in de top als een doel op zich. Dat is arbitrair (totaal geen reden om dat te doen, anders dan voor de show kunnen roepen "kijk eens hoe geëmancipeerd wij zijn") en discrimineert tegen mannen. Vrouwen en mannen zijn nu eenmaal in andere dingen geïnteresseerd. De meeste rechters zijn tegenwoordig vrouw en ik als rechtenstudent merk dat ik vooral vrouwelijke studenten om me heen heb. In een technische universiteit als Delft zie je juist voornamelijk mannen. Dat is niet "ongelijk", dat is het natuurlijke resultaat van vrije keuze. Hetzelfde geldt voor de keuze deeltijd te werken of voltijd, of zelfs om helemaal niet te werken.
    1
  2066. I agree, facebook is a cancer on modern society. Good for nothing, filled with complete nonsense and hatred...
    1
  2067. Geluk en een vredig bestaan is niet standaard. Dat is het grote probleem. Wij hebben hier prachtige landen opgebouwd die de uitzondering op de regel zijn. En wat wij hier hebben moeten we beschermen. Dat betekent niet dat wij absoluut geen vluchtelingen/migranten kunnen opnemen, maar wel dat we niet zomaar een grote stroom als deze kunnen toelaten. Wat wij hier hebben is heel bijzonder en dient beschermd te worden. Wat wij wel kunnen doen is andere landen helpen om ook zo ontwikkeld als ons te geraken. Maar iedereen hierheen halen doet schade aan ons eigen geluk en onze eigen vrede. De huidige vluchtelingen die we al hebben kosten ons gezamenlijk meer dan een miljard. Dat is geld dat bijvoorbeeld naar de zorg had gekund waar het hard nodig is, of de politie die ondercapaciteit heeft, of het onderwijs waar een crisis heerst. Alles wat wij doen voor migranten, gaat ten koste van wat wij hier hebben. Ons belastinggeld, wat ons geluk en onze vrede in stand houd en verbetert, gaat daaraan op. Wat we nu doen kunnen we makkelijk veroorloven en we kunnen zeker een miljard opzij schuiven voor vluchtelingen die het hard nodig hebben, maar we kunnen wat we doen ook weer niet dermate uit de hand laten lopen dat onze eigen samenleving serieus wordt aangetast door onze goedgevigheid. Er wordt soms gedaan alsof wat wij hier hebben een gegeven is en geheel niet bijzonder, maar dat is het wel. En ja, het kan ook uiteen klappen zonder goed beleid. Daarom is het zeer belangrijk om een goede balans te vinden tussen wat wij willen doen voor vluchtelingen en wat wij kunnen missen qua geld/aandacht voor onze eigen samenleving. Het kan niet allebei en dat is het probleem.
    1
  2068. +Tom Lloyd "A protest isn't banned in the UK, therefore the president of the US can meddle in your affairs". You sound clueless there...
    1
  2069. I had no idea the film was so realistic! It was a favourite of my grandfather and through him it became one of my favourites too, but knowing the lengths to which they went to deliver a realistic film makes me even more excited for A Bridge Too Far. Such a wonderful film
    1
  2070. Je weet dat alles wat wij hier hebben (incl. "extreem" rechts) radicaal links is vergeleken met de Democratische partij in de VS?
    1
  2071. Nu weet ik hoe onze voorvaderen zich gevoeld moeten hebben toen hun landgenoten zich bekeerden tot het christendom en hun eigen cultuur verraadden voor een of ander boek uit het midden oosten. Wat een walgelijk gevoel. En nu hebben we woestijnreligie 2.0. Elke keer als ik een Europese bekeerling zie, gelukkig zeldzaam, dan krijg ik kotsneigingen. Het is werkelijk walgelijk. Daar moet je zo zwak van geest voor zijn om voor te vallen.
    1
  2072. It started in the US, where the past of racism and native genocide created this idea that the US really is (or should be) a country without any specific culture that is a melting pot immigrant country where all cultures and ethnicities can coexist on equal grounds. And Social Justice is the idea that these cultures and ethnicities should have equal influence over the country. This idea was copy-pasted onto Europe, but it doesn't work at all in Europe. We still have our native populations and dominant native culture, meaning that to implement these ideas the existence of a dominant native culture first has to be denied to make make for other cultures to live alongside it on equal grounds. What they want is to turn Europe into a cultureless melting pot wherein there is no such thing as a dominant native culture; that culture would just be a culture among many others, no more or less important than the others. This means that the native European culture must make massive concessions in favour of foreign cultures and to a large degree must forfeit its position as dominant culture within our countries. Only then can we be a multicultural melting pot like the USA. They are challenging the dominance of our native cultures.
    1
  2073. In this case you clearly see the traits of a psychopath in him
    1
  2074. I have this distinct feeling that they dislike Trump's decision
    1
  2075. Voor die rotzooi in Oekraïne waren we nog bondgenoten met Rusland... Toen kwam de koning nog even naar Poetin om samen wat vodka te drinken en te lachen, nog maar een paar jaar geleden. Ik vind dat geroep over Rusland als vijand maar overdreven. We moeten de huidige situatie oplossen zodat we weer bevriend worden met Rusland. Goed voor de economie en strategisch ook goed. Trump wil gewoon Amerikaans gas en olie verkopen voor een hogere prijs...
    1
  2076. +Why did Breivik kill Open Border people? Mohammed (may the soil lie light upon his rotting corpse) was a mentally depraved maniac, so it'd only be fitting for him to show such extreme delay in his personal development. When he married that 9 year old I suppose he was only getting together with someone of the same mental age.
    1
  2077.  @ayushkumar-bg1xf  You really think the US has any control over the British channel or the EU-UK tunnel? They;re not in a position to starve the UK as long as the EU is there
    1
  2078. Nee, de Schotten zijn bij het vorige referendum voorgelogen. De EU werd als dé reden aangehaald om te blijven. Dit is niet een kwestie van één verkiezing die even niet goed valt, dit is een veel langer spelend politiek probleem en de Schotten hebben alle reden dit te willen. Onafhankelijkheid is al heel lang een heikel punt in Schotland en Brexit doet de emmer overlopen. Brexit is helemaal niet de hoofdreden dat ze onafhankelijk willen worden, het is slechts de laatste druppel.
    1
  2079. Indirecte zelfdoding
    1
  2080. There is no 'far left' of America. The corporate democrats are still significantly to the right of even nationalist/populist parties in Europe.
    1
  2081. +jwang604 You're correct. Constitutional rights are almost never absolute. Rights don't just go one way, they go both ways. I have certain rights but only to the point where I start invading others' rights. For example, I have the freedom of movement to go wherever I want, but this freedom stops when I want to enter someone's house. It's the same for freedom of speech; I can say anything I want, until the point where my words seriously impact others (threat of violence, slander, etc.) or to the point where my words are unnecessary in a democratic society and damaging to it (hate speech and incitement of violence; it creates the risk of a split and unrest in society and threatens public order and even the safety of others). Only consitutional rights like the abolition of torture is absolute, but to Americans even that one has plenty of exceptions :)
    1
  2082. +Tony the french Trouble Who the hell cares what their religion is? The Middle Eastern stream of migrants has been stopped by the EU some years ago. It dried up with the Turkey deal. What we have left now is the Libyan stream with Africans. They are Christians.... but I don't care. They're illegal migrants coming here for economic benefits, mostly. The EU must deal with the African stream like they dealt with the Syrian stream. Unfortunately they've been slow... but at least Italy has started a new discussion about this and I'm certain we will get a solution in the end. You call European leaders "veggies" without spines, but the EU has stopped the biggest migrant stream within months of it starting. That is what I call resolve and effective policy, yes with a spine. We have so far made a deal with the Libyan coast guard and gave them some ships to keep the African stream down, but that deal wasn't completely succesful. Now we are working on another solution. What have the Americans done? So far, just about nothing . Do you call that having a spine? Ripping families apart by forcefully removing children from their parents upon getting caught in the US is having a spine? It's the ultimate example of not having one. I want a leader that solves issues, not one that desperately builds walls that will never actually stop migrants or desperately resorts to punishing migrants by taking away their children. Americans have let migrants cross freely for literal decades and to this day do not have a solution. Instead they resort to breaking apart families and yelling at Europe.
    1
  2083.  @robertneven7563  Hoe het ook zij, de wolf is goed voor de natuur in Nederland. Een echte aanwinst voor het ecosysteem. De natuur is geen speelpark waar wij mild gevaarlijke dieren verwijderen vanwege mogelijke misstanden, en al helemaal niet om het eigendom van boeren te beschermen. Ik vind dat dit soort ingrepen in de natuur zeer ongepast is. Als de wolf komt, dan komt hij. En ondanks mogelijke gevaren ben ik daar blij mee. Ik wil geen nepnatuur waarin wij alle dieren die wij liever niet willen gewoon afschieten. Moet je je eens voorstellen hoe dat zou zijn als ze dat hadden gedaan op al die plekken waar je bent geweest. Vreselijk. De natuur is nu eenmaal geen veilig wandelpark dat slechts bestaat om ons mensen plezier te bieden, ook dieren als de wolf horen erbij.
    1
  2084.  @robertneven7563  Jij bent degene die tegen de wolf is en een kunstmatige natuur wil. Wel in het buitenland de echte natuur opzoeken maar als Nederland de wolf krijgt ho maar da's te eng. Beetje hypocriet. En afschieten mag als dat nodig is voor het ecosysteem. Volgens mij schieten we jaarlijks 75% van de hertenpopulatie af, dus er speelt zich elk jaar weer een Oostvaardersplassen af. Waarom? Omdat ze geen natuurlijke vijand hebben, dus moeten wij mensen die rol maar weer vervullen. Afschieten om de populatie klein te houden ben ik voor, maar een dier compleet verwijderen uit de natuur vind ik walgelijk.
    1
  2085. So is Christianity, the only difference is that that alien ideology succesfully invaded Europe in the past and Islam has only started the invasion
    1
  2086. Verlichte islam kan. Als moslims grote delen van hun geloof negeren. Het christendom was ooit net zo kut als de islam vandaag, maar door de verlichting en renaissance belijden christenen vandaag een sterk geëuropeaniseerde versie van het christendom die weinig meer met het origineel te maken heeft. Maar ik moet wel zeggen dat de bijbel veel minder erg is dan de koran en dat het christendom in zijn geheel veel minder politiek ingesteld is dan de islam met sharia wetten e.d. Niettemin, als je kijkt naar de eerste christenen die Europa binnenkwamen en wat ze deden toen ze de macht overnamen... bijna letterlijk ISIS. Beelden slopen, boeken verbranden, dissidenten ombrengen, Europese tempels slopen en kerken in hun plaats bouwen, scholen voor filosofie sluiten, etc. etc. en als de kers op de taart: het belijden van heidense geloven verbieden op straffe van de dood en verschillende kruistochten lanceren om andere Europeanen ook met geweld te converteren. Wat het christendom vandaag is, komt doordat wij als Europeanen dat geloof compleet hebben veranderd.
    1
  2087.  @Enwabi  Zoals ik zei; de Bijbel is veel beter dan de Koran en ik zal dat uitbreiden door te zeggen dat Jezus oneindig veel beter is als religieus voorbeeld dan Mohammed. Maar het is niet te ontkennen hoe vreselijk het christendom was toen het naar Europa kwam en hoe gewelddadig en zelfs genocidaal men te werk ging om dat geloof te verspreiden. Het christendom was VRESELIJK voor de Renaissance en Verlichting. Werkelijk vreselijk. 1. Europa was slechts een schaduw van wat het was in de Klassieke tijd onder het christendom; de vroege christenen hebben Klassiek Europa totaal afgebroken. Zoals ik eerder zei ging dat gepaard met het massaal vernietigen van beelden en andere kunst, het sluiten van filosofiescholen, het vermoorden van filosofen en andere dissidenten (incl. christenen met andere interpretaties), het slopen van Europese architectuur en veel meer. Vergelijk eens kunst uit de vroege Middeleeuwen met kunst uit de late Oudheid. Het schaamrood staat je op de wangen als je ziet hoezeer men de Europese cultuur had vernietigd met de komst van het christendom. Die zwakte is waarom wij überhaupt moesten vrezen voor de moslims; zij hadden ons wetenschappelijk en cultureel INGEHAALD door de afbreuk van het Klassieke Europa. Dat is de harde waarheid. Vroege christenen waren net zo erg als IS-fanaten als je hun gedrag bestudeert. 2. Ik beoordeel een geloof op wat het met mensen doet. Ik ben het met je eens dat er niets mis is met Jezus, maar wat het christendom heeft gedaan met haar volgelingen in die tijd is afgrijselijk. Dat moet niet genegeerd worden. Net zo min dat als ISIS dingen doet die nóg erger zijn dan wat Mohammed deed, dat alsnog moet worden gezien als een gevolg van hun geloof. Bijvoorbeeld de praktijk dat terroristen zichzelf opblazen is redelijk nieuw en niet afgeleid van het voorbeeld van Mohammed, maar de islam is wel degelijk de oorzaak van dat gedrag. 3. Klopt helemaal.
    1
  2088.  @Enwabi  1. Ik heb het over de Oudheid, niet de Verlichting. Toen Europa nog "heidens" was en floreerde onder de klassieke cultuur vernietigden christenen kunst, vermoordden ze heidense filosofen e.d., sloten ze ook filosofiescholen en verbrandden ze boeken. Zo is het christendom de dominante religie in Europa geworden; met bruut geweld. 2. Dus de GEHELE christelijke stroming in Europa, van begin tot aan de Verlichting waren gewoon neppe christenen? Is dat nu serieus wat je beweert? Want tot de Verlichting was het christendom en nagenoeg al haar volgers in Europa vreselijk onderdrukkend, onverdraagzaam en bijzonder gewelddadig. Dit is niet veranderd tot aan de culturele heropleving/omwenteling van de Renaissance en Verlichting. En nogmaals; jij vindt dus ook dat islamitische terroristen die zichzelf opblazen niet de schuld van de islam is, omdat de stichter van de islam dat niet deed? Want dan moet je wel consequent zijn.... ik vind dat als iemand iets doet vanwege zijn/haar geloof, die gedraging aan dat geloof is toe te rekenen ongeacht of die gedraging letterlijk staat voorgeschreven in het geschrift. Dat dat geloof op zo'n gewelddadige manier KAN worden geïnterpreteerd betekent an sich al dat het een geloof is met serieuze mankementen. 3. En om nog even terug te gaan naar wat je zei bij punt 1; de filosofen en geleerden die onderdeel waren van de Verlichting waren misschien "christelijk", maar wat ze deden en waar ze voor stonden was in DIRECTE oppositie van het christendom. De Renaissance, waarin klassieke en heidense cultuur, mentaliteit, architectuur en veel meer weer tot leven werd gebracht, staat in directe oppositie van het christendom. De Verlichting, waarin de logica en redelijkheid boven alles stond en dus ook het geloof (wat in de praktijk betekende; ook na de Renaissance moest het christendom wéér aan macht/invloed inboeten), stond in directe oppositie van het christendom. De Renaissance en Verlichting waren bewegingen die in hun kern anti-christelijk waren en de macht van de kerk/het geloof inperkten. Of actoren binnen die bewegingen zelf in god geloofden of niet is totaal irrelevant; ze waren anti-christelijk bezig door de heidense/klassieke cultuur van Europa weer te doen opbloeien en door het geloof opzij te schuiven voor de redelijkheid en wetenschap.
    1
  2089.  @Enwabi  1. Dit is pure ontkenning van de geschiedenis. Zodra de christenen de macht kregen in het Romeinse rijk begon men massaal kunst te vernietigen, boeken te verbranden, tempels te vernietigen om kerken erbovenop te bouwen en werd het belijden van de originele religie van Europa verboden op straffe van de DOOD. En er werden kruistochten gelanceerd om dit ook met de Europeanen in het noorden en oosten te doen, die met geweld werden bekeerd (of onthoofd). Dit zijn feiten. En dat heidenen allemaal kinderen zouden opofferen en sexorgies hielden is ronduit lachwekkend. Van de Romeinen en Grieken is bekend dat ze mensenoffers verachtten. En waar haal je in godsnaam het idee van sexorgies vandaan? 2. Ben je nu echt zo dom om te zeggen dat het terugbrengen van de KLASSIEKE HEIDENSE CULTUUR van Europa (heidense kunst, heidense architectuur, ook werden weer heidense goden afgebeeld in kunst e.d.) pro-christelijk was? Wat de christenen wilden was het vernietigen van de "duivelse" heidense cultuur van Europa (hetgeen ze best goed deden tot aan de renaissance) om deze te verplaatsen met het christendom. Waar denk je dat de beeldenstorm over ging? Puristen onder de christenen vonden dat we in Europa weer te veel heidense kunst e.d. hadden, dat de katholieke kerk te veel heidense kenmerken had opgenomen. Een heropleving van klassiek Europese waarden en normen en kunst/architectuur staat in directe oppositie van christelijke waarden en normen en kunst/architectuur. Simpel toch? Wil je het christendom zo puur mogelijk houden, zonder heidense invloeden, dan moet je tegen de renaissance zijn. En wil je de positie van het christendom als leidende/centrale macht binnen onze samenleving behouden, dan moet je tegen de verlichting zijn. 3. Geweld kun je wel terugvinden in de islam, maar ik heb het over het heel specifieke voorval van zelfmoord terroristen. Waar staat in de koran dat je jezelf moet opblazen? Nergens. Sterker nog, er staat volgens mij in dat zelfmoord plegen een zonde is. Maar dat betekent niet dat moslimterroristen opeens niets met de islam te maken hebben; hun gedrag vloeit voort uit hun eigen interpretatie van het geloof en dat betekent dat dat geloof wel degelijk iets te maken heeft met die zelfmoordacties. Dat geldt ook voor die vreselijke christenen van toen. Volgden die de lessen van Jezus? Nauwelijks, maar hun geloof was wel de drijfveer van hun geweld, dus houd ik dat geloof verantwoordelijk voor wat haar volgelingen doen. Als een geloof KAN dienen als drijfveer voor geweld, is er iets mis met dat geloof. Punt. En er WAS ook iets mis met het christendom... tot de verlichting.
    1
  2090.  @Enwabi  Dit gaat niet om hooligans van Ajax, maar de SPELERS van Ajax. Als heel de christelijke beweging totaal verrot is dan is er geen onderscheid meer te maken tussen de goede en slechte christenen. De conclusie waar jij op uit zou moeten komen met jouw redenatie is dat het christendom niet eens bestond tot aan de renaissance en verlichting, omdat het daarvoor allemaal "hooligans" waren. Ooit gehoord van de "no true scotsman" drogredenering? Die gebruiken moslims ook altijd om hun "hooligans" goed te praten. Nee, als geweld zo wijdverspreid is en zo onderdeel is van de beweging dan is die beweging zélf verantwoordelijk. Dan gaat het niet om een paar hooligans aan de zijlijn, maar om de spelers zelf die verrot zijn geraakt. Dit is anders van de voorbeelden die jij noemt omdat de nazi's e.d. niet deden wat ze deden uit naam van atheïsme; zij deden het uit naam van hun ideologie. Net zoals christenen en moslims geweld gebruikten (of voor de moslims; gebruiken) in naam van hun ideologie. Dat iemand atheist/christen/etc. is, betekent niet dat alles wat die persoon doet voortvloeit uit dat geloof. Een goed voorbeeld zijn de christenen die geheel tegen de wil van de kerk in onderdeel waren van een beweging die de heidense kunst weer deden opleven. Dat waren christenen die ipv christelijke taferelen te schilderen en christelijke teksten te schrijven terug gingen naar het schilderen van heidense goden en teksten met heidens karakter en zich lieten inspireren door heidense architectuur- en kunsttechnieken. De wereld is niet zo eendimensionaal als jij hem presenteert. En nogmaals; waar denk jij dat de beeldenstorm over ging? Puristen onder christenen vonden dat wij weer te heidens waren geworden. Net als de christenen in de Oudheid dachten zei dat Europese kunst op zichzelf al afgoderij/duivels was en dat moest allemaal kapot. Net als hoe ISIS al die oude beelden kapot maakte. Fundamentalistische christenen zijn hetzelfde. Jij weet dit waarschijnlijk niet want in jouw simpele hoofd is het christendom het grote goed en het heidendom duivels of zo, maar het overgrote deel van de kunst uit de Oudheid is vernietigd. De beelden die wij nu in musea kunnen zien zijn niet de beste stukken, niet de mooiste, maar de stukken die de christenen hebben OVERLEEFD. Vaak gaat het om beelden die zijn verstopt en eeuwen later pas weer zijn gevonden, anders waren ook die beelden vernietigd door fanatieke christenen. Het christendom van vandaag is niet meer het fundamentalistische christendom van toen, en dat hebben wij te danken aan de renaissance van klassiek Europese waarden, normen en cultuur en de verlichting die wetenschap en humanisme boven geloof plaatste. Je weet wat christenen zelfs met elkaar deden in brute religieuze oorlogen en slachterijen tussen protestanten en katholieken, massale vernietiging van kunst in de beeldenstorm, maar je ontkent wat ze met de voor-christelijke Europeanen hebben gedaan en met de klassieke kunst. Geschiedontkenner. Er waren zelfs hele kruistochten om Europeanen te bekeren met geweld. Onze voorouders moesten óf bekeren óf werden onthoofd. Zie hier een voorbeeld van zo'n kruistocht: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Crusades Wat betreft zelfmoord en de islam; "Don't kill yourself. No doubt Allah (swt) is merciful and anyone who does so, will be pushed in fire. And it is easy for Allah (swt)." (Nisa: 4:29, 4:30) "Whoever kills himself with an iron weapon, he will be tortured in hell with the same weapon". (Hadith nr 1) "Whoever strangles himself with a rope, he will keep on strangling himself until being burnt in hell. And he who killed himself with a spear, he will keep on being killed by spear until he is sent to hell." (Hadith nr 2) Dit wordt in meerdere teksten herhaald. Dus... zelfmoordterroristen zijn geen moslims? Ik denk van wel... iedereen die uit naam van een geloof iets doet, ongeacht of dit tegen de theorie van dat geloof in gaat of niet, draagt slechts zijn eigen interpretatie van dat geloof uit. En dat kan dat geloof worden aangerekend.
    1
  2091. Ok I really want to see this one haha
    1
  2092.  @tinekedejong2226  Meteen terug en straffen kan niet altijd. Er zijn landen die niet mee willen werken en het kost tijd om het mogelijk te maken de migranten wél terug te kunnen sturen. In de tussentijd moeten we ze van de straat houden en zodra het kan linea recta weg sturen. Gevangenhouding is een goede manier om migranten over te halen zelf weg te gaan (als migranten zelf weg willen kan dat sws ongeacht wat het ontvangende land wil) of ze van de straat te houden totdat wij ze zelf kunnen uitzetten.
    1
  2093.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Vind ik ook, helemaal mee eens. We zijn veel te laks met die landen terwijl zij ons gewoon af zitten te persen. En wij maar hopen op een diplomatieke oplossing terwijl die landen dit willens en wetens als drukmiddel gebruiken. Inderdaad maar gewoon ontwikkelingshulp dreigen in te korten en invoerbelasting. Natuurlijk draagt dat het risico met zich mee dat die landen dan nog onstabieler worden, wat op vele manieren ook weer slecht voor ons is, maar op een gegeven moment is het klaar. We kunnen dit niet toelaten, zo lijken we een stel zwakkelingen en daar zullen meer landen gebruik van gaan maken als het zo door gaat. We hebben de diplomatieke en economische macht om die landen helemaal kapot te maken en toch hebben ze het lef ons af te persen, dat zegt heel veel over onze politici. Zo geobsedeerd met stabiliteit en diplomatie dat ze liever over zichzelf heen laten lopen dan die stabiliteit in gevaar brengen. Dat werkt contra-productief want soms moet je juist met instabiliteit kunnen dreigen om de stabiliteit te beschermen. Die landen moeten bang zijn om niet zoals ieder land betaamt hun eigen onderdanen terug te nemen ipv ze hier te droppen. En totdat ze bang zijn voor de repercussies zal dit doorgaan.
    1
  2094. IT'S AN ASIAN PLOT TO MAKE THEMSELVES SEEM SUPERIOR
    1
  2095. +AWResistance Sure. Because all those people in the recent terror attacks in the US were capable of protecting themselves, right? And on top of that, I believe more people actually died of terror attacks in the US than in the UK. You have a crooked view of what "liberty" is. It encompasses many more things than gun ownership. Firstly it should be known that in Europe, demand for guns is extremely low in the first place and only people who have an actual use for them (farmers, hunters, etc.) tend to own them. Gun enthusiasts are very rare here. Secondly, liberty also includes proper public safety, so you have the freedom to go where you please without being in danger. Widespread gun ownership diminishes public safety and therefore also liberty, but it also adds to liberty for obvious reasons. I'd actually argue that we have more liberty here, because if you really want to you can own guns (with background checks, etc., much more difficult than attaining a gun in the US) but at the same time gun crime is drastically lower, which both respects the liberty to own a gun if you so desire but at the same time upholds public safety. We chose for the middle ground between gun ownership and public safety, you chose for the extreme of absolute gun ownership.
    1
  2096. +Robert Ayala Rosales Congratulations, I'm sure you are a very intelligent person! Bye now...
    1
  2097.  @paulhan1615  We import people from abroad because we need cheap labour to bolster our economy. But we ignore the serious cultural effects of bad integration et al. It is tearing our societies apart, just for money. I say it's not worth it.
    1
  2098.  @Circee11  In the year 98 Roman historian Tacitus described how Germanic people painted themselves black as part of a tradition that is extremely similar to Sinterklaas of today. And all Germanic countries today have their own version of it. In the Netherlands we have Sinterklaas and black pete. In France it is Saint Nicholas and Père Fouettard. In Germany it is Saint Nicholas and Krampus. You are calling a 2000+ year old tradition racist. The origins of black pete is so old that our ancestors had never even seen an African in their entire life. Bit difficult to be racist back then. The origins is the yule festival of the Wild Hunt, in which Odin soars the skies followed by an army of black figures. Black pete is the modern and christianised version of that ancient tradition and you see similar cultural festivals all over Europe in which the black figure is slightly different.
    1
  2099. Je kan ook omgang totaal verbieden omdat het gestoord is om kinderen bloot te stellen aan invloed van IS-fanaten. Nul contact.
    1
  2100.  @RedbadvanRijn-ft3vv  Ja als je nul contact wil tussen IS-fanaten en hun kinderen, dan valt ook de enige reden weg om ze überhaupt hierheen te halen (gezinsvereniging). Bovendien betwijfel ik of gezinshereniging van toepassing is op deze mensen, het is niet ondenkbaar dat een uitzondering voor terroristen door de beugel kan bij de rechter. Anders zou de rechtbank ook niet hebben gezegd dat we de moeders niet terug hoeven halen.
    1
  2101.  @henkjurrien4954  Dank voor de film, zeer interessant. Helaas zijn onze politici te dom en kortzichtig om zo over ons land na te denken. Ze zijn zo kortzichtig dat ze beleid voeren waarmee 100.000 mensen per jaar naar Nederland worden gehaald en vervolgens verrast worden door een huizencrisis. Terwijl de bevolkingsgroei gewoon bekende cijfers zijn en aldus kan worden voorspeld hoeveel huizen we nodig hebben. Ons land wordt zeer slecht bestuurd terwijl kundige oplossingen voor al onze problemen gewoon mogelijk zijn. Maar kundigheid is te ingewikkeld voor politici.
    1
  2102. +luck aerts Dat zijn van die hachelijke NGO's, niet de EU
    1
  2103.  @lennipulkkinen6446  True, not all of us. But unfortunately most do, especially in western Europe.
    1
  2104. ​ @hotteststuff6009 That's pretty stupid, tbh
    1
  2105.  @Pining_for_the_fjords  There is a clear agenda from the BBC however. The truth about multiculturalism is that there are many issues with it. There are both serious issues and success stories like this one. But the BBC will not show these issues. Instead they will show a handful of success stories in an attempt to shape our opinions about open borders. They frame it as an exclusively positive thing, while it is definitely not.
    1
  2106. Honestly, I think this fits in the modern dystopia they're trying to create. It's part of the satire of the modern world
    1
  2107. From Russia with a deadly nerve agent ))))
    1
  2108. Russia and the EU also would be able to defend just fine.
    1
  2109. Grappig. Ze voelen zich veilig in een bubbel van hoge criminaliteit, schooluitval, etc. Dat begrijp ik niet echt. Kennelijk weegt omringd worden door je eigen cultuur zwaarder dan wonen in een veilige buurt. En dan maar "wij zijn Zweden" zeggen, terwijl ze bewust voor een notoire probleemwijk kiezen om de Zweedse cultuur te ontwijken.
    1
  2110. +fredo1070 Which team is winning? Al Qaida? ISIS? Man the Ramadan Bombathon is always so exciting
    1
  2111.  @executionsquad3926  Nee, het verschil is dat wij helemaal geen immigratieland zijn. In de VS werkt het omdat iedereen van ergens anders kwam en op gelijke voet samen iets nieuws opbouwden. Dat werkt niet in een land waar de inheemse bevolking anderen uitnodigt, want dat betekent dat je óf de nieuwe migranten effectief moet kunnen integreren in de reeds bestaande cultuur, óf je moet de bestaande cultuur afbreken en samen iets nieuws bouwen. Het eerste lukt niet goed op dit moment (er is nog hoop, dat wel) en de tweede is culturele genocide. Nederland is niet de VS, dus multiculturalisme werkt hier bij lange na niet zo goed als daar. Dat geldt ook voor andere Europese landen die niet zo dichtbevolkt zijn.
    1
  2112.  @executionsquad3926  Als we het Romeinse model volgen dat zouden alle Nederlanders burgerschap hebben en de meeste allochtonen tweederangs burger zijn. Bovendien zit er een belangrijk verschil tussen een natuurlijk vormend multiculturalisme omdat een grote stad kooplui van over heel de wereld/andere delen van het Rijk aantrekt en een door mensen gevormd multiculturalisme waarbij we massaal mensen importeren vanuit de ideologische overtuiging dat "diversiteit kracht is". Ook Nederland zelf was in de Gouden Eeuw al redelijk multiculti omdat wij zo belangrijk waren in de handel. Dat heeft een natuurlijke aanzuiging op allerlei mensen en dat is normaal. Maar gestuurde massa immigratie met het doel om diversiteit te krijgen is niet normaal, dat is een ideologisch aangestuurde leugen die ons niet veel goeds brengt en vindt bovendien op een grotere schaal plaats dan ooit. En Amerikaanse multiculti werkt redelijk goed, in ieder geval veel beter dan hier. Maar zelfs daar zijn er problemen, daar heb je gelijk in.
    1
  2113. Take as many as you like, it's a much deserved rest
    1
  2114. Not being able to threaten the EU with no deal (neither of us want no deal) equals giving the EU absolute power in the discussion of that deal. Now the EU knows that whatever happens, Boris Johnson cannot come home without a deal. The deal is doomed before it's even being negotiated. On the other hand I disapprove of Boris' methods, which are constitutionally questionable. It's a huge mess and the centre of the problem is the unprecedented divisions within parliament. No no deal, not May's deal, nothing is acceptable to them so far. And the EU is going to make prime use of the UK's discord. Parliament needs to accept the risk of no deal in order to be able to negotiate properly in the first place. No deal is the only leverage Britain has in the negotiations. As long as no deal is on the table, we have two parties that both do not want no deal and will strive for a fair and acceptable deal in order to prevent a no deal situation.
    1
  2115. +NeonsStyle True, the moment the EU starts looking to the East, the US' days as world leader are numbered. And that is exactly what they're doing right now
    1
  2116. This is a pretty good video. As a Dutchmen I found no big misconceptions, everything is at least partly true
    1
  2117. Especially when that nickname doesn't even quite catch how sadistic he was
    1
  2118. Als wij kunstmatig arm worden gehouden, waarom staan wij dan op plek 6 van de wereld als het om de welvaart mediaan gaat en Amerika, achter de meeste westerse landen, op plek 21? Wij zijn RIJKER dan Amerikanen. Zij mogen dan wel een hoger inkomen hebben, maar ze houden toch echt minder over. De kloof tussen rijk en arm is daar enorm. En al die grotere huizen en grotere auto's heeft te maken met de ruimte die in Amerika beschikbaar is. Ze bouwen daar gewoon groot, wij bouwen hier sinds mensenheugenis klein en dicht op elkaar (zelfs honderden jaren geleden).
    1
  2119. If Socialism allows for extensive privatisation, then what exactly is the difference between modern day Europe (social democracies) and Nazi Germany, apart from the obvious fascism/democracy differences? Are we socialists? The problem is; when do we call something capitalism with socialist elements and when socialism with capitalistic elements? I think calling National Socialism a form of Socialism is fair, because it had many socialist elements within it and allowed the government to direct the production output of even private companies on demand. What I think is the most problematic about your last video is how you equate it with the USSR. Stalin turned the USSR into a command economy, a completely planned economy. Stalin took away land from farmers so as to collectivise agriculture. Hitler privatised companies and even let them compete in a capitalistic style, but when deemed in the interest for the greater good of the German people the government could place an order with a company (this was for profit, but repeated non-compliance could have nationalisation of the company as a result). Hitler also did the exact opposite with farmers: he did not take it away from them, but forced them to keep it as property and forbade selling of land. In short, the USSR was collectivising and factually taking control over the means of production, or at least the grand majority of it, and National Socialism was privatising but increasing government control over private corporations. Both were trying to achieve a socialist society in which the means of production served the common good, BUT both went about it in a radically different way. National Socialism is a bit of a strange one because it allowed capitalism style freedom for companies, BUT increased government soft power over companies. It is like a conditional capitalism. You get capitalistic freedoms, but only if you occasionally (?) serve the general interest of the German people instead of just your own profit interests. The companies did what they need to do to contribute to the socialist society, and when they were "off duty" they had the full capitalist freedoms. I think you could place National Socialism between Capitalism and Socialism on the political spectrum, but it is mainly socialist. I'd say it's like modern day social democracies but the other way around: mainly socialist, with capitalist elements. Alternatively, one could say that National Socialism was capitalism with very heavy socialistic government intervention (capitalism, unless the government orders you to do X or Y). Best place would be between Capitalism and Socialism on the political spectrum
    1
  2120.  @Rssika  The USSR "liberating" Eastern Europe and staying there, exerting massive influence over them through the communist party and more, literally is imperialism. They also didn't want to leave Iran by the end of WW2 but Britain got them to.
    1
  2121.  @Rssika  Imperialism: state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other areas. The USSR was by definition imperialist in what it did to Eastern Europe at the least. And even if you insist on including exploitation within the definition, being forcefully included in the planned economy of the USSR is by definition also exploitation of economic resources of that country.
    1
  2122. ..... which ignores left libertarianism completely. There are absolutely forms of libertarianism that seek to ensure wealth distribution. All the way from free market socialism to anarcho-communism. All that libertarianism means is that you value liberty highly and therefore want to limit government intervention to a certain minimum (or abolish it entirely). This can technically include welfare as well.
    1
  2123. +LDNballer It's because it shouldn't matter what race someone is. If you look up to someone, that should be that. You shouldn't only be able to identify as people that look like you. It's so trivial and stands in the way of progress. Race shouldn't matter at all and anyone should be able to be your role model.
    1
  2124. Countries in Western and especially Northern Europe have extremely high quality of life ratings, beating the US soundly in almost every single way. If you look at those countries and still say that a politician wanting to achieve that same quality of life in America is wrong because it's democratic socialism, there is something seriously wrong with your moral compass. We are looking at policies that demonstrably work in other countries, demonstrably create a better society in those countries and don't lead to costs we can't overcome. The only acceptable argument against that is if there were special conditions in the US that'd make implementing those policies extra challenging and/or risky. Simply saying "but it's socialism" and trying to justify denying Americans those benefits purely because of that "reason" is nothing short of criminal behaviour.
    1
  2125. Very unrealistic scenario, the US would at the very least trade with both sides and probably only with the allies. Cutting off the US trade seems like a step too far for the scenario
    1
  2126.  @peterfrostoff5383  I'm not "defending" Floyd. He should have faced court and be convicted for whatever crime that could be proven before court. What I am doing is attacking Chauvin, whose job was to bring a suspect before court but instead ended up strangling him to death! Officers who do that are not "heroes", they are criminals who fail to do even the most basic thing their job asks them to do; to bring criminals to court and only use violence or kill suspects if it is ABSOLUTELY necessary to do so (for example when they are attacking you and you need to defend by shooting back). Chauvin failed at his job and brought massive shame to the police force. He is a disgrace and a criminal. Officers who do their job correctly; THEY are heroes.
    1
  2127. A huge gas field has been discovered in Eastern Ukraine and actually is part of Russia's goals to capture, so unironically yeah lol
    1
  2128. WW2 and the Cold War are over. But the US' lust for war isn't. Latest trick: bombing Libya and fuelling a civil war in Syria, thereby causing over 2 million migrants to come to the EU. Thank you, our precious "allies". The US is the main aggressor of the world and caused more problems for Europe than all of its "enemies" combined. And NATO is just the US' personal tool for foreign interventions. It has little to do with protection anymore, it's pure aggression. But you Americans always have to look to the past to find your relevance. That past is gone now. Your "protection" is no longer relevant. Today, it is YOU that countries need protection from. But go on, reminisce about the old days and ignore the current situation... "but muh Cold War, muh WW2"
    1
  2129. mrbump28  Really? If that is true you live is a screwed up society. People get in trouble for having drunk too much as students???
    1
  2130. To those whining about the India/China example, the US (328 million) has double the prison population that all of Europe does (741 million), despite having less than half the population. No false stats in Europe, nor is there a failing justice system that lets criminals go free.
    1
  2131. +Robert Sampson The fact that you said IF shows how stupid you are. IF Dr. Ford is lying (zero evidence for that and her testimony was very moving and believable, but we're talking IF, right?) she deserves mocking, so let's make a TV show right now mocking her! What kind of screwed up logic is this? It is also horrible to be accused of something like this and yes Kavanaigh deserves the same respect as Dr. Ford until the truth is uncovered. "If".... "if"... then wait until that IF is turned into a fact!
    1
  2132.  @avatharbehemoth  Dit is een "Trump-update" geen wereldnieuws. Het profileert zichzelf ook niet als superbelangrijk nieuws. Je zou het inderdaad "filler" kunnen noemen, maar geen fake news. En wat de geopolitiek betreft ben ik er inderdaad mee bekend dat de petrodollar aan het afsterven is nu meer en meer landen olie in euro's en yuan's, etc. kopen/verkopen. En omdat de dollar puur op vraag is gebaseerd en niet goud of wat dan ook, is de Amerikaanse economie is serieus gevaar als die vraag wegvalt. Ik neem aan dat je daarnaar verwijst?
    1
  2133.  @laszlokiss483  They are creating a futuristic dystopia as a critique of some aspects of the modern world. This could be a creative fourth wall breaking part of the satire. In any case, it fits the theme of their game perfectly. But I can't say if it's intended or not, but my guess is that it is an intended satire. They probably wouldn't have done this with a game that doesn't have such a theme.
    1
  2134. Always Labour
    1
  2135. Yeah, it can disable anything. No tank can protect its tracks and optics against all threats. A-10 can achieve a mission kill on anything. Other obsolete weapons can too. Hell, a WW2 tank can disable the most modern MBTs.
    1
  2136. +Micromation It's stupid to shoot the actress down because of her ethnicity. It's about what she actually LOOKS like. And she looks good enough, but not the best (Yen should be more pale according to the books). Then there's also her age which is the biggest problem for me. She looks too young.
    1
  2137. Onze kinderen moeten geen lamzakken worden, hier moet je toch wel tegen kunnen
    1
  2138. Dat komt alleen doordat wij de natuur dermate hebben beschadigd dat ze niet meer zelfvoorzienend is en onderhoud nodig heeft. Kijk bijvoorbeeld naar hoe wij in het verleden wolven door bijna heel Europa tot op het punt van uitsterven hebben gedood. Dáárdoor moeten wij als mens nu herten elk jaar moeten afschieten om te voorkomen dat ze de natuur volkomen leeg grazen en uiteindelijk zelf ook van de honger afsterven (ten minste in NL, de wolf heeft de laatste decennia een come back gemaakt in diverse omringende landen, hoewel de populatie nog altijd laag is). Er is nu één wolvenfamilie in NL teruggekeerd na al die decennia en de herten gedragen zich meteen al anders en migreren nu meer waardoor ze het land waar ze leven niet meer kapotgrazen en eerder weggaan. WIJ hebben de natuur verstoord en daardoor moeten WIJ voorlopig de natuur ook in stand houden. Die verstoring moet worden teruggedraaid zodat de natuur weer echt de natuur is.
    1
  2139.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Het moet terug naar een punt waar we kunnen spreken van een bepaalde balans tussen mens en natuur. Dat houdt in ieder geval in dat wij niet de natuurlijke cyclus doorbreken door alle wolven uit te moorden waardoor er geen roofdieren meer zijn voor herten e.d., dat wij niet met landbouwgif, gefabriceerd eiwitrijk gras dat nutteloos is voor insecten en stikstofverzadiging insecten, vogels en bepaalde planten heftig bedreigen en dat wij niet 99% van de grond in Nederland claimen voor (uitsluitend) gebruik door de mens. Er hangt geen duidelijk getal of referentiepunt aan de term "balans", daar heb je gelijk in, maar wat je in ieder geval niet kan ontkennen is dat op dit moment de balans totaal zoek is. De ultieme balans vanuit het perspectief van de natuur is uiteraard dat mensen onderdeel uitmaken van de natuur als gelijke van dieren, oftewel als jager-verzamelaars, maar dat is zoals je zegt een idealistisch sprookje dat niet meer dan misschien een paar honderd duizend mensen zou kunnen voeden, zo niet nóg minder. Voor mij betekent balans dat wij doen wat we willen, tot het punt dat wij de balans van de natuur doorbreken. Dus om terug te komen op het historische voorbeeld van de wolven; zo veel jagen als we willen, tot het punt dat dat een gevaar op zou kunnen leveren voor de natuurlijke balans tussen roofdier en prooi. Voor zover wolven bijvoorbeeld wel eens vee van boeren lastig vallen hebben wij dat te accepteren en is dat geen reden om heel de natuur naar de kloten te helpen (wel kun je boeren compenseren of ze helpen hun vee te beschermen). Dat wij dieren/planten een redelijk aandeel van de Nederlandse grond gunnen om normaal te kunnen leven. Dat wij voorkomen dat wij bepaalde stoffen gebruiken/uitstoten tot op het punt dat dat de omgeving onleefbaar maakt voor bepaalde dieren/insecten. Dat boeren zo natuurvriendelijk mogelijk te werk gaan. Niet al te veel gevraagd lijkt mij, dat laat een redelijk breed veld over voor mensen. Het enige waar ik misschien meer zou vragen is op het punt van immigratie. 100.000+ netto extra mensen per jaar is onhoudbaar vanuit het perspectief van de huizen die wij erbij moeten bouwen (100.000 is het inwonersaantal van steden als Delft, Deventer of Leeuwarden). Dat moet drastisch naar beneden, ten minste tot op het punt van behoud van het huidige populatie niveau (dus alleen migratie tot op het punt dat het ons krimp-veroorzakende geboortecijfer van 1.8 of zo bijvult tot een neutraal niveau en als we een positief geboortecijfer van 2.0+ zouden hebben, geen netto immigratie). We zijn al overbevolkt en moeten al veel te veel bij bouwen, al dan niet ten koste van natuur, en daar hoeft niets bij te komen. Op een gegeven moment moet het klaar zijn en wat mij betreft is dat moment nu. Anders wordt straks heel Nederland de randstad, bij wijze van.
    1
  2140.  @vvv-o9y  Dat klopt niet, Staatsbosbeheer heeft geen wolven uitgezet, de wolven die er nu zijn kwamen zelfstandig uit Duitsland. En ook al zou Staatsbosbeheer wolven zelf uitzetten dan zou ik het alsnog terugkeren noemen; het corrigeren van een fout die wij 150+ jaar geleden hebben gemaakt. Ze horen hier thuis en zijn nodig voor een behoorlijke natuurcyclus in NL, of ze nu zelf komen of door Sbb worden uitgezet.
    1
  2141.  @vvv-o9y  Het enige sprookje hier wordt door jou verkondigd. Je hebt totaal geen argument dat je verhaal ondersteunt, behalve "vertrouw geen overheidsinstanties". Het is gewoonweg onzinnig om wanneer wolven zijn gespot gelijk ervan uit te gaan dat Staatsbosbeheer dat dan wel gedaan zou hebben. Alsof het niet zou kunnen dat wolven zelfstandig naar Nederland komen nadat de populatie in Duitsland toe is genomen. Je gaat er bij voorbaat vanuit dat Sbb liegt, zonder enige reden.
    1
  2142.  @nivilleren  Wolven werden uitgeroeid om geen andere reden dan dat wij daar zin in hadden omdat ze ons (vee) lastig vielen. Het was totaal onnodig om ze compleet uit te roeien. Dit is bovendien door zo ongeveer heel Europa gebeurd, helemaal tot aan Rusland. En je kan me niet vertellen dat de wolf geen plaats heeft in bijvoorbeeld Duitsland of Frankrijk vanwege het aantal menselijke inwoners; ook daar zijn wolven tot uitsterven aan toe nagejaagd. De laatste paar decennia komen ze langzaam weer terug, nu zelfs in NL. De reden dat wij wolven hebben uitgeroeid heeft niets met de menselijke populatie te maken, maar met een bepaalde opvatting over wolven. Ze werden als een plaag gezien, waarmee men volledig voorbij ging aan hun rol in de natuurlijke cyclus. Over de natuurlijke balans en onze huidige populatie, ik denk ook niet dat wij een perfecte balans meer kunnen hebben zonder populatiekrimp, maar ik zeg ook niet dat wij allerlei gekke dingen moeten doen. We moeten een zo goed mogelijke balans opzoeken en als onze populatie zo groot is dat we alsnog best veel van de natuur moeten pakken dan zij het zo. Ik zeg bijvoorbeeld niet dat we geen huis meer erbij mogen bouwen als dit ten koste gaat van natuur en mensen maar op straat moeten leven. Ik zeg dat we in alles wat we doen ten minste moeten streven naar balans, voor zover dit redelijkerwijs mogelijk is. Alles wat we kúnnen doen, moeten we doen.
    1
  2143. +Shamsudeen Sodangi I am not making excuses, nor am I denying it had any impact. All I'm saying is that Africa is not the only continent to face disasters and that even worse disasters have in fact hit other continents. It is everyone's own responsibility to rebuild their nations after disaster hits them. Especially in today's world, there is not only the prime opportunity to build your country due to relative world peace and protection against outside threats (nobody will suddenly go invading random countries anymore), but to top it off there is plentiful access to help from the outside to rebuild countries. Everyone faces set backs, but instead of getting stuck in recalling those set backs and trying to get recognition for them (recognition that I'll give you, btw), it is best to look to the future and improve yourself.
    1
  2144. +browarman ... Yes, why? In 2015, the EU stopped the Middle Eastern refugee stream with the Turkey deal. This is a fact. We'll have to wait how they fare with the African stream, but I think they'll manage in the end.
    1
  2145. +browarman They ignore Juncker because he is not in control. The EU is controlled by the member states jointly, they decide what the EU does next. Juncker and other Eurocrats follow the political course that member states decide the EU will take. As for it happening. Yes we are now only in the stage of words, so we will have to see if the action that follows is worth anything. But again, remember that the EU ended the Middle Eastern stream with great success, within mere months of it starting to be a problem. The EU can get things done. Question is, will they this time? I say they probably will if they are serious enough about stopping the African stream.
    1
  2146. What a joke. Russia barely wanted to invade Ukraine, let alone start a war with the EU (which they'd 100% lose even without the US getting involved). This "huge Russian army" always was western (and of course Russian) propaganda. We've had Russia by the balls for years, they cannot stand up to the west. They can't even properly defeat Ukraine armed by mostly old Western tech, and we took our damn time to arm them as well. Russia has a pretty impressive military presence for its economy, but still nowhere near the West. Invading Poland (EU and NATO) would be an absolute joke move by them that basically is geopolitical suïcide. They invaded Ukraine only because Russia desperately wants to preserve its remaining imperialist area of influence and thwart western attempts at pulling Ukraine into our imperial sphere. And they're barely managing. If they could keep Ukraine in the Russian sphere if influence without invading, they would have. But they tried and failed so they attempted to force it militarily. There is no goal to invade Europe.
    1
  2147.  @rikspring  Dan moet Rutte dus weg, want hij heeft duidelijk gemaakt bezig te zijn met politieke machtsspelletjes. Achter de rug van de kiezers. Sterker nog, zijn hele leiderschapsstijl is één groot politiek machtsspel met als einddoel om de Kamer volledig buitenspel te zetten en alle macht naar de regering te trekken (oftewel, naar hemzelf). Wat de Kamer een circus maakt is juist dat ze veel te lang de Rutte-doctrine hebben aanvaard en zichzelf hebben opgesteld als de speelpop van Rutte. Dit is een kans om de Kamer weer te maken wat het moet zijn; de hoogste macht in ons staatsbestel.
    1
  2148. Inderdaad vreemd. Hier wordt een soort karikatuur van de geschiedenis gemaakt met de "slechte" Europeanen en de "slachtoffers" in Afrika. De "slechteriken" moeten hun excuses dan maar aanbieden. Maar zo simpel ligt het verleden zelden. Anti-slavernijbewegingen, dat waren "wij" ook. En het is ook niet zonder betekenis dat juist die anti-slavernijbewegingen ondanks de economische belangen die wij in slavernij hadden en de macht van de corporaties die zich daarmee bezig hielden, de discussie binnen Europa wonnen en de bevolking en de regering achter zich kregen. Dat is iets om trots op te zijn. 99% van de Nederlanders heeft niets met slavernij te maken gehad, we hebben hier in Europa nooit zwarte slaven gehouden. Grote corporaties als de WIC deden dit in de kolonies en voor de willekeurige burger was dit een ver van mijn bed show. Dat betekent niet dat wij als land geen verantwoordelijkheden hadden om hier tegenin te gaan ipv gemakzuchtig het geld in ontvangst te nemen, maar dit is wel een belangrijke nuance. Een andere belangrijke nuance is de rol van Afrikanen zelf in de slavenhandel. Wij stalen namelijk niet zomaar mensen mee, we kochten de slaven "legaal" volgens lokale gebruiken. De modus operandi was zo: in West Afrika zou bijvoorbeeld Nederland één stam ondersteunen met geld en wapens en Groot-Brittannië een rivaliserende stam. Die stammen vochten met elkaar en de stam die won maakten de anderen tot slaaf, om vervolgens aan de Europese macht te verkopen die hun ondersteunde. Dit creëerde een grote markt voor slaven waaraan veel stammen meededen om geld en macht te vergaren. Daarnaast was er natuurlijk ook de Arabische en lokale Afrikaanse slavenhandel, waarin Afrikaanse stammen ook nog slaven verkochten. Dus die goed/slecht tweedeling is helemaal niet zo passend. De realiteit is zoals gewoonlijk grijs. We zijn het er allemaal over eens dat het vreselijk was, maar dit "blank versus zwart" idee van slavernij moet echt stoppen. En dan heb ik het nog niet eens over het idee dat de nakomelingen van daders allerlei vergoedingen en excuses verschuldigd zijn aan de nakomelingen van slachtoffers, wat op zichzelf al problematisch is. De westerse slavernij van toen is wellicht te vergelijken met het dumpen van afval door grote multinationals van vandaag en ander wangedrag in derdewereldlanden. Ja het zijn onze bedrijven, ja ze brengen geld en meer terug naar ons en ja dat gaat (deels) gepaard met serieus wangedrag in derdewereldlanden waar wij voor wegkijken (willens en wetens of gewoon omdat wij er geen aandacht aan besteden). Het gebeurt nog steeds. Kunnen we niet beter kijken naar wat er vandaag gebeurt? Wat "wij" (lees: onze internationale bedrijven) voor winstbejag doen in het buitenland en wat wij kunnen doen om dat wangedrag tot een minimum te beperken? Maar nee, in de plaats daarvan duiken we het verleden in om een totaal betekenisloze excuses aan te bieden. Er is zoveel wat wij vandaag kunnen doen, en daar worden we van afgeleid door dit soort initiatieven. Gebruik de anti-slavernijbeweging als inspiratie om moderne problemen op te lossen ipv de slavernij als een middel om Europeanen een (misplaatst) schuldgevoel aan te praten. Positief, niet negatief.
    1
  2149. no true scotsman
    1
  2150.  @kitt3813  The USSR contributed the most to the defeat of Nazi Germany, then the British empire and only then do we arrive at the US contribution. The US did more in the Pacific. In Europe they didn't do a damn thing until 1942 and even then contributed an abysmal number of soldiers until 1944. The US intention was to join only when an invasion of France took place, and that is what they did. Before that they were either not present or sent a smaller force like the other smaller powers. For example, even France (post defeat, Free French forces) did more than the US in North Africa and in Italy the British empire forces outnumbered the US contribution 3 to 1 (by comparison, post D-day the Americans and British had a 1,5/2 to 1 ratio). And that is not mentioning the naval element in which the British absolutely dominated and were by far the most important actor in Europe and the Atlantic. It's sad how Americans pull all attention to themselves and downplay what the Russians and British have done.
    1
  2151. 44:45 What is this? Someone who actually sees that corporations are incompatible with anarchism? Now I respect you even more, TIK, even if I'm more of a leftie. I'd sign up for such a society for sure. Still have a few points though. I actually watched the video by the way, so what follows is constructive. I do have to say I don't quite agree with your definitions of socialism and capitalism. I definitely admire your view of corporations being public in and of themselves, but being public is not the same thing as being socialist. I feel like your statement there is a bit too general and misses some nuances. Socialism as an ideology, encompasses a lot more than simply public control over the means of production. A corporation is a public entity in the sense of it being a body of multiple people functioning within said corporation (which indeed also makes the government a corporation), but capitalism nor socialism is opposed to the simple idea of a group of individuals banding together to form corporations. What socialism is against is the capitalists within this system being able to have ownership of that corporation and thereby also the labour of the workers within said corporation. Socialism wants every individual to be the owner of their own labour and wants to abolish the very idea of being able to own a company beyond your share of actual labour within said company. Whether you have an economy with worker-owned corporations or an economy with individuals owning their own labour, that is socialist because everyone in society owns the means of production by their own share of labour. Capitalism is a system based on the concept of capitalist investors being able to buy (parts of) a company, including the labour of the workers there (you buy labour by entering into a wage contract) and those singular investors reaping the profits of the labour done at that company. Because the workers don't own their own labour, but are instead selling it for a set wage, the net value that they create does not go to them as workers, but to the capitalist that owns their labour. These profits are then used to further invest in that company or invest elsewhere (or to get a huge pay for the capitalists as individuals), enacting economic growth/expansion. The idea of capitalism is that this benefits both the investors and the wage workers. The workers get a deal they agreed on (socialists would argue that it is not a choice because the market sets their wages and the entire point of the market is to keep those wages as low as they can possibly be without losing the worker to a competitor who pays better). The capitalists get the full reward for making the business possible in the first place and ensure that the economy expands, offering opportunities for more and more workers to get a wage as well as fulfilling in the needs of as many consumers as possible. Other characteristics are a (more or less) free market, (more or less) free private ownership, competition and more. There is nothing in capitalism that opposes the creation of corporations either. Corporations can exist in a capitalist as well as socialist setting, depending on how ownership within that corporation is organised. If either the state (representing the "proletariat") or all workers employed at that corporation owns the company, it is socialist. If individuals, not in their capacity as workers, but in their private interests as investors own a company, that is capitalist. Same for the state; it can exist both in a capitalist and socialist setting. You already know how it exists in a socialist setting by examples of authoritarian socialism seen in f.e. the USSR. But state intervention in the free market and capitalism? It all depends on the nature of that intervention. A state can nationalise industry for the sake of abolishing class conflict (auth. socialist), but a state can also partake in a capitalist economy by f.e. buying shares in a company or simply buying pencils from a corporation. In the same way an individual can own a company either as a capitalist investor (representing their own individual interest) or as one of many workers collectively owning the company they work at (being part of the socialist principle of collective ownership of one's own labour), a state can act either as a neutral actor on the capitalist market or as a facilitator of socialist principles. A state buying pencils from a company is not socialist. Even a state putting into place regulations on the free market to prevent big corporations from dominating the market is not socialist; they are simply regulating a capitalist market with the intention of protecting the capitalist principle of competition regulating market prices (which would be drowned out if a state of monopoly or oligarchy is achieved by big corporations). So your specific view of capitalism, which you call "true" capitalism, is not the only iteration of capitalism. There are man forms of it (as there are many forms of socialism) and yours is merely one of them. Probably the one I find the most admirable form, but that's besides the point.
    1
  2152. They're scared, that's why. Can't have Biden bust in that debate, can they? Hell, Bernie can still take it if Biden gaffes. And he will gaffe, I deeply believe that. A deep, substance-based debate? Goodbye Biden. Bernie has been aiming for this debate since the beginning, I think it's his main strategy to enter into a civil discussion and crush Biden on substance. Without even having to resort to personal attacks; Biden's own performance will be the attack on his campaign. It's still possible.
    1
  2153.  @boketto9521  In this case it's not even about racism. It's about the lasting effect of past racism causing situations for black people in which they are eventually more likely to enter into criminality or make other bad decisions causing them to be incarcerated more. The causal chain is there, but it's too long to call it actual racism. People are incredibly uninformed because even though they don't harbour any bad feelings towards black people, they're still called racist. If social justice activists would simply explain that because of past racism, black people today still live in an environment that systematically causes them to fall behind in society and that true equality would only be attained by lifting everyone out of that disadvantaged environment, I'm sure many more people would actually understand. Now it's just a cesspool of the term "racist" being thrown around and the recipients going into full-on defensive mode because they feel attacked. It's the dumbest strategy ever to try and attain social justice for black people. 99% of the anti-SJW crowd are not racists, but people who are absolutely oblivious to the lasting effect of past racism and how unfair it is to allow this situation to continue. Not being aware of the way past racism continues to affect the future and not seeing much actual open racism right now, they theorise it must just be themselves or their culture driving black people to criminality and such. They don't need big terms thrown at them to reaffirm their beliefs that social justice activists are just nutty ideologues who have an insanely exaggerated definition of big words like racism and sexism, they need people to actually explain why black people are so terribly disadvantaged to this day and how this is linked to racism.
    1
  2154.  @komalprakash6789  That is more the norm than exception with Darwin awards lmao
    1
  2155. +talusha NMN Ok is goed, dan volgen wij Japan's voorbeeld en stoppen alle immigratie. Je mag alleen komen als je met een Nederlander trouwt, punt. Als Japan zo'n goed voorbeeld is moeten we maar hun voorbeeld volgen
    1
  2156. +Karel de Kale Nou ik vind dat Nederland het qua taal best goed doet. Het gedrocht van straattaal terzijde, is Nederland een gezonde, levende taal waar nog altijd nieuwe woorden bij komen. Nederlands vertoont geen tekenen van sterfte door verengelsing of anderszins, dus de multi-linguistische aspecten van Nederland brengen volgens mij geen schade toe aan onze taal. Hoewel ik wel moet bekennen dat er steeds meer anglicismen worden gebruikt, wat dan wel weer jammer is.
    1
  2157. +Karel de Kale Ja ik zal het weten, ik ben zelf een rechtenstudent in Utrecht. Alle vakken met een internationaal karakter worden in het engels gedoceerd, zoals internationaal, Europees recht of vergelijkend recht. En ja ik ben al wel een paar buitenlandse docenten tegengekomen, hoewel de overgrote meerderheid (ook binnen de engelstalige vakken) gewoon Nederlands is. Maar rechtsgeleerdheid valt heel erg mee vergeleken met de rest. Een vriend van mij studeert technische natuurkunde in Delft en 100% van zijn vakken worden in het engels gegeven en buitenlandse docenten zijn ook niet zeldzaam. Een vriendin van mij studeert een geneeskundige studie (ben even de exacte naam kwijt) in Eindhoven en ook die krijgt veelal in het engels les. En ja ik moet zelf ook bekennen dat als ik iets internationaalrechtelijk moet uitleggen in het Nederlands, het soms moeilijk is de juiste termen te vinden omdat ik het allemaal in het engels ken. Dus voor buitenlandse toepassing is het handig, maar in Nederland zelf belemmert het in principe alleen maar hoe goed je ermee overweg kan. Nu is dit nog logisch voor internationaal recht of Europees recht, maar de gehele natuurkunde studie? Ja dat gaat toch wel ver. En ja dat zal voor internationale studenten worden gedaan denk ik. Ik heb ook een criminologie vak gevolgd en ik zat daar met twee Britse, twee Spaanse en nog veel meer buitenlandse studenten (meestal uit de EU) en een paar andere Nederlanders. De docente kon ook alleen maar engels en was niet Nederlands. Het gaat allemaal om internationale studenten en geld.
    1
  2158.  @mikeb7615  You're terribly informed. The EU has certain issues but what you describe here is utter nonsense.
    1
  2159.  @mikeb7615  Alright, bootlicker. I'm sure they'll appreciate your loyalty when they pull another Iraq. And I'm also sure they'll ignore you again if you need help for once, like they did during the Falklands war. What an equal relationship, seems very healthy to be in.
    1
  2160. +Survivor -357 The US Navy actually isn't more powerful than the combined EU navies. Look up how many destroyers/corvettes/cruisers/frigates/attack submarines both navies have and weep. What makes the US Navy so great compared to other navies is the amount of aircraft carriers they have. But aircraft carriers need to be protected by destroyers/corvettes/frigates/attack submarines, or they will be sunk (carrier strike groups). The US has more carriers, but the EU outnumbers the US in terms of warships/submarines capable of sinking those carriers. According to wikipedia we're talking an advantage of 159 destroyers, etc. and 55 attack subs (EU) versus 96 destroyers, etc. and 52 attack subs (US). Plus the EU has the advantage of being the defender. You have 11 aircraft carriers, but can you prevent them from becoming multi-billion dollar seawrecks somewhere in the Atlantic before you can even try to invade the EU? Wouldn't be too certain.
    1
  2161.  @madfinger6884  De video is van de eerste moskee, wat deze man zegt is bij de tweede gebeurd.
    1
  2162. Dat weten we dus niet. Het hele punt van die 18 maanden detentie is om te checken of ze wel/niet recht op asiel hebben en daarna worden ze óf teruggestuurd óf ze mogen blijven
    1
  2163. It's not only about him being a white man, it's that coupled with the story of him going mad and turning into a villain. They equate this to radicalisation of school shooters and such. You're right that this is dumb and that this kind of thinking would lead to bizarre conclusions like "Goodfellas promotes the mafia and causes more people to join such organisations". It makes no sense.
    1
  2164.  @bretert  Dat komt omdat de strengere wapenwetten daar een REACTIE zijn op het geweld. Streng zijn op één plek en elders alles toelaten werkt niet. Het gaat om hoe gemakkelijk wapens te verkrijgen zijn in Amerika, wat boeien die wetten nou. Die wetten werken natuurlijk nooit zolang het simpel is een wapen te verkrijgen. De VS kan al lang niets meer doen tegen het wapengeweld omdat er zoveel wapens in de omloop zijn dat criminelen ze toch wel weten te vinden, maar ze hebben het wel veroorzaakt met dat idiote gedoe over wapens voor burgers. In ieder geval is het te laat om het te stoppen
    1
  2165.  @bretert  Omdat het een ghetto is. Moeilijk hè? Een ghetto vol met armoede, criminaliteit en al dat soort onzin. Dat is waar het grote geweld plaatsvindt.
    1
  2166.  @bretert  Waarom blijf je vragen stellen die zowat algemeen bekend zijn? In steden als Detroit is de industrie grotendeels verdwenen en de overheid boeide het niet zo veel dit te compenseren. Dan hou je deze rotzooi over. Ook historische factoren zoals segregatie hebben een rol gespeeld. Slaven werden bevrijd maar hadden helemaal niks, segregatie zorgde er verder voor dat heel veel zwarten bij elkaar in wijken werden gestopt, weg van betere blanke wijken. Wat gebeurt er als je mensen zonder opleiding, kansen of tot voor kort überhaupt een leven in vrijheid allemaal op één hoop gooit? Lijkt me logisch dat je dan een probleemwijk vol met toekomstloze criminelen krijgt. En als je dat combineert met een overheid die niks doet en het allemaal maar laat escaleren dan krijg je vreselijke ghetto's waar elke week tientallen mensen worden vermoord. Maar historie daargelaten, die mensen in de ghetto zijn idioot en de overheid is idioot om het te laten gebeuren.
    1
  2167.  @yungjoemighty879  ok person with no coherent response with substance
    1
  2168. Ach mens, hier is bij koninklijk besluit bepaald, op grond van een totaal niet van toepassing zijnde wet, dat wij allemaal opgesloten zullen zitten in ons huis. Dit is geen grap. Hier is het parlement totaal mee omzeild, willens en wetens. De Raad van State heeft hier van tevoren voor gewaarschuwd en is genegeerd. Als de regering zo te keer gaat dan verdienen ze het niet om naar geluisterd te worden. Mensenrechten zijn geen grap, maar Rutte lijkt ze niet bepaald serieus te nemen met z'n geklungel. Als er deugdelijk beleid is zal ik die volgen. De avondklok voldoet daar niet aan.
    1
  2169. +Purple Flame Tarot They're separate only on paper in the US. The fact that personal opinions of judges even matter is a bad joke. They don't serve the will of "the people", they just judge as they themselves see fit and in accordance with their own personal views. They can be pro-Trump, they can be anti-Trump, but whatever it is it will sway the outcome of a case. Shameful, they are not fully neutral
    1
  2170. Arena war: US wins with air power advantage, navy (the only area in which the EU is stronger in certain aspects) is ignored. But with an almost equal land force to the US and air power bigger than Russia's, it would still be interesting to see (the US-Russian arena war was interesting and the EU would at least fare better so yeah). Normal geographics: US carriers sink long before arriving in Europe due to the large EU navy size and they can't even hope to invade, EU can't really attack the US either due to lack of air power and carriers to project power over distance. Unlike the US they might actually be able to try an invasion, but it will inevitably fail even if they do. Draw.
    1
  2171. +DrDoctorDerp You are wrong. Corvettes and up sport the exact same anti-ship missiles as destroyers, albeit less of them. Multiple frigates are more difficult to take down than one destroyer, yet they can dish out comparable damage. So unless you're willing to claim destroyers can't damage other destroyers, corvettes and up can in fact threaten destroyers. And you are correct about the carriers, but it just so happens that during training everyone and their mother has managed to sink a US supercarrier with even one submarine. The UK, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Australia did it, just off the top of my head. Probably more we don't know about. Carriers are sitting ducks for a well-trained crew in even one single attack submarine. Keep in mind that half the CSG was usually sunk with the carrier they were meant to protect... Just one submarine is stupendously dangerous, especially silent diesel subs. Nuclear ones are louder You do have a point on the invasion thing, though. The EU also has zero chance to get through because while our navy is numerous and no doubt the best defensive navy in the world, it is not well suited for offense. The US has the best offensive navy in the world, no doubt. I don't think the EU could mount an invasion of the US, but neither can the US even hope to invade the EU. So it's a draw.
    1
  2172. Socialism is not "when everyone is equally poor". Socialism is when everyone gets the full reward for their own work. I.e. if you write a book you fairly share the profits among those that worked on it. That's perfectly in line with socialism, you jus can't get passively rich off someone else working for you. Even in the authoritarian USSR, if you did more work you got paid more. And managers were f.e. paid more than regular workers. Socialism can even exist in a free market. As long as everyone is the owner of the fruits of their own labour, it is socialism.
    1
  2173.  @tomwes8390  Omdat het weer niet zo simpel werkt. Als we een extreme zomer hebben gehad kan het zijn dat we daarna juist een extreme winter krijgen. Het weer is in de war en we krijgen steeds meer vreemd weer. Dat is wat opwarming is, niet letterljike opwarming en niks anders.
    1
  2174.  @Pete-tq6in  Authoritarian socialism means a dictatorial government that violates basic freedoms and a shitty economic system that likely will collapse when put under stress. Nazism means the same, plus genocide of entire ethnicities. Nazism is definitely worse and more insane.
    1
  2175.  @florintanase9348  Because Nazism/Fascism has a broken economy that will lead many to suffer once it collapses, part of Nazism is outright to kill minority groups, and both Nazism and Fascism have a high likelihood to lead to large scale wars due to attempts to rebuild empires or claim lebensraum. And both feature extreme nationalism that disregards our personal freedoms in favour of a dictatorial government dictating important aspects of our lives to us without our own input. They are disastrous ideologies.
    1
  2176. +Trevor White Zeus is real. The pagan gods are symbolic of real world things. Athena represents the act of thinking or knowledge in general. Hygieia, the god of health and sanitation even literally gave birth to the term hygiene. They all have a symbolic meaning that is laid in real life. So they exist but they aren't what you would expect from the Abrahamic point of view. Athena is mankind's ability to think, for example.
    1
  2177.  @sweetlemonade6925  Unfortunately this attitude is increasingly being imported here from America
    1
  2178.  @sweetlemonade6925  Oh I know that, I'm half-Nigerian, half-Dutch myself :) I think you described it nicely. If there is one thing I hate it is this American idea of "black people" as a monolith and thinking of "race" as some kind of conflict between white people as a monolith and black people as a monolith. And for people like me there's an extra bonus of having the one drop rule applied to you (by "antiracist" Americans lol). I hope we deal with our own issues our own way in Europe, without importing the destructive discourse of America
    1
  2179. You're missing one thing here... I live in the Netherlands and guess what's in the news here about the Defense Production act? Well, OUR companies (like Philips), providing YOU with jobs by setting up factories in the US, came to our government with the message that they fear the Americans would invoke the Defense Production act to claim all ventilators they produce, leaving Europeans to DIE. Right now they're working overtime to provide both the EU and the US with crucial equipment, but the Defense Production act could mean that all of that equipment is used only for the US. Making sure more equipment is produced by telling companies what's needed is all well and good. Claiming the production of your own companies is all well and good. But claiming the production of OUR companies? No. Just know that there will be countermeasures if the US goes through with this. Right now the production is distributed fairly across the US and EU markets. Should the US choose to claim it all of themselves, well... critical components of those ventilators are made in the EU. We will claim EU production for local use as well and watch as the production in the US grinds to a halt. With the deaths of both Europeans and Americans as a result. Either the production of our companies is fairly distributed, or there is no production at all. You can't do this without consequences. Proceed carefully, use the Defense Production act only where it doesn't deprive the EU of vital equipment made by EU companies abroad.
    1
  2180. Het was echt net aan, beiden waren zeer goed, Badr heeft iig bewezen dat hij zeker nog kan vechten. Wat er in de navolgende rondes was gebeurd weet niemand, dus doe niet zo stoer. Dit gevecht had geen duidelijke winnaar totdat Badr neerging.
    1
  2181. +Dimitri Andreou And it is society that bears the cost of them not contributing to the population upkeep. They are not producing workers, they don't contribute to the future.
    1
  2182. +Dmitri Andreou When the hell did I ask for the state to FULLY reimburse my costs for a child? I only ask to not be bankrupted just because I need to take care of my child in its early days. It's interesting how the US is one of the most overworked societies on earth, yet the taxes are so low. Meaning... "less work to feed yourself"? You're talking complete nonsense. Here in Europe we work less, have very high equality rates (meaning that we not only work less, but just about everyone can afford about the same, with food obviously being part of that) and even for those that don't have food we give it for free. We work less and we have more people capable of paying for their own food. You work more and have a huge amount of poverty compared to other developed countries. There are even examples of people working two jobs in the US and still not fully covering their bills. That is unthinkable here in Europe.
    1
  2183. In her Duits spreek je het uit als Krampoes, in het Nederlands is het gewoon Krampus.
    1
  2184. It's useless against any military with AA capabilities, so its uses don't extend much further than anti-terror missions. But since that is what the US has mainly been doing anyway, it's great at its job regardless of its limited capabilities.
    1
  2185. +Möppy You're pretty deluded if you think America can invade the likes of Russia or the EU. Not even a chance. The truth is that the US couldn't take on any of the larger modern countries even if they tried, and can only target countries like Libya*. The same holds true for any other military. You don't just invade Russia, China, the EU or the US. Nobody can "just" do that. Also, don't underestimate the influence that your allies and countries like China have over you. It goes both ways
    1
  2186. +_enoeletnom Which country has a constitution that says that rights are god-given? I'm gonna go with the Plakkaat van Verlatinghe (1581), which the Declaration of Independence copied. They are... oddly similar :) Okay, it's not a constitution, but still
    1
  2187. Paganism is far more feminist than any of the Abrahamic religions, but the most feminist of all is of course no religion.
    1
  2188. Religie is cultuuur
    1
  2189. Het dreigen met hun stemrecht afpakken heeft niets te maken met het weigeren vluchtelingen op te nemen. Dat doet de EU omdat de overheden in Polen en Hongarije structureel de democratie ondermijnen door invloed uit te oefenen op de rechtspraak en media in hun landen. Wat de EU wil doen met landen die geen vluchtelingen willen opnemen is een boete opleggen, daar dreigen ze mee. Je moet de EU proberen te begrijpen. Er komen ongelooflijk veel vluchtelingen naar Italië en Griekenland. Dat is een groot probleem... tenzij wij Griekenland en Italië helpen en de vluchtelingen verspreiden over een gebied waarin 510 miljoen mensen wonen. Het gaat er niet om dat Hongarije die vluchtelingen niet wil helpen, maar het gaat erom dat wij ze miljarden euro's geven om in hun economie te investeren en zij ons er vervolgens keihard bij naaien als we een probleem hebben. Ze naaien Italië en Griekenland erbij en door Hongarije moeten ook wij meer vluchtelingen opnemen. 2 miljoen vluchtelingen op een populatie van 510 miljoen Europeanen klinkt niet zo destructief, maar 2 miljoen vluchtelingen in bijvoorbeeld Duitsland? Tja... Niemand wil vluchtelingen, ook de EU niet, maar als ze eenmaal hier zijn dan kunnen we ze beter verspreiden over heel de EU dan een paar landen er bij naaien en in de steek te laten. Daar gaat het om.
    1
  2190. "Sounds true" ahahahaa
    1
  2191.  @eddiel7635  We can make budget, just like we are currently expanding budgets of our national militaries, as a commitment to NATO. Look at it this way; we need a military of X size to defend ourselves, which costs Y money. Whether that money is spent nationally or pooled together in an EU defence fund doesn't matter for our eventual goals. In fact, pooling a part of it together may even be more efficient, financially. What equipment is bought, who decides when and where they're deployed and everything else is decided by all our leaders sitting in a room, voting on it. Doesn't seem that complicated.
    1
  2192. America has a mighty history of installing dictators in foreign countries and intervening when democratic elections don't go their way. America also has an electoral system that is so heavily flawed it can barely even be called a democracy at all. Quit the bullshit
    1
  2193. +YraxZovaldo Tja, ik zou zeer zeker wel wat doen. Maar... dorpen met alleen burgers compleet uitmoorden terwijl het leger dat mijn land bezet niet eens in de buurt is? Hmm, toch maar niet. Dat is wat Bosniërs deden tijdens de oorlog. En de Serviër wisten er ook wel wat van, van massamoord. Er zit een GROOT verschil tussen gebieden proberen in te nemen of te beschermen en massamoord.
    1
  2194. +Dick Morhead North Korea is different, this time China has huge leverage. So if you can get China to support you, you're going to get something done at least
    1
  2195. @CryptoPower Het was inderdaad een heidens feest, zoals vrijwel alle feestdagen in Europa. Maar de zwarte figuur heeft niets met Afrikanen te maken
    1
  2196. @CryptoPower Ik ben het helemaal eens met je uitleg van de geschiedenis, maar niet je conclusie. Zwarte piet begon in voor-christelijke tijd als niet-racistisch, is toen op een gegeven moment een racistische karikatuur geworden, maar sinds de jaren 60-70 zijn die racistische kenmerken weggehaald en is zwarte piet niet meer racistisch. Het simpele zwartschminken van je gezicht is niet racistisch. Dat is waar de discussie om gaat. Bepaalde activisten geloven dat het zwart verven van je gezicht in welke context dan ook een racistische blackface is. "Mijn huidskleur is geen kostuum", zeggen ze dan. https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/231134/Bedreigingen-om-racistische-make-up-Ze-zouden-mijn-kinderen-iets-aandoen Ik vind dat als men zwarte piet racisme vindt, goed onderbouwd moet worden waarom de huidige zwarte piet een racistische karikatuur is in plaats van een kindervriend met zwarte schmink. De origine noch de huidige versie van zwarte piet zou ik als racistisch kenmerken. Ik zie dat anti zwarte piet demonstranten vooral vergelijkingen maken met óf blackfacing uit de Amerikaanse geschiedenis (het belachelijk maken van zwarte mensen) óf de geschiedenis van zwarte piet zelf (hetgeen we al lang hebben veranderd om niet meer racistisch te zijn). De vergelijking gaat gewoon niet op. De simpele handeling om je gezicht zwart te verven is niet gelijk een blackface karikatuur. Ik vind dit soort gedrag veel te ver gaan en iets wat we absoluut niet moeten belonen. Het moment dat men aan kan tonen dat zwarte piet in de huidige vorm racistisch is zal ik accepteren dat hij zal veranderen. Tot dat moment is het enige wat ik zie een valse vergelijking met blackface "omdat zwarte schmink".
    1
  2197. And it's a shooting too. It is both a shooting and terrorism, the BBC is not wrong for calling it a shooting
    1
  2198. +A.M M. You are literally doing what "bias" BBC is doing according to you, but much worse. How can you just randomly say the British killed him to frame Russia? And when BBC points at Russia when an ex-spy from Russia is killed they're biased, aren't they, you hypocrite? What they're saying at least isn't as ridiculous and far-fetched as your statement... Seriously, take a long hard look at yourself and how you're just writing random unfounded nonsense
    1
  2199. +Paul Taylor As I said, it's possible that it wasn't Russia and that another state (including Britain itself) could have had reason to kill him. At this moment in time, Russia seems the most logical suspect and saying things like you do is wild speculation. Very wild, in fact. It makes no sense to go about saying "what if..." when you have zero reason to actually believe that. You're better off just thinking "it was probably Russia, but any other state/entity is possible too". Then you have a nice nuanced opinion based on facts. Going "what if..." is futile
    1
  2200. +Techno Viking If poison is administered rightly, they will inevitably die. Kind of like Litvinenko. He lived for quite a while but his death was certain. Only the police officer that treated the victims is recovering. You're right that this is drama, which means that this could either be Russia making a point or another entity wanting to frame Russia but neither one of those can be confirmed. To me, the most logical one seems to be that Russia is behind it. If you think that the framing scenario is more likely, it's fine to think that but it's not fine to portray that as the one and only truth and act like it couldn't have been Russia. That's the only point I'm trying to make, always keep your mind open and don't be too quick to criticise BBC's reporting if you don't have hard facts to counter it. I see a lot of people here who immediately call the BBC propaganda and then just say it wasn't Russia while nobody can know that.
    1
  2201. +Paul Taylor I'm not wrong. I'm looking at the facts only. And from the facts only you can see that multiple explanations are possible at this point. Russia having done it is one. Another entity wanting to frame Russia for whatever reason is another possible explanation. This viewpoint can not be called wrong and is based on the cold hard facts available at this moment. Your explanation is wild speculation. It's fine that you think it's a possible explanation, but be careful not to actually start believing it's the one and only truth. It isn't and in the end neither of us know for sure. Don't call people paedophiles without hard evidence
    1
  2202. +A.M M. You're hilarious...
    1
  2203. +A.M M. That's why I'm expressly NOT saying Russia did it, only that they're the main suspect. The facts are that a man was (attempted to be) killed who used to spy for MI6 on Russia and that this man was attacked with a nerve agent that is extremely hard to come by for anything less than a state. These facts point towards Russia, but are in no way conclusive evidence. But yes, any other state (or even a very rich private entity) could have done this too. If you think this is the opinion of a brainwashed zombie, then you yourself are the brainwashed zombie refusing to look at facts. There is no hard evidence against Russia, so in that regard you're right, but it's logical that people suspect it's Russia. Key word here is suspect
    1
  2204. Americans, eh? shrugs
    1
  2205. +Andrew Stewart The EU has already been richer than the US from 2000 or so to 2014, technically being the first economy of the world for 14 years and now second again. We are about equal economically, so close that we frequently overtake eachother's GDP and switch places. The EU is already rated above the US in terms of global soft power (political power), with both France and Great Britain beating the US and Germany following closely in 4th spot. All that remains is hard power, which is just a matter of how much money you throw at the military (and since we have comparable riches we have equal potential). This is the situation NOW. Now imagine a future in which the entire Eastern part of the EU is economically developed as Germany... And with Juncker's recent speech about dropping the dollar to trade in oil, imagine the US without its precious petrodollar easy-mode economy. The US invaded Iraq when Saddam announced in 2000 that he would trade oil for euros, the US killed Gaddafi when he announced he wanted to trade oil for a commonAfrican currency, they now try to block Iranian trade because they trade oil for euros, now try to invade/block the EU... They will lose their petrodollar if the EU goes through with this (no significant allies left that will support it) and this alone could cause massive damage to the US economy
    1
  2206. +Novocastrian Winter Dearie me, they've done the same to me! Blast, now where did I leave my tinfoil hat? Have they broken into my house and hidden it so their wretched brain waves can affect me? :D
    1
  2207. Hahahaha
    1
  2208.  @strongbrew9116  Agreed, the major turning points were already set in motion. However, Germany at that point still had a chance to counter the situation.
    1
  2209.  @brianlong2334  Mate, the British had about 900.000 men in North Africa while the US had like 100k at the most. Your point about the US being responsible for North Africa is beyond ridiculous. Commonwealth forces were also 2/3rd of the forces in Italy. The US never cared much for the 'soft underbelly of Europe', as that was mostly Churchill's idea of drawing German forces away. Them not being there won't change much and I doubt having less equipment would have changed too much either for the British.
    1
  2210.  @strongbrew9116  For the sake of the argument I think it's better to use Commonwealth numbers against US numbers. Not just British. F.e. Commonwealth forces in D-Day were higher than US numbers. D-day and the following breakout of Normandy was planned and commanded by all British commanders. At its lowest point, commonwealth numbers in the western front were still about 40% of the total troops, etc. Commonwealth involvement in WW2 is almost always criminally underrated.
    1
  2211.  @brianlong2334  The fact that you're even trying to argue that North Africa could not have been won without the US is absurd and shows how incredibly biased you really are. Firstly, Operation Torch was not an American but an Anglo-American operation, so again very nice show of your bias that you imply the US did everything there. Secondly, your mention of Torch is funny because the Vichy French offered very little resistance and despite this the lacklustre American performance was the direct reason why an early invasion of France was delayed as Churchill wanted it to be. There was a big strategic fight over this between the British and Americans and the US performance on the Torch landings (despite being an overall success) were the deciding factor in the British winning this strategic fight and dragging the US along the 'soft underbelly of Europe' before launching D-day (by the way, even by 1943 in Italy, Commonwealth forces were still 2/3rd of the Allied presence in Europe). Thirdly, the American presence in Torch was not necessary at all. It was used as a propaganda tool to appease the French. Churchill even planned to have British soldiers wear American uniforms! Several RN ships did fly the US flag during this operation to mask their British affiliation. Normally this would have been a British landing that the UK could have managed with ease. For political and strategic reasons, the US was involved (whom by the way from the beginning didn't want to be involved in this 'soft underbelly of Europe' idea of Churchill and wanted to go straight for France). So the idea that the US was unmissable here is also simply wrong. I don't think you're aware of the real strategic and logistical background of these things. You just mention random numbers to pad what the Americans did, seemingly. While ignoring British accomplishments of course. Rather weak argument. You even unknowingly mention operations that directly argue against the Americans. Your only good point is the Shermans that the British used I suppose. But honestly, selling something to someone and then saying "without my help you wouldn't have succeeded" is a bad argument too. It was a regular business deal, no 'help'. And it's disputable that without Shermans North Africa would've ended differently. Montgomery had a ridiculous supply/equipment advantage in this theatre due to British logistical supremacy in the area. I don't think NA could have ended in any other way than a British victory unless serious strategic mistakes were made on British side and the Germans made perfect use of the available supplies. So very unrealistic to imply the British would have lost without US support.
    1
  2212.  @brianlong2334  Considering the British had 75% of the total warships, plus several warships from other allied nations, wouldn't really miss those US warships. Especially considering that the entire section of the Royal Navy that in real life protected countless US trade vessels to the UK would be available. And 500 landing craft, well I suppose the huge amounts of money the UK shipped over to the US to purchase military equipment would instead have to be spent building factories in Britain. Not a big deal, even if it is less efficient. No big deal to make landing craft, bit ridiculous to think any major nation wouldn't be able to if necessary.
    1
  2213.  @brianlong2334  The Royal Navy is preoccupied with what exactly? In this timeline the largest naval battle in history, mainly fought by the RN, does not take place. Would you have the RN protect non-existent trade routes between the US and UK and Germany invest a fortune in subs that have no strategic value whatsoever because their entire raison d'être was to disrupt US trade that simply isn't there in this scenario? Again very disingenuous arguing. Your entire argument hinges on the ridiculous idea that while Britain gets none of the American goods they bought, they still spent all the resources they did in real life purchasing said goods and protecting the trade routes. Which was a massive endeavour. Truth is that the UK would be sitting on a huge treasury they would be doing something else with (f.e. building factories) and a huge part of the RN that IRL was engaged in the Atlantic, could be used elsewhere. You can't assume all the positives of the US-UK trade are gone, while assuming all the negatives of it still exist. UK gifts its entire treasury to the US for nothing? UK deploys huge part of RN in the Atlantic to protect... nothing? Germany produces tons of submarines to disrupt nonexistant US trade shipping? That purchasing and protecting American goods was the easiest and/or most efficient way the British thought they could spend their treasury on the war effort, does not mean that there were no alternatives to use those resources to aid the war effort. That US trade disappears does not mean the British sit on a massive pile of gold thinking "oh well, can't use this for the war effort now" or look at the RN aimlessly wandering the Atlantic thinking "damn, wish we could use this huge fleet elsewhere". The UK would use their funds and the available resources to replace what the US would have given them, to the best of their ability. At the worst, they'd get less equipment for the same money they spent IRL, but they would not get nothing . The idea that they can't even get 500 landing craft because IRL they chose to rely on the US is ridiculous. And lesser known facts are that f.e. the British had a million men in the Middle East to counter a possible German invasion through Turkey for oil. All these resources were used this way, because the US could be relied on in the Western front. If things were different, different choices would be made. Maybe they would instead choose to leave the Middle Eastern oil protected by a much smaller force and use those men in the Western front. Maybe the UK would withdraw from North Africa instead of leaving a lot of men there to keep order. Things like this you also have to keep in mind. In the hypothetical situation that Britain would choose to withdraw from the Middle East and risk German invasion, they could have about 70% of the total real life Allied presence (US+UK) with UK troops alone. Another thing is that the UK never even bothered to start conscription in f.e. India. Maybe they would have in this timeline, scraping the barrel like the USSR had to. IRL they didn't want to do this unless absolutely necessary because overusing the Empire would make its collapse likely. Maybe in this timeline they would go all out and weaken the Empire regardless because it was their only choice. Post WW2, the British Empire would then have collapsed even sooner. All these options you're ignoring. Just acting like the exact same choices would be made but without US equipment and men available. Ignoring that obviously different choices would have been made in this situation. So yes, I agree with you that if Britain magically bankrupts itself getting no trade in return, lets the brunt of the Royal Navy float aimlessly in the Atlantic protecting nothing and generally chooses to use NONE of the alternatives available to them if they miss out on an American alliance, they would lose the war. Problem is that that "if" is borderline insane. Just the fact that you say the UK needs US ships and supplies for D-day and in the same breath dare to say the RN could not be used because "their job" is to protect the very supplies you say aren't going to Britain to begin with is telling enough to know that you're incredibly biased.
    1
  2214.  @brianlong2334  So, 30% of their war needs from the US. Why according to you could not at least a third or two thirds of that number be compensated for with trade from elsewhere and/or an expanded industry in Britain? America wasn't the only nation on earth capable of trading, y'know.... Nor was it impossible for Britain to invest in factories of its own. What do you think Britain would do with its treasury if buying US goods was no option? Do tell. Nothing? I never spoke to you about rifles or artillery. Maybe check up on who you're speaking with before you write random accusations. And the German Navy doesn't have to spread its ships so thin? What a strange statement. If they even decide to build as many u-boats without massive transatlantic trade to begin with, they'd in this timeline have to intercept trade routes from many places instead of a massive trade route from the US. So they'd be spread more thin. Don't tell me you meant that they could loiter around Britain in this timeline, because there's a very good reason they couldn't do this in real life. Literally all you do is call me a "fanboy" (I'm not even British) and say "no" without any evidence or arguments. Like randomly saying it's unlikely Britain could win North Africa, without any argument or evidence supporting that. Worthless.
    1
  2215. Well, both Germany and Japan did consider it as such
    1
  2216. Won't vote for nationalists, but with the mistakes our current politicians have made these past few years I'd almost welcome them...
    1
  2217.  @tomsnijders6092  Oh dat valt nog best mee vergeleken met de laatste verkiezingen, maar nog steeds niet denderend. We gaan zien wat het uiteindelijk wordt
    1
  2218.  @MrQwerty2524  De opkomst voor binnenlandse verkiezingen ligt steevast rond de 80%, dus nee de HELFT is niet denderend.
    1
  2219. Well we call it Netherlands in Dutch without THE (though technically both is correct in Dutch)
    1
  2220. +Jaron Lindow True. If you get a serious form of cancer in your lifetime with immortality gene editing, get ready to spend your entire life battling tumours that return incessantly. Unless the gene editing stopped the aging of cells, though, as that would keep the risk of cancer low.
    1
  2221.  Pinga - Politiek Incorrecte Gast  Dat snap ik, maar op deze manier haal je mensen niet over. Mijn vader bijvoorbeeld vond Thierry een goed politicus in het begin, maar irriteerde zich steeds meer aan zijn arrogante opstelling. Hij gaat niet op 'm stemmen nu omdat hij zijn arrogantie niet in de politiek vindt passen. Tja, toch een stem verloren, en zo zullen er nog meer zijn.
    1
  2222.  @rocker4ever  Zijn houding betekent dat zijn punt niet goed overkomt. Ikzelf heb me verdiept in zijn programma en vind het over het algemeen goed, maar als ik naar dit debat kijk dan zie ik iemand die zijn punten gewoon niet goed weet over te brengen. Voor mij is dat geen probleem omdat ik het programma toch al ken, maar voor iemand die twijfelt en naar dit debat kijkt kan dat betekenen dat Baudet een stem mist die hij had kunnen hebben. Zoals mijn vader.
    1
  2223. Uh huh, sure
    1
  2224.  @carl48uk  Yes, that's a succesful invasion.
    1
  2225. De 15 grootste zeeschepen stoten meer uit dan alle auto's op de aarde samen. Dit gaat om grote bedrijven en internationale handel. Wederom een probleem met globalisatie. Het probleem is JUIST dat ipv de internationale bedrijven aan te pakken, de gewone burger die in vergelijking niks uitstoot wordt aangepakt. Dit gaat wéér om economische groei boven alles. Men ziet liever internationale bedrijven en goedkope invoer hier dan lokale fabrieken. Wij verdommen de lage midden klasse in ruil voor globalisatie, economische groei en extra banen in de steden. Dat is de kern van globalisatie; fabrieken verdwijnen en de lage midden klasse is de sigaar, en wij krijgen er andere banen (die de lage midden klasse niet vult) en goedkope import voor terug; economische groei. En hetzelfde geldt voor het klimaat.
    1
  2226. Valse beschuldigingen als deze worden ook wel smaad of laster genoemd. Dat heeft niet veel met vrijheid van meningsuiting te maken. De PVV doet alleen politieke uitspraken
    1
  2227. +Lil Beaver I don't know if you're trolling but there is no one "best" country. America is lacking in many areas, but is good in others. The same holds true for other countries. There is no one country that is objectively better than all the others. There only is a group of countries that can be called better than the rest; the first world. Beyond that, you can't really say one of them is the best. America has lots of issues, way too many to be called the best and arguably even too many to be called one of the best (talking about quality of life, healthcare, education, things like that). Some European and Asian countries are consistently at the very top of those lists and can be called the best of the world (but still not one of them is the best country, they are way too similar in their performance), while the US is sometimes at the top, mostly in the lower top, occasionally even at the bottom. The US scores too inconsistently on the quality of life, etc. indices to call it the best. And even the countries that are consistenly at the top can't be objectively called better than the other countries that are also consistently at the top.
    1
  2228. +Skankhunt42 Nonsense. More guns means a higher risk of even more dangerous peole acquiring them. Here is the Netherlands the most dangerous criminals have guns, but most do not. If the citizens opt to arm themselves and make guns readily available to all to defend themselves against the criminals that also have guns, that means we will have guns but also every single criminal. All in all, this would make the country a more dangerous place with more instances of guns being used against civilians and the police would be undermined in carrying out their job with an ever increasing amount of danger around them. Now in the US they're past the point of no return and all criminals can already get guns braindead easily, so at this point it seems redundant to start taking guns away, but the best case scenario is a society with low availability of guns. Criminals will always know ways to acquire them, but when society has low availability of guns, so will criminals. If someone breaks into my house right now, he's very unlikely to have a gun. In America you can be almost certain he'll be armed. How could you not be as a criminal breaking into the house of someone who can himself be armed?
    1
  2229. +As Op That more guns = more dangerous society. This "I need to protect myself therefore I need a gun" thing does the exact opposite of keeping you safe. In societies where only the police, certain criminals and a low number of civilians have guns, you see that most criminals aren't wel armed. As civilians start to arm themselves, criminals arm themselves even more. I'd rather have an unarmed robber in my house with me being unarmed as well than to have an armed robber in my house with me having a handgun. The last situation is much more likely to see one of us killed. In societies without high gun counts, illegal guns are difficult to come by even for criminals. As a result, only top class criminals will have them. And the thing is; top class criminals don't come into contact with civilians, they don't rob they do more intricate things in hiding, such as fabricating drugs. The lower class criminals that rob stores or houses in a society without many guns, won't have a gun. Therefore, civilians in a low gun count society are safer, despite not having a gun themselves. On top of that, the police is much more capable of dealing with criminals in such a society and will do a better job battling them, again keeping the civilians safer.
    1
  2230. @You're Gonna Hate This A pyramid can work if the wealth is distributed in a more or less fair manner and the lowest branch has a comfortable enough life to stave away revolutionary sentiment. This is already achieved by enacting some socialist policies witin a capitalist framework, which is not difficult to achieve at all (EDIT: not to mention a properly functioning democracy and what that does to give the lower branches a feeling of self-government). What worries me more about capitalism is its goal of endless economic growth, whether that's workable and whether it can be combined with sustainability (both from climate change and more direct environmental considerations). If redistributing a bit of wealth (a bit higher percentage tax and international cooperation to ban tax havens would already be more than enough) was capitalism's main issue there'd be no systematic issue at all. But I fear there's more to worry.
    1
  2231. Ah, so Tommy's imprisonment is the EU's doing now too? The EU is doing everything nowadays...
    1
  2232. +Vanster73 The EU has done the most out of everyone to stop migrants from flooding Europe. It was the EU that stopped the Middle Eastern migrant stream. It is the EU that is now working on stopping the lesser African stream through Libya (the deal with the Libyan coast guard had good effect, but it isn't perfect and they still come). You know who caused the migrant stream? The US and its brilliant idea to cause a civil war in Syria, right next to EU borders. The same holds true for Libya. It was interventionalism that caused our problems and the one and only entity actually working to solve those problems is... yes, the European Union. The EU is not part of any agenda; the EU does whatever its member states decide it will do. If there is an agenda then it's the member states that adhere to it, not the EU. The EU itself is nothing, it is directed by the countries that form it. Created by and led by them. The EU is just all of our countries sitting together and voting on what to do next And the EU has no power in the UK. Even if Tommy was silenced, it was the UK government and not the EU.
    1
  2233.  @curtmacquarrie  Then that would only be true because borders select which immigrants may come through (i.e. only skilled ones and those that are fleeing from war) and which are may not enter.
    1
  2234. +TIK If you mean similar in very, very broad terms, then you do have a point. Considering the clear misunderstandings in the comment section it might be good to make a video on the differences as well, to make a complete picture of the matter.
    1
  2235.  @downey2294  Yes.
    1
  2236. Patton best general that ever lived!!!1! /s
    1
  2237.  @luuk441  Daarom had ik het hem gegund om keihard in elkaar getrapt te worden door Rico. Zo'n blessure is alsnog een rotmanier om deze wedstrijd tot een einde te brengen. Ik had willen zien hoe Rico hem in de navolgende rondes in elkaar trapt, maar jammer.
    1
  2238. Tja elk land bepaalt dat zelf, maar klopt dat dat vreemd is. Je wil natuurlijk geen EU die stemmen verplicht mag stellen in Nederland of het feit dat bijvoorbeeld België (geloof ik) stemmen verplicht mag verbieden vanuit de EU. Dus vandaar dat iedereen dat zelf mag bepalen
    1
  2239. That's why pulling out is a bad idea. We must pull Iran closer and closer. Increase trade, better our relations. And then, one day, our trade with them is worth billions and we can say no nukes or we impose sanctions. And those sanctions would hurt Iran to the point of it not being worth it to create nukes. Right now the trade is just not at that level yet. The deal was only temporary, true, but it gave us time. The more we trade with Iran, the more control we have over them. As for the 150 billion... that was Iranian money that we froze. It was all theirs to begin with.
    1
  2240. +professor1729 The US wants a weak and divided Europe that it can dominate. You are traitors to Europe. No not the EU, traitors to EUROPE.
    1
  2241. Oh boy, you're in for a treat with the Witcher 3
    1
  2242.  @shmeet  The Russians fought a bloody civil war that the revolutionaries ultimately won. They are not scared of open conflict, that is the entire point of a violent revolution. That they can own guns in the US will make it easier for them to start a revolution, if anything.
    1
  2243.  @shmeet  "Not sure i follow. What's the difference compared to just "discussion"? Why "democratic" discussion?" The point of the marketplace for ideas and plurality of ideas is to facilitate democracy. We have freedom of speech for the sole purpose of preventing the plurality of ideas that works as the groundwork of democracy to be damaged. It exists to ensure that within democracy different ideas can clash in discussion and the best and/or most supported idea ideally comes out on top. The democratic discourse is the discussion of ideas that decide the political future of our societies. Not all political ideas are acceptable within a democratic rule of law. Me wanting to vote on taking away YOUR democratic rights or even your very life, non-negotiable . There are limits to the ideas that can be part of the democratic discourse. Advocating for literal genocide is not a negotiable thing within a democratic rule of law; there are certain absolute limits to how far ideas may encroach upon citizens' human rights. Since those ideas are not accepted within the democratic discourse and since freedom of speech exists for the sole purpose of protecting the democratic discourse, it doesn't make sense to invoke freedom of speech for ideas that were never meant to be protected by it in the first place. "All that does is force the radicals underground. It doesn't stop the ideas from spreading, it makes them appear credible and the ones involved (...) That precedent must never be allowed." It does force radicals towards the underground... and denies them an audience for their ideas. It places as many obstacles in their way as possible to spread their ideology, which ensures that the broader populace is unlikely to ever become radical. They may communicate secretly in the open, but they won't radicalise the broader populace that doesn't understand their dog whistles. Their secret communication only serves to signal their beliefs to other radicals that are already aware of the dogwhistles so they may congregate, not to spread their ideology among the broader populace. We keep a watchful eye on them and force them to the underground. Those two are not mutually exclusive. Furthermore, keeping a watchful eye on someone is useless if you're not actually going to do anything if you spot their ideology. If they are succesful, all you can do under absolute freedom of speech is be "watchful" of how they spread their ideology and grow, coming closer and closer to enacting their genocidal ideas by the day. Radical terrorist muslims that attempt to spread their filth among other muslims do not need to be "watched", they need to be actively prevented in their endeavour to spread their violent ideology and watched. Watching is meaningless if you don't connect action to it. Your idea of a "watchful eye" is tantamount to condoning their growth , with all due consequences if they manage to grow enough to pose a societal problem. And freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of thought. Everyone is free to think absolutely everything. They are free to be nazi's and congregate amongst themselves (though should matters get serious enough, at least the congregation could be banned too). They are not free to spread their ideology, however. There is a difference between passively thinking/believing and actively spreading. There also is not a "precedent" we're setting. There will be no further limitation of freedom of speech than speech that spreads violent or otherwise unacceptable ideologies. There is no slippery slope, there is a clear and robust line we're drawing in the sand: no anti-democratic ideologies, no violent ideologies. That's it. This is not a "precedent" to anything. You're using a slippery slope fallacy there.
    1
  2244. Half Jamaican, half Indian. I.e. not black, unless the one drop rule is still in full force in the US (which tbf it seems to be...)
    1
  2245. About your example of the levelling of houses in Palestine, I think the "why?" of the civilians that usually complain about that comes from the fact that it was not them that fired the missiles. Hamas uses these tactics so that they have human shields against a counter attack. The civilian whose house got bombed didn't have anything to do with it, it's Hamas that put them in this situation and then Israel that finalises the bombing. They're caught in the middle and are mostly angry at the one that did the bombing, but really should understand it's both Hamas and Israel that caused this. As long as they won't realise this and blame only Israel, Hamas will get more volunteers and the situation will perpetuate itself...
    1
  2246.  @Imaculata  Eerder met ongeloof naar hoe ver een mondige minderheid het schopt terwijl ze het publieke debat totaal hebben verloren en de overgrote meerderheid het niet eens is met hun argumenten. Het is goed dat de minderheid een stem heeft, maar ze moeten wel hun gelijk krijgen dmv goede argumenten en niet de wil doordrukken zoals nu gebeurt (middels organisaties als de NTR en sommige gemeenten). De meerderheid accepteert simpelweg niet dat Zwarte Piet racistische bedoelingen heeft en dat komt niet door "racisme" maar omdat KOZP heeft gefaald ze te overtuigen. Ik betwijfel dat wij met schaamte terug zullen blikken op iets waarvan de tegenstanders niet eens met deugdelijke argumenten kan komen waarom ZP dan racistisch zou zijn. Het enige wat ik zie zijn zwakke vergelijkingen met blackface in de VS. Als KOZP goed kan beargumenteren waarom Zwarte Piet racistisch is, dan zullen ze de meerderheid geheid met zich mee krijgen. De meerderheid maakt het namelijk niet al te veel uit of ZP verandert, maar willen ook niet dat ZP zonder reden verandert. Als KOZP gelijk heeft zou het makkelijk moeten zijn om hun gelijk te halen omdat de radicale pro-zwarte piet mensen net als zij in de minderheid zijn. Maar ZELFS het midden kunnen ze niet overhalen. Dan kan ik niets meer zeggen dat ze keihard hebben gefaald in het publieke debat en zelfs onder mensen die best bereid zijn ZP te veranderen onvoldoende steun hebben kunnen vergaren.
    1
  2247.  @Imaculata  Zo werkt het niet. Er zijn mensen die om gerechtvaardigde redenen ergens aanstoot aan nemen en mensen die aanstoot nemen aan de meest onbenullige dingen. Het onderscheid tussen die twee zit 'm in de argumentatie daarachter. Je kan echt niet stellen dat aanstoot nemen aan dit: https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/231134/Bedreigingen-om-racistische-make-up-Ze-zouden-mijn-kinderen-iets-aandoen Hetzelfde is als aanstoot nemen aan de Amerikaanse blackface met de zeer racistische context daarachter. Het hele punt van blackface is om zwarte mensen belachelijk te maken, dus dat is aantoonbaar beledigend. Maar als we het hebben over die make-upwedstrijd waar ik naar linkte, dan zie je dat daar totaal geen racistische context aan kleeft en de bedoelingen achter die make-up ook totaal niks met zwarte mensen te maken hebben, dus in die context wordt het heel moeilijk om te verdedigen dat dat beledigend is. Context is belangrijk en niet elke claim van racisme is even begrijpelijk. Sommige mensen stellen zich aan en zien overal racisme in; hun mening is minder waard omdat hun gevoel niet is gestoeld op een logisch argument. Hysterie over vermeend racisme is niet hetzelfde als écht racisme. Het onderscheid tussen de twee is te maken dmv argumenten en logica. En verder verdient opmerking dat massa-hysterie nog steeds hysterie is. Dat verandert niets. Als mensen bij wijze van spreken een zwarte kraai racistisch vinden en alle kraaien willen verwijderen, om maar iets geks te noemen, dan maakt het NIETS uit hoeveel mensen dat vinden, het zal altijd een dom en verkeerd standpunt blijven. Massa verandert niets aan de waarde van het argument. En daar zou jij het ook mee eens moeten zijn want de massa in NL gelooft dat ZP NIET racistisch is. De vraag is dus waar het figuur van Zwarte Piet moet worden geplaatst. Dat is niet een kwestie van hoeveel mensen ZP wel of niet aanstootgevend vinden, maar een kwestie van logisch beredeneren waarom de figuur aanstootgevend zou zijn en wat voor veranderingen nodig zijn om dat te verhelpen. Gelukkig is de overgrote meerderheid in NL gevoelig voor dergelijke argumenten en houdt slechts een kleine minderheid koste wat kost vast aan Zwarte Piet, dus mits de argumenten goed zijn zou KOZP met succes de meerderheid moeten kunnen overhalen. In dat opzicht faalt KOZP. Dan is mijn conclusie dat ze onvoldoende kunnen onderbouwen waarom Zwarte Piet racistisch zou zijn.
    1
  2248. Your critique of socialism fails if you consider the anarchist camp (or communist as you see to call them). Anarchists do not want a government, let alone a totalitarian one. Anarchists want horizontal structures of power in which all individuals hold roughly equal power. This is an organisation of individuals, discussing matters that concern them. And crucially, they DO NOT want the majority to be able to enforce decisions upon the minority, meaning your issue of “democracy as a dictatorship” does not take place. Anarchists wish nothing but freedom, and think that as free individuals seek to improve their lives they will voluntarily start cooperating to achieve this. And if any individual does not participate, they are free to do so as long as they don’t infringe on the freedoms of others. It’s all about free individuals finding out how to best organise to improve their own lives, while respecting the freedoms of all.
    1
  2249.  Who Knew?  What we need is a strong culture with good values and binding traditions. Any society that advances enough is bound to reach a point where they outgrow the notion of a literal god with an unfallible scripture. And if that religion was one of the pillars that bound your society together, you've got a problem. So you need a culture and/or spirituality that transcends this. I hope that in the future we revive our pagan origins and redress our current traditions to go back to their original meanings. Easter is not about christ, it is about celebrating the blossoming and fertility of nature. Midsummer is about celebrating the height of summer and the brightest day in the year. Samhain/Halloween is a feast marking the end of the harvest season. Yule/Christmas is a festival starting on the darkest day of the year, in which you symbolically take in an evergreen and light up your house to symbolise that nature/green will blossom again and light will return again. Then repeat the cycle. We need traditions about something REAL, in the case of Europe we're sitting on many traditions related to real natural cycles that can help bind us again and will have us celebrate and appreciate nature together. This would return a sense of community, balancing out with the current individualism. Humans do need a type of common spirituality to keep that sense of community alive, but believing in gods is behind us at this point.
    1
  2250.  @henktank1633  Omdat Biden daarop hamerde en Trump juist zei dat dat niet gedaan moest worden. Maar dat voornamelijk democraten dit nu hebben gedaan is pijnlijk, want briefstemmen is gewoon fraudegevoelig. Daarom mogen wij dat niet in Nederland, zelfs niet tijdens coronatijd. Dit gaat Trump dus sowieso gebruiken.
    1
  2251. +Endless Slumber Firstly, the US Marshal plan was purely out of self interest. You needed a trade partner and you got one. You got your billions back several times over. Without Europe you also couldn't have won the Cold War. It was an investment out of self interest which happened to also be in Europe's interest. Secondly, there is only one country abusing NATO and spitting in their allies' faces and that would be the US. Is using NATO for wars like Iraq and interventions like Libya in Europe's "defence" or in anyone's defence for that matter? No. The US uses NATO as its personal tool for war. And sometimes you even cause damage to your allies through NATO and other interventions. The US fuelling a civil war in Syria and US-led NATO interventions in Libya caused over 2 million migrants to come to the EU . You spit on your allies and constantly play the aggressor even if your allies are collateral damage. You care only for your own interests. I sincerely hope Trump destroys NATO.
    1
  2252. Nah, there's a lot more about America that people laugh about. The government I mean, not the people
    1
  2253. The UK is literally in the Baltic states right now, so it's quite ridiculous to say they wouldn't be involved when Russia would invade the Baltic states
    1
  2254. All genuine regional independence movements should be supported. Fuck states that think their borders are more important than the actual lives of the people on the land.
    1
  2255.  @marca7542  Better for them than a nationalist Ukraine trying to solidify its national identity and force it on minorities. This does not excuse an invasion of course, but it's true that Ukraine isn't all too nice to their minorities, especially not after the US-backed coup. I detest both Russian and American imperialism in the region, but I do think that independence for Ukrainian regions that want it would be a good thing. Because they are minorities that do not want to deal with a nationalist Ukraine trying to impose their national identity on them and they have historically divided Ukraine along pro-EU and pro-Russia lines. Splitting up Ukraine across pro-EU and pro-Russia lines would not be a bad outcome for Ukrainians imo. They would be left with a fiercely pro-EU west that eventually could gain membership and would politically be a lot more unified. And the pro-Russian east could do what it wants as well. Overall, trying to put a bunch of ethnic groups with very different geopolitical aspirations into one country is a bad idea. Especially not if you mix it with nationalism. For years this fierce split between pro-EU and pro-Russia has deeply divided Ukraine, with sometimes the pro-Russians gaining a small majority and other times the pro-EU side. That is politically not stable at all and one side always loses out significantly. And I don't care for Russian/American imperialist interests here, but Russia would have its buffer state between NATO and their borders and the US would have its desired NATO expansion eastwards. So hopefully this would put the imperialist grandstanding to rest as well. Above all I wish all these nations would quit their imperialist bullshit, but that unfortunately will not happen. US wants to for some reason expand its global dominance even more and Russia just wants to retain the influence it has and maybe gain a bit here and there. And fuck the both of them.
    1
  2256.  @sheatanner9935  Almost no country in existence has more shit to shovel than the United States. Don't downplay the history of the US by saying "others have done bad things too".
    1
  2257.  @trynitro_  I said "almost". But even in the case of the British Empire, they forbade westwards expansion in the American colonies and didn't have insane ideas of exceptionalism that made them think it was fine to genocide the population of half a continent and replace them as the main population. Their main fault was reeducating natives, thinking their culture was inferior and believing they were helping by forcing European culture and education on them, thereby almost destroying their native cultures. Which is different from outright thinking all their land was given to you by god and they must all die, with some small remnants being herded into tiny reservations. Even in the worst examples of the British Empire, being Canada and Australia, the natives today own roughly 1/3rd of the land in each respective country and their culture is alive. In the US, the native reservations are about 3% of the total land mass. You'd have to give all of a state like Alaska to the natives to even get to half of what Australia and Canada have done. In terms of modern history, the US is exceptionally cruel. I mean, you forcefully sterilised native women up until the bloody 1970's.
    1
  2258.  @trynitro_  From a historical standpoint I agree with you. It's pointless to compare whose suffering was 'worse' back then, especially when talking about suffering on that scale. But looking at the lasting effect of past actions, I do believe that I can say that Indians today are doing very much better than Native Americans and therefore, what America has done had a worse impact compared to what the British Empire did in India.
    1
  2259. If the overall spending is linear, why does it matter for the military capabilities of China that the per capita spending has risen?
    1
  2260. An Iran war would be way too many casualties for the US. They'd lose popular support FAST and be forced to cease the invasion. It'd be Vietnam 2.0
    1
  2261. Nope that's just business as usual. Corporate media won't question anything that benefits wall street and the establishment
    1
  2262. And the EU itself is also a military alliance with training. What Binkov says here is like saying if Russia invades the Baltic nations NATO would have trouble responding because they're different nations. It doesn't make sense
    1
  2263. .... America
    1
  2264. Misschien bedoelden ze een superdeluxe latte macchiato met goudschilfers erop of zo haha
    1
  2265. Nee liever niet
    1
  2266. This is a weak excuse to do anything without criticism
    1
  2267. Het is ook framing in dit geval. Ik heb de context en de complete uitspraak gelezen en daar was niets mis mee. Absoluut niet zoals hoe het in de media wordt weergegeven. De dislike ratio op deze video spreekt boekdelen zou ik zeggen...
    1
  2268. Bill Clinton had een vergelijkbare deal met Noord Korea geloof ik.
    1
  2269. +Judge Morville When did I challenge that illegal migrants should be dealt with? As I said, separating the parents from children is a completely unnecessary measure that has nothing to do with protecting your borders. You can place the families in camps (closed off camps, if need be) and hold them there until you send them back. Separating parents from children has o purpose, it is a useless violation of the right to family life, which you deem so important, yet brutally disregard for these people. Human rights are not absolute; they can be infringed upon when there is a need to do so. But in this situation there simply is no need. It's almost like you're doing it to punish them, taking away their children as a punishment. It's hypocritical, cruel and wholly unnecessary. I'm the last one to deny the US the right to protect its borders (as a European I think you actually let it go on for so long. The US has had a migration problem for decades and Obama was the first president to even start deporting illegals at a reasonable rate, which Trump is now doing at an even higher rate), but this just goes too far.
    1
  2270. +Judge Morville Human rights don't work like that, mate. You don't suddenly lose all your rights when you step into another country. Citizen or not, people have human rights. Placing migrants in prison is not only unnecessary but also stupid. You ought to focus on sending them back instead of punishing them. Put them into a detainment camp with their children and send them back first opportunity you get. That is how you deal with illegal migrants. Now you rip families apart even though it doesn't even have any positive consequences for you. if anything, it will delay their journey back as you punish them by holding them in the US and also separate the family which means you have to get them back together when you're sending them back. This takes time and effort, it's just not practical. Put them in a closed detainment camp together and send them back, don't dawdle, don't be cruel, be effective and practical. There is no excuse for this nonsense.
    1
  2271. +Judge Morville Of course it bloody isn't, when have I stated it is? I was referring to the right to family life, as I did before. Human rights can only be infringed upon when it is justified and necessary . In this case it is neither. If you want to get rid of them, there is no reason whatsoever to split up the family, which will only upset the procedure of returning them. It makes no sense. It is unjustified to rip a family apart while you can just detain them together and get the job done quicker to boot. It's useless and only inflicts suffering onto the migrants. They need to be sent back ASAP, not placed in prison and separated from their children. You are essentially defending the policy of not sending migrants back but instead keeping them in the US and ripping their family apart for no reason other than "punishment". It's senseless and contrary to US interests of deterring illegals and of the migrants human right to family life. There is no defending it.
    1
  2272. SM I agree on Europe but the US is almost the ultimate example of what we don't want. It is stolen land in which the natives were murdered and culturally replaced. The absolute opposite of diversity. Europeans are the natives of Europe. America can be flooded by migrants for all I care, it has no culture to protect anymore, just a bunch of Europeans living there.
    1
  2273. SM... I have no pity for what will happen to you... You will be flooded by migrants and cease to exist and rightfully so. 63% and counting down, you'll be a minority in your "own" country soon. Nothing of worth will disappear, just a multicultural abomination that destroyed the native people of north America and their culture.
    1
  2274.  @pimentacitrica9883  Yeah, but a lot less though. Sure, you can't vote for views that are way outside of the overton window (like anarchism), but there are parties in many European countries that are basically reformist socialists that (maybe not openly) see as their end goal a socialist society but want to move towards it slowly through reforms. I think that's a world of difference when compared to the US, which basically gets to choose between neoliberals and slightly more left-leaning neoliberals (though under Trump the choice is more meaningful as he's more of a classic nationalist).
    1
  2275.  @ShadaOfAllThings  I agree that voting does not change policy, but I'm talking about something different. If a political party is so fiercely rejected by voters that to ever hope to win an election again, they need to actually put in some effort to get people to vote for them again, they will change. That or they will cease to exist. Only in that situation does voting really matter a lot. And I think this election offers a unique opportunity to make the Dems see that they need to change. And we do that by either not voting or voting for another party.
    1
  2276. @Elhammo No you can't. The two-party system is firmly in place in the US and won't ever change if you keep voting for them. It's a pipe dream as long as you keep confirming their power. Establishment Dems are laughing at you for standing in line once again and confirming that they do NOT need to change to get your vote and can keep pushing forward any candidate they like because "vote blue no matter who" succesfully keeps every voter in line. This is exactly what they want and exactly why the US democracy is flawed in the first place. I respect your opinion if you think Trump is so bad that voting for Biden is necessary, but insofar you think voting for Biden has even the slightest chance to bring about change I think you're wrong. In fact, the absolute opposite is true.
    1
  2277.  Aaron Smith  This isn't about things not going exactly in anyone's way, it's about a fundamentally broken democracy in which two huge parties have the power to gaslight voters into casting their vote for them instead of the politicians they truly support. How is this changed? By showing them that this doesn't work , i.e, by not voting for them if they put forth terrible candidates and making them realise that maybe they actually need to listen to what the voters want.
    1
  2278.  @ShadaOfAllThings  Because losing to a nationalist that behaves like Trump is a lot different than losing to a slighty more right-leaning neoliberal. Losing to republicans is not a surprise to them, losing to Trump is an absolute shock to them. Just look at how sure they are that they'll win. Proving them wrong should hopefully be a shock big enough to realise that voters care for their ideology so little that not even Trump can get voters to support them. That's why I think this time it is different and this time there is a chance that rejection of the Dems will make them re-evaluate their strategies.
    1
  2279.  @MAP233224  About the same in the Netherlands. In fact, our government is currently comprised of four parties working together. The idea of parties actually working togeher constructively in national interest is impossible in the US.
    1
  2280. The Dutch Sinterklaas is the original, real santa. The American one was based on Sinterklaas and the tradition goes back to at least the medieval ages. So Santa Clause lives in Spain, as the original legend has it.
    1
  2281. Klopt, en ook al die linkse kranten kunnen er wat van
    1
  2282. Professor Toaster Firstly, you call yourselves America all the time. Secondly, the Americas is short for North and South America, not just America. America is used much more commonly to refer to the USA. The Americas also makes more sense for the continent
    1
  2283. nothingwithlimits The EU can't really be compared to anything else on earth. It's unique. It can't be called a country, but it also can't be called an international organisation. It's something inbetween. The member states are in charge of what happens in the EU, it's not a federal government or something. It's not a federal government that is in charge and grants its states some freedoms (like in the US), it's kind of the other way around. The EU member states are in charge and if something needs to be done together, they do it in the form of the EU. The most important institutions of the EU are literally just the member states sitting together (Council of the EU is literally just ministers of each member state sitting together and voting on something, the European Council is the heads of state of member states sitting together and debating on where the EU goes next, etc.). Besides that, it's also not one entity. I'm Dutch, which means that I have Dutch citizenship, ut also EU citizenship. I essentially have two governments and two citizenships that each give me certain rights. It's kind of complicated
    1
  2284. Now THIS gets me to a theatre!
    1
  2285.  @marcobarros4742  Die generaties dachten tenminste aan een manier om overpopulatie te voorkomen. Heel bedachtzaam van ze om aan de planeet te denken
    1
  2286. +Rationality Rules It belongs to someone else, because non-Abrahamic religions and science are not opposing forces. Paganism was more a kind of spirituality. The gods were not all-knowing entities that were to be praised, appeased and listened to in the "the word of god is truth" Abrahamic sense, they all represented something real and were an attempt to explain those real phenomena. The pagan gods themselves were a very primitive form of science. Thales was mocked for his revolutionary approach because he went against the at the time dominant explanation for natural phenomena, in the same way more modern scientists in the past have been mocked for having theories that go against the dominant scientific explanation for something in their time. Paganism and science were never counter to eachother, as you can see in ancient Greece, Rome and a lot of other places. I'd say he was the father of scientific philosophy, but whoever first stood up to any Abrahamic "word of god is truth" faith would be the father of irreligion. Especially since Thales himself still was spiritual in the pagan sense
    1
  2287. Zo, alle haatbaarden verbannen en ook deze haatprediker. Christelijke haatpredikers zijn zeldzaam, maar ook die bestaan... vooral in de VS
    1
  2288. The film criticises 80's yuppie culture and modern consumerism culture as a whole, not by humanising Patrick Bateman, but by showing that a psychopath like Patrick Bateman actually fits in and even after confessing is met with nobody caring. Because everyone is too busy with their own image to care. The film purposefully leaves whether the murders actually happened in the middle, because it doesn't matter whether they happened. The point is: it doesn't matter to Bateman's surroundings either. The film shows how in a viciously superficial consumerist culture, literal psychopaths can not only fit in but thrive. And it makes us question, should we want to live in such a corrupted culture? A culture in which people who only care for one-upping their equally empty peers and know no emotion beyond disgust, prideare not outcasts, but rather the most succesful members of society?
    1
  2289. +Omasa Bil Naden Klopt. Het is me verteld dat m'n opa ze vroeger ook nog moffen noemde, voordat ik geboren was. Maar ja, dat gevoel kun je niet voor altijd behouden, niet als gezond persoon in ieder geval. De slachtoffermentaliteit betekent dat je eigenlijk gevoelens van haat en tekortdoening in leven wil houden, dat je die elke keer weer aan al die negativiteit herinnerd wil worden. Maar dat moet je niet doen, je moet die gevoelens begraven. Ik zei het al in een andere comment, in dezelfde tijd als die van de slavernij werden in de dertigjarige oorlog 30% van alle duitstaligen gedood. Moet Duitsland dit nu gaan herinneren: "kijk eens wat zij ons allemaal hebben aangedaan"? Het slaat gewoon nergens op en het enige wat dat brengt is haatgevoelens.
    1
  2290. +Awesome Avenger Let's be honest we're both war mongers. The West (particularly the US) started the Arab spring of revolutions to try and create some democracies. Russia is aggressive in the countries you mentioned. In Syria and Ukraine the two foreign policies clashed and now we're being aggressive against eachother (well, predominantly Russia against the West at this moment with all the hacking going on). So if you ask me there's no real good or bad side here, though Russia is acting worse right now in my opinion.
    1
  2291. +Awesome Avenger Fair enough, let's say the West encouraged the Arab Spring then. We know that the EU and US heavily supported the Libyan revolution with limited military intervention and if I recall correctly it is known that the US had a hand in starting Syria and then of course supplied the rebels afterward. I agree that Russia is aggressive, but we're no saints either. We're not nearly as openly aggressive as they are, but we have our interventionalist tendencies. Especially the US goes way too far on certain occasions. I myself am from the EU and I feel horrible for what we've done in Libya. It seems like a good thing to support regime change into a democracy, but we've contributed to making a horrible mess there. It's like a complete anarchy now. And the US, having supplied the rebels in Syria, is partly responsible for the refugee crisis in Europe. The Western and Russian foreign policies simply collided in Syria (US) and Ukraine (EU). We wanted a friendly buffer state between the EU and Russia, so we attempted to befriend Ukraine, which pissed Russia off and turned it very violent. They have no right to be angered, though. Ukraine does what it wants to do.
    1
  2292. +Awesome Avenger It may have shortened the war but I think the way we left Libya behind is an absolute disgrace. I wasn't opposed to the intervention per se, but when we intervene it should produce results and an anarchy state with 4+ rebel factions perpetually fighting for control over the country is not what I call results. Besides that, the current state of Libya is almost the perfect opportunity to make sure it becomes a proper democratic state by intervening and of course shortening the fighting and suffering (and taking away a critical gateway for illegal migrants at that). We just didn't handle it correctly. The US fervently supplied the rebels and lengthened the war significantly. I blame them for destabilising a country so close to Europe and yes I partially blame them for the refugee crisis. They should've known it would go out of hand there when Russia came in. What did they want? Another 10 year proxy war like Cold War times? Come on... Well they got it, but the weapons supplier lost this time. We should NOT support such bloody conflicts. I'd much rather have seen no intervention at all and a swift end to the fighting or perhaps a full-on boots on the ground intervention if they were willing to risk American lives. The supplying has caused a long and bloody conflict as well as a refugee crisis, and in the end Assad wins anyway to top it all off. Well done USA, you're a wonderful ally as always. Sometimes I feel like they do us more harm than good... Clearly the Russian one. It may have been a lengthy intervention, but it produced results. We swiftly rid ourselves of Gaddafi and yes, good riddance, but we still don't know what kind of state Libya will become. Will it be a free democracy or perhaps another dictator? And will that dictator be friendly to Europe? We simply don't know. It's a mess. It didn't cost us much, but it doesn't feel right. Perhaps we should intervene a bit more extensively there to guide the process towards it being a democracy. Well, Ukraine is a buffer state to the EU and Russia, as free as it may be. I live in the Netherlands, where we had a referendum about the association treaty and yes, the main objectives to befriend Ukraine was to have a buffer state between the EU and Russia, as well as increase trade. It was one of the main arguments of the pro-treaty/government camp. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but in getting our defence in order we still work with buffer states and whatnot. Libya was also partly done because we want stable countries at our borders (this one backfired spectacularly, however. As did Ukraine, now that I think about it)
    1
  2293. +Awesome Avenger The way I see it, Syria was over the moment Russia went there to support Assad. The US shoulsn't have unnecessarily lengthened the war by continuing the supply of weapons. It was almost futile. The US caused a Cold War style proxy war to take place in Syria. You can't blame Russia for defending their interest and their arrival in Syria was only made possible by the US' absence. It may be our business, but a 10 year period of severe instability in a country bordering us (by sea borders) is really not in our interest. Apparently the US doesn't quite care about EU interest, however. That's why I partly blame the US for the migration crisis. The moment Russia came in they knew it was going to be a modern Vietnam or Afghanistan proxy war.... at our borders. It's a bit mild to call that negligence, it's much worse than that. They essentially chose for a decade of severe instability at EU borders in exchange for a chance to overthrow Assad. Just a chance. As for Libya, we only have ourselves to blame for that. Surely the Ukrainians don't agree with me, but it's a fact that we and Russia use them as a buffer country. It's unfortunate for them, but that's the place they take in our foreign policies. We express it by approaching them with an association treaty in the hopes they befriend us, Russia expresses it by outright invading them if they refuse to ally with Russia.
    1
  2294.  @指鹿为马-s1h  WHat are you? North Korean? South Korean traitor?
    1
  2295. Technically, you would have to be stronger than the US + EU if you want to oust the West as the current superpower. And nobody is even at half our strength. If we streamline our foreign policies, nobody will ever outweigh our power.
    1
  2296. Yup, it goes so much further than just the Uyghurs. Tibet, Hong Kong.... the Han Chinese want them to assimilate completely at the expense of local culture. The only reason the Uyghurs are most known is because China takes to most severe actions against them, due to their resistance. Cultural genocide is happening across China. Everyone must become like the Han Chinese...
    1
  2297.  @dafttool  They survived the 2004 tsunami.... somehow.... And they survived there for tens of thousands of years, which certainly is not bad. There is no indication that they won't make it
    1
  2298. The problem is that the debate is too short. Trump wanted to speak longer clearly, as did Biden on certain issues, but they were cut off to move to the next subject. And Trump wouldn't allow for that, which led to all the issues. That is not being treated unfairly, it's just the way the debate was designed.
    1
  2299. Trade = taking money. Okay then.
    1
  2300.  @nsbfront3343  Zo werkt de vrijheid van meningsuiting niet. De grens ligt bij oproepen tot geweld en haatzaaien.
    1
  2301. +Lord of Light A national anthem not even written by that nation and you're totally fine with it? A national anthem is supposed to be representing a country, you can't just take a drinking song from another country and change the wording. Not if you have any respect for your country, that is... You're just making a false comparison. This isn't a "cover song by a band", this is the national anthem of a country and it is taken from a British drinking song about alcohol and prostitutes. Any normally thinking person would find it a disgrace to have such a song as their anthem
    1
  2302.  @greedokenobi3855  Ik bedoelde buitenlanders als in mensen die niet in NL woonachtig zijn. Het was een respons op een comment over de VN die het allemaal maar racistisch vond. Ik besteed geen aandacht aan buitenlanders die van grote afstand naar tradities van anderen kijken en het meteen racistisch noemen. Dat doet me niks, zeker niet als ze nog een stap verder gaan en zeggen dat het veranderd moet worden. Als zwarte piet wordt aangepast wordt dat gedaan door bezwaren van mensen de hier zijn en er echt last van hebben en niemand anders. Dan moeten die bezwaren trouwens wel goed beargumenteerd zijn. Verandering van cultuur gebeurt vanuit de samenleving zelf en niet anders. Ik moet overigens wel zeggen dat mijn comment ook toepassing heeft op sommige anti zwarte piet demonstranten in NL. Die zien iets wat enigszins op blackface lijkt en stellen het dan meteen gelijk met blackface, terwijl de waarheid veel genuanceerder ligt. Dat zijn mensen zoals in dit nieuwsitem niet lang geleden: https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/231134/Bedreigingen-om-racistische-make-up-Ze-zouden-mijn-kinderen-iets-aandoen Ik zat een talkshow te kijken waarin een activiste bij hoog en laag beweerde dat deze make-up racistisch was en zei voorts "mijn huidskleur is geen kostuum", het is gewoon te belachelijk voor woorden. Er zijn tegenwoordig veel mensen die overal racisme achter zien en daarom vind ik dat ook voor zwarte piet het simpele klagen erover niet genoeg is; de klachten moeten goed onderbouwd zijn.
    1
  2303. @La Honda Migratie is van alle tijdperken, maar op deze schaal en zulke afstanden absoluut niet. En je stopt daar wel heel veel woorden in mijn mond, waar haal je in godsnaam vandaan dat ik wil dat anderen minder rechten hebben? En over cultuur, het gaat niet alleen om verschillende culturen, maar ook de mate waarin culturen verschillen. Waarom denk je dat westerse migranten veel beter integreren en ook eerder worden geaccepteerd dan niet-westerse? Omdat hun cultuur al op die van ons lijkt. Hoe groter het verschil tussen culturen, hoe moeilijker het is samen door één deur te gaan. En dat is een feit. Als het ons niet lukt om samen op te trekken (en even voor de duidelijkheid, dat heb ik het liefst) blijft er maar één ding over: concluderen dat multiculturalisme heeft gefaald. We leven door multiculturalisme in een steeds meer gepolariseerde samenleving. Je kan zo veel naar de geschiedenis verwijzen als je wil, maar feit blijft dat als wij vandaag de dag geen multiculti samenleving hadden, één van de grootste politieke problemen en dé bron van verdeling in ons land er niet zou zijn. Ons land zou weer één zijn, zonder of in ieder geval met veel minder polarisatie. Een beter land. Multiculturalisme heeft ons niets goeds gebracht, behalve misschien wat economische groei. Economische groei die de negatieve effecten op onze samenleving totaal niet waard is. Diversiteit heeft nul komma nul waarde, behalve "is toch leuk?". Maar in de tussentijd is het wel een bron van veel conflict in onze samenleving. Mensen als jij verdedigen alles blindelings. Alles moet kritisch bekeken worden, ook multiculturalisme. En als je kijkt wat de voordelen en nadelen ervan zijn, kun je niet anders dan concluderen dat de nadelen het overwicht hebben. Probeer het maar eens, kritisch nadenken. En leg maar eens uit wat voor positiefs multiculturalisme ons brengt dat zwaarder weegt dan de polarisatie en verdeling die het zaait. Je kan lang zoeken, vrees ik.
    1
  2304.  @danthemansmail  Fair enough. With channels like CNN it's 100% organised, which makes it worse than simple bias or even more blatant bias.
    1
  2305.  @mwj8418  Het probleem is niet dat Denk is opgericht door Turkse Nederlanders, het probleem is hoe ze zich in de Kamer gedragen. Ze gedragen zich schandelijk. En over je andere comment, mijn diploma Rechtsgeleerdheid aan de universiteit doet vermoeden dat ik wél het een en ander weet over democratie en vrijheid.... idioot.
    1
  2306.  @mwj8418  Als je al zo lang dat diploma hebt zou je bekend moeten zijn met het concept van de militante democratie en het feit dat je daarbinnen politieke partijen kan verbieden ter bescherming van de democratie. Aldus kunnen anti-democratische/anti-rechtsstatelijke partijen e.d. worden verboden. Zo is in het verleden bijvoorbeeld een politieke partij verboden die onder meer pedofilie wilde legaliseren. In Turkije is ook begin dit millennium een politieke partij verboden die zelfs goed in de peilingen stond maar tijdens een bijeenkomst uitsprak de sharia wet te willen invoeren in Turkije, dat was einde partij. Dat is waar ik naar verwees als antwoord op een eerder comment die impliceerde dat het onmogelijk was om een partij te verbannen uit de Tweede Kamer. Ik bedoelde daar uiteraard niet mee dat Denk hier onder zou vallen of zou moeten vallen.
    1
  2307.  @mwj8418  Het lijkt erop dat je simpelweg niet bekend bent met het concept van de militante democratie. De uitspraak van de HR past daar wel degelijk in. Het gaat erom dat wanneer een politieke partij de democratie wil afschaffen of een bepaald programma heeft dat de rechten van bepaalde individuen zodanig benadeelt dat dat onacceptabel is vanuit de rechtsstaat (zoals in het geval van de pedofilie partij; een gedachtegoed dat vanuit de rechtsstaat bezien onaanvaardbare inbreuken in de levenssfeer van kinderen beoogt te realiseren wordt niet geaccepteerd als onderdeel van de democratie en derhalve verboden). Of de HR dit zelf uitdrukkelijk in het arrest vermeldt of niet is irrelevant, zoals je weet zijn er veel juridische concepten die meer op de achtergrond spelen, zoals pluralisme als we het over doorwerking van internationaal recht hebben. Maar goed, het gaat er niet om of de vraag of de pedofilie zaak daar een specifiek voorbeeld van is, het gaat erom dat ik reageerde op een comment dat erop neer kwam dat het verbieden van politieke partijen niet mogelijk is vanwege democratische overwegingen en ik gaf enkele voorbeelden van gevallen waarin dit wel degelijk kan. Nazistische, communistische, shariapartijen en meer worden vanwege hun anti-democratische en/of onrechtsstatelijke karakter niet toegelaten tot het democratisch discours. Anders zouden we namelijk toestaan dat ondemocratische actoren de democratie zouden gebruiken met het enige doel om de democratie af te schaffen, zoals de Nazi partij dat deed in Duitsland. De democratie is in dit opzicht niet absoluut in die zin dat letterlijk alle denkbeelden worden toegelaten (dit was de heersende opvatting in de Jaren 30 en we weten allemaal hoe dat uitpakte). Jij noemde mij hierom een nep-jurist of iets in die trant maar dat klopt dus niet. Het is noemenswaardig om nog te zeggen dat het hier gaat om een staatsrechtelijk begrip (dat overigens ook niet al te vaak gebruikt wordt omdat dit uiteraard bijna nooit voor komt, los van een enkele uitzondering, waardoor de meeste juristen het niet zullen kennen), dus misschien heb je hier nog nooit van gehoord en dat zou ook niet zo gek zijn.
    1
  2308.  @mwj8418  Nogmaals; democratie én rechtsstaat worden beschermd in de zogenaamde militante democratie door ondemocratische en onrechtsstatelijke actoren buiten het democratische discours te houden. Je zegt niets dat tegen mijn comment in gaat. Je benoemt terecht één element dat hier speelt; het beperken van bepaalde rechten om de rechten van kinderen te beschermen. Maar bij politieke partijen speelt er nóg een dimensie. In die bijzondere gevallen speelt niet alleen of hun programma te verenigen is met de rechtsstaat, maar óók de vraag of dat politieke gedachtegoed een plek verdient binnen ons democratisch debat. Je bepaalt namelijk niet alleen dat iets op dit moment een onrechtvaardige beperking op de rechten van de kinderen oplevert, maar ook dat een bepaalde politieke stroming totaal geen vertegenwoordiging mag hebben binnen de democratie omdat de democratie zich weerbaar opstelt tegenover dergelijke ondemocratische en onrechtsstatelijke ideologieën. Dat laatste element is wat men de militante democratie noemt. Ik heb geen idee waarom we nog discussiëren. Ik weet dat ik hier een heel niche theoretisch/academisch concept noem dat in de praktijk maar zelden voorkomt, maar hier zou geen discussie over mogelijk moeten zijn, het is gewoon een bestaand concept en geenszins een "eigen definitie". Zoek het anders eens op.
    1
  2309.  @mwj8418  Dit is niet "mijn gedachtegoed", dit is een gevestigd concept dat al decennia bestaat binnen de rechtsgeleerdheid. Kennelijk zit jij vast in de opvatting van democratie die we voor de tweede wereldoorlog hadden (een democratie is alleen een echte democratie wanneer het letterlijk alle ideeën toelaat binnen het debat)... een beetje achterhaald.
    1
  2310.  @mwj8418  ............. zoals ik al eerder zei, zoek het op. Ik heb werkelijk geen idee waarom je ervoor kiest zo'n onzinverhaal op te hangen ipv een simpele google search te doen naar de militant democracy zodat je de literatuur ziet. Je lijkt Baudet wel die de klimaatveranderingswetenschap maar blijft ontkennen, maar dan nog een tandje erger.
    1
  2311.  @mwj8418  Welke partij in NL is communistisch? En wat jij presenteert zijn geen argumenten maar ontkenningen van het bestaan van een bekend staatsrechtelijk concept. Ik heb je al meerdere keren uitgelegd wat het inhoudt en dat je dat gemakkelijk kan verifiëren door de term militant democracy op te zoeken. Meer dan dat ga ik niet doen want dat is een verspilling van mijn tijd. Een interessante discussie vind ik nog wel wat, maar reageren op het simpelweg ontkennen van een makkelijk op te zoeken concept heeft geen waarde.
    1
  2312. @Gisela Veras Don't call Christianity the idea of the white male. It completely and utterly destroyed classical Europe very violently and oppressed Europeans for centuries before people rose up against it with the renaissance and age of enlightenment. So many European culture is lost and so many people died here because of Christianity.
    1
  2313. +Almighty Aisha A stone and a statue is the same in this context. The point of the prohibition of idol worshipping is that you don't worship anything that is material. Worshipping money is idol worshipping, worshipping statues is idol worshipping and yes, worshipping a stone is idol worshipping. The point is that you don't worship any kind of item, but rather the spiritual enity of whatever god you believe in.
    1
  2314. +john smith There are no different versions of the bible, just slightly different translations. All of these are derived from one bible in Greek or Hebrew, which are the originals, some dating back to 2500 years ago. The only differences in bibles are laid in different wordings in the translation of those original texts, which are supposed to bring the bible to the general public. So those versions say the exact same thing with different wordings, essentially. Besides, unlike different Islam interpretations, Christians don't kill eachother or hate eachother. The same can't be said if Shias and Sunnis. Different interpretations of Christianity live together in peace because they all believe in the same core message of the religion and because Christianity is the religion of peace
    1
  2315. +exzo k2 I was talking about actual terrorists. Members of groups such as ISIS or Al Qaida outnumber all hateful Christians such as the Westborough church in the US. There just aren't many examples of hateful Christians and those that are have clearly misunderstood the message, but they are Christians nonetheless. And terrorists are only a fraction of what I would qualify as hateful Muslims. As for Israel, it is so strong because it has modern equipment (partially supplied by the US in particular, but also made by themselves) and is very well organised. Arab militaries are notoriously badly organised, which is why a small organised force can mop the floor with them.
    1
  2316.  @Vinmoonsu  Christians took over Europe through crusades and mass killings. But that doesn't make the muslims any better, they try to do the same. Both are abrahamic religions from the middle east that have done nothing but trying to spread their ideology no matter how many die
    1
  2317.  @jameswhiteley6843  The only reason that christians today are non-violent is the renaissance and the enlightenment having Europeanised christianity. Without Europeans changing christianity, we'd be living in a christian version of Saudi Arabia. We should not want islam, judaism or christianity in our countries. All abrahamic filth that has killed tens of millions throughout history and attempted to destroy and replace every culture it encountered. I spit on those religions, all three.
    1
  2318.  @jameswhiteley6843  I agree, but the answer is to go back to those pre-christian values (which have actually been fused with christianity already so many of the values you see in christianity are actually not christian at all). If we go back to that spirituality, religion in Europe would be similar to Japan: almost everybody is atheist but they do align to certain spiritual values and traditions. Most of our pre-christian traditions are still alive, albeit christianised. We only need to drop the christian aspects of them and reintroduce people to their ancient spiritual meanings. The problem with christianity and all abrahamic religions is that they have scripture (that and their values weren't originally made to fit Europeans). Religion embodies a set of cultural norms and values and with unwritten spiritual religions they evolve with the people. With scriptures however... the cultural norms of a specific time are written down (in case of christianity these are 2000 years old by now) and believers are expected to essentially live according to those old norms indefinitely. Luckily christianity in Europe was heavily Europeanised and even paganised too, but we are still stuck with the problem of scripture.
    1
  2319. Goed zo, konden die kinderen niets aan doen. En nu ervoor zorgen dat asielzoekers de zaak niet meer kunnen saboteren door steeds weer in beroep te gaan en het proces jaren te rekken. Het zijn hun ouders die dit hebben bewerkstelligd, willens en wetens ervoor zorgen dat je procedure 5 jaar of zelfs langer duurt, dat mag niet beloond worden. Het is dat het kinderen zijn voor deze ene keer (en al die keren daarvoor...), maar dit moet echt eens afgelopen zijn. Procedures moeten sneller, desnoods met een (deels) verminderde mogelijkheid in beroep te gaan tegen beslissingen. Dit kan echt niet, die ouders moeten gestopt worden.
    1
  2320. Als ik burgemeester was had ik die demonstranten op een andere plek gezet, weg van die intocht. Belachelijk dit. Ze mogen hun stem laten horen maar waarom nou bij die kinderen. Slaat nergens op. En dan zulk gedrag als er iemand komt om je mening te vragen, dat haalt toch het bloed onder je nagels vandaan. Het enige wat werd gezegd was "wat heb je mooie ogen", absurd. Je staat daar toch om je mening te verspreiden, maar één tegenwoord en het valt stil. Waar ben je dan mee bezig, dan moet je je gewoon schamen. Het enige wat die lui kunnen is schreeuwen en kinderen laten huilen
    1
  2321. +Jamey Mikels Mate, this Russia collusion story is only a thing in the USA. It makes zero sense to attack the European president of NATO over this. You'd have to look long and hard for European politicians/figures that actually said Trump colluded with Russia.
    1
  2322. 75% of ships during D-day were British, even more commonwealth. There were 3 beaches for Commonwealth forces, 2 US. All commanders who planned and executed the land, sea and air aspect of D-day and the following breakout of Normandy were British. The plan was mainly based on British experience in Dieppe. Yes, I think it is probable that the Commonwealth could have achieved D-day by itself. The idea that the Commonwealth can't even muster mabe 10-20 thousand extra forces to commit to those 2 extra beaches is ridiculous. However, the following breakout of Normandy is very questionable, since they'd have half the forces. Germany would also have less forces stationed there, however, as they would prepare not for a US+UK invasion, but only for UK invasion and spend the rest of the forces on the Eastern Front. _𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰜_ 
    1
  2323.  _𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰜_  They left their colonies with a token defence force because the mainland had to be defended and US-UK trade routes were more important.
    1
  2324.  _𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰜_  That's wrong. Without US trade making the Battle for the Atlantic necessary (which was about Germany trying to disrupt US trade routes to the UK and the Royal Navy protecting vessels and hunting subs), just about the entire Royal Navy would be available to fight Japan. Which at the time was bigger than the US Navy, plus more advanced. So Japan would lose anyway. They only won in the first place because they only had to face a token colonial force of a few European countries that were focusing on defending their mainland, plus the US who also only had a token colonial force present and wasn't yet deeply invested in defending its assets. If the full attention of either the Royal Navy or as in real life the US Navy was pointed at Japan they'd get curb stomped. And guess what, the Royal Navy is available in a scenario in which there is no Battle for the Atlantic.
    1
  2325.  _𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰜_  This makes no sense. The Royal Navy was mainly deployed in the Atlantic to secure US trade routes. That entire section of the fleet (which would be massive as the Battle for the Atlantic is to date the largest naval battle in human history) would become available to fight Japan, plus probably more because Germany would have no need at all to invest in a navy (main reason for them was to disrupt US trade, it would be a waste of money to build subs to do... nothing of any strategic importance). You can't just ignore this. Or pretend like the Royal Navy would quadruple their Mediterranean patrols for... reasons, instead of facing Japan. They would not just do nothing. Even in real life, the British reinforced their Pacific fleet in 1945 to aid in the planned invasion of Japan. And by comparing its size to the American presence there, you can see that even while patrolling the Mediterranean, North Sea and Atlantic (now in lower numbers because the Battle for the Atlantic was essentially won) the British could afford to send a massive fleet East. The main fleet of the US in the Pacific was the Fast Carrier Task Force under Nimitz with 17 carriers, 6 battleships, 13 cruisers, 58 destroyers and in total 1100 aircraft. The British Pacific Fleet which joined up with that US fleet to attack Japan late war had 10 carriers, 4 battleships, 11 cruisers, 35 destroyers, 14 frigates and a total of 750 aircraft. Not too bad considering this is just the Pacific section of the Royal Navy, while still being active in other regions around Europe as well. While the US wasn't. The truth is that the US mainly handeled the Pacific naval theatre while the Royal Navy basically did the rest (which would be mainly Europe and the Atlantic). I.e. a fair distribution of the two main naval theatres. If a massive part of what the Royal Navy had as its task would not have been necessary, obviously a huge fleet could have been sent to Japan instead to fight them. As seen from the real life fleet the British sent to Japan as they were finishing up the war in Europe, they could and would send spare ships to Japan if available. Absense of the Battle for the Atlantic would mean that even more than the real life British Pacific Fleet would be available to fight Japan. Easily rivalling the US main Pacific fleet. Not surprising, because the Royal Navy and US navy were both extremely capable. RN a lot more in the beginning, while the US navy was more capable by the end of the war. Possibly the Japanese would ironically have to face a bigger and more advanced fleet if they had to face a more committed RN early on in the war...
    1
  2326. I'm sitting here in the Netherlands and watching US politics is one big cesspool of far right policies to me. Democrat or Republican matters little. Only Bernie is the real deal
    1
  2327. Exactly, women were important in paganism, especially in the Germanic, Celtic and Slavic traditions. Shame this was destroyed by christianity
    1
  2328. They are ISIS 2.0
    1
  2329. There always was and always will be LGBT people everywhere in the world because LGBT people are not an ideology or culture. Our existence is a simple fact of this world. You can force us to hide. You can kill us. But you will never change the REALITY that LGBT people will continue to be born and will exist always. From the beginning of time until the end of time. You are fighting reality. It is a fight you will never win. We win this war by default. You cannot erase LGBT people without erasing humanity itself, because we are an inherent part of humanity's existence. All you can do is hurt us and for that I curse you, but you'll never succeed in erasing us. Your stupid ideology is doomed to fail.
    1
  2330. Ja maar dan wordt de vlag van het Verenigd Koninkrijk echt super lelijk
    1
  2331. +Critically Thought Well, lets hope that the US education continues to improve then
    1
  2332.  @technoloverish  Maybe in America, but that sure as hell isn't the case here in Europe
    1
  2333. I agree. The EU is working on separating itself from the US now. In the future we won't rely on them anymore
    1
  2334. This is exactly what they have done throughout the Middle East and beyond with pagans and christians, now it is done onto them in China. I wish we could just leave eachother be in our own countries
    1
  2335. That's why you have a government that can make laws to force them to pay it. Corporations think only about profit, there is no reason to design the law to only think about profit too
    1
  2336.    It's not really anti-white. It just depicts slaves. They were captured by Africans and sold to Europeans, Arabs or other Africans. I don't see anything that specifically targets Europeans here, except for some subsections like the submerged faces that clearly refer to the Atlantic trade.
    1
  2337.  @jadevillaceran5045  And? You tell me how Russia is going to blockade the EU. Truth is the EU will be the one blockading Russia.
    1
  2338. +Eryk Pyc Hmm, a white ethno-state on stolen land. You Americans are truly adorable. The entire point of an ethno-state is to keep an ethnicity and its traditions intact. You have no ethnicity, nor do you have any culture to speak of. An ethno-state makes no sense for Americans. You can't even have an ethno-state because you're not an ethnicity. You're a bunch of migrants from Europe (for a large part rejects) who have lost all contact with their culture
    1
  2339. +Vlad the Inhaler "You're just jealous" is the standard response of Americans. You're just salty and you know it's true. Ethno-states are meant to preserve an ethnicity and its culture/traditions. America can never be an ethno-state. Well, unless it's a native American ethno-state. You are by nature a mixed country, a melting pot of cultures. Even if you turn the US into a fully white country, it's a melting pot of white cultures. That and it's a melting pot of white ethnicities. Slavs differ from Germanic peoples, who differ from the Anglo-Saxons, who differ from other European ethnicities. We are pretty much all mixed even in Europe, but here you can still see clear differences between ethnicities. The typical Slavic facial features can be distinguished from typical Germanic facial features, for example. We differ from one another clearly. In America you're just white. You can change it from a melting pot of brown, black and white to a melting pot of just white but it will always be a melting pot of cultures and no ethno-state. It's not a bad thing that you can't be, but I'm just saying the idea of an ethno-state in the US is ridiculous
    1
  2340. +Delete Facebook De "ismes" mogen dan wel overbruikt worden door sommige mensen, maar dat betekent niet dat ze nooit correct gebruikt kunnen worden
    1
  2341. +Delete Facebook En het argument dat alle ismes onzin zijn is ook een excuus voor luie/inepte mensen om geen fatsoenlijk tegenargument te hoeven formuleren. Je hebt volkomen gelijk dat ismes zo nu en dan (misschien wel vaker wel dan niet) gebruikt worden als excuus, maar dat is ook weer niet in alle gevallen zo. Soms is iets ook echt een isme, en dan is het juist degene die zegt dat alle isme standaard onzin-argumenten zijn die met een onzinnig tegenargument komt. Nu heb je wel gelijk dat als je zegt dat iets een isme is je ook met ondersteunende argumentatie moet komen waarom er daadwerkelijk sprake van een isme zou zijn, maar toch zijn ismes een ding. En in principe moet je zelf ook met argumentatie komen om te onderbouwen dat iets geen isme is (of dat er wel sprake is van een isme, maar dat dat in die context aanvaard zou moeten worden). Racisme wordt bijvoorbeeld veel te vaak en veel te snel gebruikt, maar als iets daadwerkelijk racistisch is en je onderbouwt dat ook met goede argumenten (alsook waarom racisme in die context slecht is)... dan gebruik je een isme op een correcte manier. Wil je dan die uitspraak weerleggen, dan zul je zelf met argumenten moeten komen die weerleggen dat er een isme is of beargumenteren dat dat isme in die context goed is. Dus het gebruik van ismes en de weerlegging van ismes zijn in wezen twee kanten van dezelfde medaille; beide zijn lege uitspraken zonder bijgevoegde argumentatie.
    1
  2342. Because you desecrate European culture and world heritage sites
    1
  2343. +s p True. America wasn't ready for war either, though. Actually, the USSR was in a better position than the US in terms of military. The US had a pitiful army at the start of WW2, equal in size to a small European country like the Netherlands... (300k standing army max, equipped with mostly outdated WW1 equipment). You'd also be surprised how technologically inferior the US was to everyone else before they received all kinds of information from the British in exchange for them manufacturing their weapons for them. The only of the allies that truly stood for their principles was the UK, which deliberately chose not to go for peace while they were on the losing side and risked to lose their country to an invasion while they didn't have to. The US and USSR clearly didn't have principles in mind, but I do respect the USSR because they were invaded and bravely defended themselves until the end. They clearly were never going to surrender. The US... they made money off the backs of both and joined only when the allies were starting their counterattack (after the USSR won Stalingrad and the British North Africa, the allies never really lost again). It was the UK and USSR that together fought the allies out of the huge disadvantage they were in. Germany was winning and winning, until Stalingrad and El Alamein. The US joined when the war was already turned around, but did help greatly at D-day and beyond.
    1
  2344. +Anna Lee Fitcher How many political opponents does Putin have that stand a chance of winning? And what happens to political opponents that do gather a respectable following? Navalny is constantly harrassed by the police, some others have been killed by unknown perpetrators (could be the government, could be a coincidence). Think about it, the political landscape in Russia is not very diverse. Putin is really the only realistic option, the rest is undermined. You can see the same thing in America. There are two established parties (democrats, republicans) and the rest have zero chance of winning (if you didn't know, yes there actually are more parties than those two in the US). Looking at how those two parties are artificially held in power by a system that revolves around pumping money in campaigns and how it's virtually impossible for parties aside from the big two to attain such money, would you call that a democracy? Apply this logic to Putin and his virtually non-existant political adversaries. Is a democracy with only one or two choices truly a democracy?
    1
  2345. +s p Yes and at first they were allied with Nazi Germany to invade Poland together. Both Communism and Fascism were totalitarian ideologies that ended up murdering millions of people. And if you think having 20 million deaths is a good thing, think again. The war in the east and west was different, but both sides were extremely important. The east was bloody fighting, while the west was more strategic victories. You can see it in the casualties. In the east, the Soviets killed 4.5 million German soldiers and captured 2.8 million, totalling to 7.3 million German casualties. In the west, the allies killed about 700.000 Germans and captured 6.7 million, totalling 7.4 million German casualties. People always think Russia did more because the fighting was so fierce in the east, but both fronts were actually about equally important. The east was just a lot bloodier, while in the west the Germans were mostly oumanoeuvred and captured instead of fought until the last man. And by the way, before you brag about Berlin, look at a map. Great Britain was first in Germany, followed very soon after by the US. The Western allies had been in Germany for weeks while the USSR was still in Poland. Berlin was taken by the USSR for only one reason: it's located at the utmost eastern border of Germany. For the allies, taking Berlin meant they already had taken pretty much all of Germany before that... For Russia it was essentially enter Germany an the first thing you see is Berlin. Anyway, as I said both sides were equally important.
    1
  2346. +s p Yes you're right, the war took a huge toll on Russia. I'm from the Netherlands and Hitler saw us as pretty much equal to the German "masterrace" so he didn't go on a murdering spree here. He did cause a shortage of food one year, but its nothing compared to what he did in the east... He saw slavs as inferiors, so he really went to town in the east and did horrible things. We celebrate WW2 as us having fought for our freedom, but for Russia I notice it means even more... As for communism, you're correct that the murdering was actually due to Stalin, but communism itself remains a totalitarian regime. Dissidents are not allowed, Stalin or no Stalin. Even today in China dissidents are still not allowed and they're imprisoned or in some cases even tortured. Under Fascism or Communism you can have a good life.... as long as you don't dare oppose the government.
    1
  2347.  @goydepatriot283  Wat lul je nou? Mannen zijn geen uniforme wezens die altijd aan bepaalde eigenschappen voldoen. Het enige wat iemand tot man maakt is het biologisch man zijn. Voor de rest hebben mannen uiteenlopende persoonlijkheden en eigenschappen. Ja, doorgaans zijn dat kwaliteiten die jij noemt en die binnen onze samenleving als typisch "mannelijk" worden gezien. Maar dat betekent niet dat vrouwen niet ook die eigenschappen kunnen hebben (zie bijvoorbeeld Thatcher, die meer mannelijk was in haar persoonlijkheid dan de gemiddelde man), of dat er mannen bestaan die niet de typische mannelijke eigenschappen hebben. Thatcher was een vrouw, ongeacht of ze zich "vrouwelijk" gedroeg en die mannen waar je het over hebt zijn ook gewoon mannen. Ongeveer de helft van onze bevolking is qua persoonlijkheid overwegend "mannelijk", maar de fout die je maakt is om ervan uit te gaan dat iedereen die die eigenschappen heeft ook daadwerkelijk man is. De realiteit is dat alle persoonlijke eigenschappen zowel in mannen als vrouwen voorkomen, met enige regelmaat. De eigenschappen die wij "mannelijk" noemen worden slechts zo genoemd omdat de gemiddelde man die eigenschappen vaker heeft dan de gemiddelde vrouw. Maar er zijn heel veel vrouwen die ook die "mannelijke" eigenschappen hebben, of enkele daarvan. Je kent ze wel, de wat stoerdere types die je eigenlijk nog best vaak ziet. Dat zijn vrouwen die qua persoonlijkheid enkele mannelijke eigenschappen hebben en dat is volkomen normaal en ook veelvoorkomend. Hetzelfde geldt omgedraaid voor mannen. Dus je zit in dat opzicht onzin te praten. Je zit vast in dualistisch genderdenken. Geslacht en onze biologische verschillen zijn geen sociaal construct, maar gender is dat wel. Inclusief al die gendergekkies die denken dat ze een fluïde weetikveelwat zijn omdat ze een bepaalde persoonlijkheid hebben, wat totaal nergens op slaat. Geslacht bepaalt of je man of vrouw bent, niet "gender". En er zijn al helemaal geen derde, vierde, etc. genders. Je hebt je geslacht en je hebt je persoonlijkheid, dat is het. En als je als man niet de typisch mannelijke eigenschappen hebt ben je niet opeens man af. Maar dat terzijde, het kan ook dat mannen worden beïnvloed door een repressieve ideologie die mannelijke eigenschappen in toom wil houden (dat is waar het feminisme tot is uitgegroeid). Dus voor zover je daar op doelt heb je wel een punt. Dat kan zeker een invloed hebben op mannen die eigenlijk gewoon hun mannelijkheid niet naar behoren (kunnen) uiten.
    1
  2348.  @milad274  Wat is er zo ziek aan om fundamentalisme en terrorisme te willen bestrijden?
    1
  2349.  @سيدجعفري-غ8ف  Even voor de duidelijkheid: met fundamentalistisch bedoelde ik alleen de wahhabieten en salafisten, alsook alle terroristen. Dus daar had ik wat specifieker moeten zijn
    1
  2350.  @Jamal-hv8mr  Het militair bestrijden van terroristen als IS en de Taliban is fundamentalistisch? De verspreiding van het wahhabisme door Saoedi Arabië proberen te stoppen is fundamentalistisch? Jij hebt wel een heel bijzondere opvatting over wat fundamentalisme is.
    1
  2351.  @ricksanchez1149  Yes, important difference
    1
  2352. Actually the EU is for a two state solution and continues to fight for that, but whatever
    1
  2353. If recessions are the inevitable result of massive growth then we simply grow too fast. Outpacing the needs and wishes of consumers. Maybe we just need to calm down a bit and grow more steadily, like the economies of old.
    1
  2354.  @oliviatelcyanferaniir5410  Gast ik maak mensen die het wel racisme vinden juist belachelijk. En ze hebben wel sinterklaas in Duitsland, gewoon een andere versie
    1
  2355. Not all norsemen were vikings, only norsemen that went on raids were vikings. And those raids happened against other norsemen as well. So there's more to Scandinavian history than just vikings, even in the Viking era.
    1
  2356. It's not a man?!
    1
  2357. +Lord Beerus I truly feel sorry for the greedy individualistic country you live in. Not only should everyone help their countrymen out, but investing in students is a good idea both from an economic standpoint and a future tax income standpoint. A student always is worth it in the end. Sorry that Americans won't see this
    1
  2358. +Lord Beerus The system is rotten to the core, unfortunately. Donor money is the only way parties can fund their massive campaigns so the corporations are king. I mean, Hillary had a one billion dollar campaign... How can any independent party beat that without any money? It's a system that heavily benefits the parties that take donor money and it's a shame for the American citizens. Here in the Netherlands we have around 15 parties in parliament as of now and not once in history has one party ever had a majority by itself. Right now we have so many parties to choose from and such different political views that the current government is made up of a coalition of 4 parties! And they have a narrow majority of only one seat. You need a system in which each party gets about the same amount of attention in the media and nobody can gain an advantage by accepting heaps of money. Money should not be a factor in politics, it should be sound ideas that earn you votes. The two established parties are essentially kept in power artificially by companies' funding giving them an unfair advantage.
    1
  2359. +IWroteThis We don't need it, but we are better off with it. More trade, a strong unified bloc in foreign policy (if we can agree on something, that is) and free movement across Europe is very nice. Remember that the EU literally just is all of our countries sitting around a table and voting on something
    1
  2360. Mate, the EU is what is enabling us to stop migration in the first place. It was the EU that stopped the entire middle eastern migration stream with the Turkey deal. Do you think Greece by itself has enough leverage to get that done? No, but together we do. And right here on this video it is EU-backing that enables Italy to go to Libya and arrange that there will be more regional camps to prevent more migrants coming to Europe. Do you think Italy alone could have pulled that off? Together we are stronger and that's a fact. There is also no plan to "invade" Europe. The Kalergi plan was the EU, nothing more. The Kalergi plan is already fulfilled, 100%. The Kalergi plan hoax originates from one of his quotes, where he said he believed that in the distant future everyone would be mixed into some brown race. This was not one of his goals, just a stupid belief. And we will make sure it won't happen. The EU does whatever the member states dictate it to do, it is how the EU works. Italy finally called for the migration to stop, so they got together to speak about it. Do you think it was a coincidence that the Turkey deal happened under Dutch presidency of the EU, while back then the foremost goal of our government was to stop migration? The plan for the Turkey deal originated in our governemnt and we used the EU to get it done. In a few days, Austria will get the presidency and they already stated migration is the foremost thing they want to tackle. It's no coincidence that the EU will soon be working hard on finding a solution to the crisis...
    1
  2361. And the World Cup after that in Russia, with the stadiums being in occupied Ukrainian territory
    1
  2362. +Teo Veerman De persoon van Trump verdient niets anders dan afkraken. Hij heeft een walgelijke persoonlijkheid waar bijna geen goed woord over te zeggen is. Zijn beleid is een heel ander verhaal en heeft positieve en negatieve kanten zoals elk ander beleid. Maar Trump als persoon zou ik nooit aan de macht willen zien hier, echt nooit. Een deugdelijk persoon met hetzelfde beleid als Trump? Misschien. Maar Trump? Nooit.
    1
  2363. We hebben een nieuwe Pim Fortuyn nodig
    1
  2364. It's the price of freedom, unless you want an authoritarian government removing all pro-Russian comments because they could be Russian trolls.
    1
  2365. 100% historical
    1
  2366. My father wears clogs in the garden. Neighbour doos too
    1
  2367. Een burgemeester die eventjes een duizenden jaren oude traditie (vreugdevuur) afschaft. Dit geweld is slecht, maar ja wat verwacht je als je zo respectloos met cultureel erfgoed omgaat? Laten we ook eens de ramadan of het kerstfeest afschaffen en kijken hoe mensen reageren... je moet met je poten van andermans tradities en cultureel erfgoed afblijven. Vreugdevuren kunnen gewoon doorgaan als ze kleiner zijn, een algeheel verbod is niet nodig. Domme burgemeester die de betekenis van tradities voor mensen niet begrijpt.
    1
  2368. De migranten zijn een interessant onderwerp voor Europa. Wat er in Zuid Afrika gebeurt (ik neem aan dat je het over geweld tegen witte boeren hebt?) veel minder. Ik ben trouwens al een paar Boeren tegengekomen in Nederland die zijn gevlucht, dus kennelijk nemen we ze wel op, hoewel ik niet weet hoe ze hier precies terecht zijn gekomen
    1
  2369. +Delete Facebook Ik kan me niet echt herinneren dat er over BLM werd gerapporteerd hier, maar dat is van die idioterie die dan uit Amerika overwaait. Als alle grote zenders van de VS het uitzenden denkt de NOS soms dat doen wij dan ook maar. Maar ja, BLM kan me geen bal schelen
    1
  2370.  @ihavenosociallifedaddy0253  Pretty much all of them would either be outright murdered or exported to Siberia to make place for the Nazi plan to claim Eastern Europe for the German people. If you compare how many both regimes actually did kill, it's similar and perhaps the USSR even killed a bit more through deliberate famines. But if you consider what the Nazi's had planned after they won the war... well damn.
    1
  2371. +The Slim Reaper Je kan deze video zelf interpreteren, stop met die propaganda onzin. In deze video kun je zien, zo je dat zelf wilt: - klimaatverandering in actie - een zware hittegolf, wellicht mede onder invloed van klimaatverandering tot stand gekomen - een hoogst zeldzame hittegolf, geen connectie met klimaatverandering etc. etc. JIJ kiest ervoor om dit als "propaganda" te zien, maar waarom? Ik zal je vertellen waarom: omdat JIJ hier anti-NOS propaganda verspreidt en bewust de feiten niet wil zien. En de feiten zijn dat deze video niks te maken heeft met een of andere klimaatveranderingagenda, het laat slechts de gevolgen van een hevige hittegolf zien en laat verder volkomen open waardoor jij denkt dat die hittegolf er is. Leer je brein te gebruiken en misschien zul je dan niet zo ééndimensionaal naar nieuwsberichten meer kijken, alsof er alleen "rechts" en "links" nieuws is.
    1
  2372. Why don't they equip the carrier with some kind of bird repelling alarm or something? A sound that chases them away
    1
  2373.  @uroboros4260  The idea that the EU would sit back and watch one of its member states be attacked is ludicrous. That would be like geopolitical suicide for the EU. A surefire way to make it that nobody ever takes the EU seriously ever again. They would not be stupid enough to not intervene.
    1
  2374.  @davidg8628  Second, I think.
    1
  2375. You can if you split elements of society in different separate scales.
    1
  2376.  @mitchellline4242  Yeah but TIK seems to be mainly talking about one element of the spectrum: collectivism versus individualism. And yes, both NS and Marxism are far left on that scale, for the exact same ideological reasons (their shared anti-capitalist sentiments and desire for collectivist control over the means of production). In other areas the two ideologies differ greatly, for example the egalitarian nature of Marxist society versus the focus on hierarchy in fascism in general and preservation of the classes. In this regard Fascism is far right and Marxism far left. But because the question at hand is whether both are socialist, it suffices to show that both want a socialist revolution of the economic system (if we define socialism as the collectivist takeover of the means of production so as to ensure it is used in the interest of the group instead of the individuals they see as exploitators).
    1
  2377.  Stefan Dingenouts  But they are a separate group. I bet disabled people would want to be part of the regular olympics as well, but fact of the matter is they are a separate group in terms of performance so they have to be part of a separate event. Transgender games are the best solution because they either fall behind competing against males or enjoy an unfair advantage against females. They're in many ways inbetween the two in terms of performance. I'm also a fan of keeping sports clear and structured instead of allowing everyone to compete in one event. Because if we do, we might also be able to argue that for example disabled men that perform similarly to women, may actually compete with women. Even if that is technically fair, I think sports are better off staying as structured as possible, presenting itself as a competition between roughly equal competitors, with skills and training being the main factor in who wins. If we go the "different but similar performance" route, with competitors all having their own strengths but ultimately a similar performance (i.e. the example of a double-amputee competing in regular sprinting, suffering from slow acceleration, yet having a clear advantage maintaining speed), I think the general public would find watching the sport less enjoyable. The point of sport is not so much the actual outcome, it is competing with someone who is equal to you. If it is no contest, it is no longer enjoyable. If it is a contest between vastly different competitors, it also starts losing some of the main qualities of sport. Compare it to those typical Top Gear races, if you will, where they pit for example a car against a mountain climber or some such. Yes, they set up the race in such a way that both would finish at a similar time and either could win, but no it doesn't feel like a "true" equal race anymore even though it is technically a fair competition in which either has a fair chance to win. This is not a scientific argument, of course, but I feel like for this reason the general public probably would not enjoy such a set up for sports.
    1
  2378.  @Topples7  Actually, to take the US as an example, there is an estimated 2 million amputees in the US, or 0.65% of the population. According to Google, the transgender population of the US is 0.6%. So the disabled olympics, featuring mainly amputees, is comparably difficult to fill as a transgender olympics would. Worst case scenario the transgender olympics would only feature single-competitor sports like sprinting and ditch team-based sports. I think the largest challenge for transgender sports would be to have enough countries participate, there would probably be no more than a few western ones.
    1
  2379.  Stefan Dingenouts  In that sense, sure there is never a way to make everyone happy. So let's say introducing transgender games would probably make most people happy.
    1
  2380. Serves them right. The way they portrayed WW2 in the war stories is absolutely disgraceful
    1
  2381. Abrahamistische religies ja, de rest niet.
    1
  2382. +Isaa Kops In de video zeggen ze alleen dat ze wilde katten terug zetten in de natuur en niet zomaar in een stad, maar ze zeggen niks over of ze die ook steriliseren. Ik hoop dat je gelijk hebt, want volgens mij zijn Europese wilde katten redelijk zeldzaam
    1
  2383. Have you explored the practical consideration of housing millions of extra people in a Europe that is destroyed by war being deemed troublesome? This could have been a contributing factor as well, at least for some of the groups. Another reason could be fears that spies or socialists would be within the group, which by certain governments might have been seen as a huge downside to granting them citizenship. Remember that at the time the US government imprisoned its Japanese population due to fears of allegiance to Japan, strictly based on their citizenship/ethnicity. Why wouldn't a similar kind of thinking apply to Russians (i.e. an assumption that they're just a "bunch of commies" and therefore seen as a threat to the capitalist order)? Even if there was knowledge of their reluctance to return to the USSR, this didn't discount them as possible socialists or USSR-sympathisers. After all, there are factions of socialists/communists such as anarcho-communists that absolutely hated the USSR all the same.
    1
  2384. If it's normal people committing these crimes in London they have a bigger problem there. Criminals are criminals and will always be violent, but when it becomes a regular occurrence for normal citizens to kill people in domestic violence it seems like you have a culture issue in London. And that is much more difficult to battle than criminals.
    1
  2385. Die journaliste is echt wereldvreemd. Een ongelooflijk ingewikkeld filosofisch vraagstuk over de huidige staat van de westerse wereld en ze zegt doodleuk: "wat is de oplossing?". Je geeft geen "oplossing" voor diep filosofische onderwerpen, je hebt er een discussie over. Daar komt geen concrete oplossing uit, het is gewoon dom om om een oplossing te vragen. Journalisten hebben geen diepgang meer dezer dagen. Ze kunnen alleen oppervlakkige vragen stellen. Sorry maar dit is gewoon echt dom. Ik kan het niet anders verwoorden.
    1
  2386. These ads are creating literal nazis. They are causing massive anger among people that see their identity attacked
    1
  2387. @Water & Sky Er is geen bewijs dat transgenders een gevaar zijn voor kinderen en het is ook niet logisch om dat zomaar te zeggen. Dat verzin je ter plekke. Het enige wat mentaal anders is in transgenders is dat ze een sterke drang hebben om van gender te veranderen en dat is het. Tegen kinderen zijn ze gewoon normaal. Dit gaat ook niet om het recht op kinderen, maar om de vraag of de overheid je letterlijk mag verbieden om kinderen te krijgen. Dat is heel wat anders. Iedereen heeft sowieso het recht om niet willekeurig door de overheid verteld te worden dat ze GESTERILISEERD moeten worden. Vind jij dat de overheid mensen moet steriliseren? Ik ook niet...
    1
  2388. Ach ja, Rutte. Een gevecht dat wij zullen winnen, een aanslag op de rechtsstaat. Intussen is er flink bezuinigd op de politie, die zo onderbemand is dat zij de georganiseerde misdaad niet meer aan kan. Dit gebeurt allemaal vanwege een verzwakte politie en verzwakte rechtsstaat. Verzwakt door VVD-beleid. De aanval op de rechtsstaat is een tweeluik; vanuit de georganiseerde misdaad die steeds brutaler wordt en aanslagen op advocaten, misdaadjournalisten en meer inmiddels niet meer schuwen; en vanuit de politiek, die bezuinigt op de politie, sociale advocatuur de grond in boort met bezuinigingen, etc. De rechtsstaat wordt van alle kanten aangevallen. Wij hebben tot op de dag van vandaag nog niet eens het aantal agenten dat wij in 2012 hadden, ondanks de vele beloftes van Rutte dat met onze 'gave' economie die op volle toeren draait alles weer normaal zal zijn, incl. investeringen in de politie. Loze beloftes als altijd. En als we dan worden geconfronteerd met de gevolgen van uit de hand lopende misdaad, dan wordt op eens gesproken van een strijd die wij zullen winnen. Wij zullen inderdaad winnen, maar als je het mij vraagt staat Rutte aan de verkeerde kant van deze strijd; ook hij beschadigt de rechtsstaat met zijn beleid. Walgelijk figuur.
    1
  2389. Of het gaat gewoon om hooligans die sowieso herrie schoppen. Ik vind niet dat je zomaar drank als de grote boosdoener kan profileren. Je moet eerst echt goed kijken naar de oorzaak en als drank daar inderdaad zo'n grote rol in speelt dan zou je inderdaad kunnen zeggen max 3-5 pils per persoon verkopen
    1
  2390. Sadly, I think you're right. I never like things like that, but they brought it upon themselves and it probably will happen at some point.
    1
  2391.  @L0neFollow3r  And I literally said "North Americans", which includes Mexico.
    1
  2392. What a split between young and old.... Well, I guess we can say the future of Korean-Japanese relations is bright, going by how young Japanese generally reacted. Or.... they'll swing around once they get older? We shall see
    1
  2393. Biden heeft ie sowieso, hij hoeft z'n mond maar open te trekken en dan is het duidelijk dat Trump veel gezonder en helder in het hoofd is. Maar Sanders? Dat wordt meer interessant, vooral omdat beide kandidaten dan anti-establishment zijn
    1
  2394.  @rockymountainman7  Ja, dat doen ze niet gericht, maar ze houden de populatie van herten in bedwang zodat die niet de natuur kaal vreten en zelfs de aanwezigheid van de wolf verandert het gedrag van herten en andere prooidieren al. Over het algemeen is het veel beter voor de natuur als er ook wolven zijn.
    1
  2395.  @joshuawilliams9020  Even assuming countries are easy to occupy, you wouldn't get any further than taking the Americas. The EU is too strong to take, Russia is too strong to take, etc. If you take war economies into account you'd ever have to fear being invaded yourself, because if the EU would go full war economy it would outproduce you and have almost double the population pool for soldiers, all while having similar technology... That's not even taking Russia into account, which would join the EU against the US, nor China. War is not about what your peace time numbers are. It is about your war economy, population pool, technology and resources. The US can only really dominate its own continent, no more than that. Well, parts of Africa as well, as long as no foreign forces get involved trying to stop you. And the second question is whether there will be an intervention from the other competent war economies to what you'd be doing in the Americas. You certainly couldn't protect it all from a counter invasion.
    1
  2396.  @therealyassassin  Geloof heeft niets met intellect te maken. Geloof is het aanvaarden van een boek als de enige waarheid, gebaseerd op nul komma nul bewijs. Als je dat wil doen moet je dat vooral doen, maar het is GEEN intellect dat je ertoe heeft gedreven dat te geloven. De enige die hier wegrent van de waarheid ben jij. Je baseert jezelf niet op feiten, maar op geloof. Intellect is niet geloven, intellect is WETEN. Want onderzoek, want feiten, want bewijs, niet "want geloof".
    1
  2397.  @therealyassassin  Vertel me maar, ik wil het weten en sta open.
    1
  2398. Did you just say to call another referendum would be undemocratic ?
    1
  2399. +Timothy Plato You say he's deluded and then you say tariffs are the reason German cars are more expensive in Europe than the US... The answer is we heavily tax cars due to environmental considerations, among other factors. Unless we import parts from the US to build cars here (don't think we do), tariffs are completely irrelevant to the price of European cars in Europe.
    1
  2400. I'm fine with anybody, no matter their background, taking any role as long as they look like the character they should be playing. If need be with a little make-up. I honestly don't get this race obsession in the US.
    1
  2401. Wilders' actie is een reactie op fundamentalistische moslims die zeggen dat wij niet de profeet mogen tekenen of anders.... Dat is de enige reden dat hij het überhaupt doet. Dát is haat en zelfs geweld bezaaien, niet het tekenen van een persoon
    1
  2402. +waseem akram Of course you can judge a religion by its prophet. Why not? If he's supposed to be the shining example for all its followers, the religion can be judged by the behaviour its followers are supposed to follow: the behaviour of its main prophet.
    1
  2403. Can't wait to make a curb meme on this
    1
  2404. China is at war with India over some regions in the Himalayas. So border concerns in the sense of actual military confrontations, not migrants
    1
  2405. Ik vermoed inderdaad dat dit een spelletje is dat vanuit de economie wordt gespeeld. Meer werkers, meer geld. Iedereen moet kunnen doen wat ze willen met hun leven en als dat voor veel vrouwen betekent dat ze deeltijd willen werken dan zij het zo. Het wordt als een "probleem" gezien dat vrouwen dat zelf willen, dus wordt aan de vrouwen verteld wat ze moeten willen en dat is werken. Vrijheid en gelijkheid is het enige dat telt, geen arbitraire wensen over 50/50 man/vrouw op de werkvloer of in de top. Hoeveel mannen of vrouwen ergens rondlopen is niet relevant, wat wel relevant is is of die mannen en vrouwen hun eigen vrije keuzes hebben kunnen maken en gelijke kansen hadden om hun wensen ook daadwerkelijk te bereiken.
    1
  2406. It is islamic law in some interpretations. Others don't think a hijab is necessary. Some interpretations even require full veils.
    1
  2407. +Hashmat Kuch Ja en in Amerika worden elke dag mensen doodgeschoten door volledig uit de hand gelopen criminaliteit, duizenden per jaar, honderden per maand. Moeten we nou ook Amerikanen opnemen? Brazilianen? Etc. etc. etc. Dat er in een LAND wat gebeurt betekent niet dat een specifiek persoon uit dat land ook niet terug kan keren. Je moet kijken naar individuele gevallen in plaats van maar wat te roepen over wat er wel niet gebeurt in een land. Wat als deze specifieke man op het platteland van Afghanistan woont, ergens in een gebied onder volle controle van de overheid, ver van zowel de Taliban als de aanslagen van de Taliban? Zelfs als hij wel in zo'n gevarenzone woont, wat als hij de mogelijkheid heeft om elders in Afghanistan makkelijk onderdak te vinden? Stop met generaliseren. Roepen dat iemand "dood gaat" alleen omdat hij naar Afghanistan gaat slaat helemaal nergens op. Je moet naar ieder geval apart kijken. Anders dan nemen we onnodig mensen op die gewoon veilig zijn alleen omdat ze van land X komen of slaan we mensen juist af terwijl ze een bijzondere situatie hebben in een anderszins veilig land waardoor ze toch in gevaar zijn daar. Maar ja, "land Y is veilig dus terug". Generaliseren werkt niet.
    1
  2408. +Deborah Martens Petities... willekeurige mensen die iets tekenen maakt wat ze ondertekenen kennelijk de waarheid... Ja tuurlijk. HEEL Afghanistan is onveilig en NIEMAND uit Afghanistan leeft in een veilige situatie, waar je ook woont en wie je ook bent. Geloof je het zelf? Ga toch weg met je petities, wat boeit dat mij nou.
    1
  2409. +Hashmat Kuch Ok, moet dit mij wat boeien? Als iemand bijzonder veel gevaar loopt om een of andere reden dan mag die van mij komen, maar ik ga echt niet een heel land binnen halen omdat er elke dag 5 mensen sterven. Ga toch weg met die onzin. Er sterven elke dag zo'n 5 mensen in een Amerikaanse stad als Detroit alleen al, door criminaliteit. Moeten we nu alle Detroitenaren (of hoe je ze ook noemt) of zelfs alle Amerikanen gaan toelaten? Dat slaat toch nergens op? Niet elk land is zo veilig als Europese landen en daar kunnen we niks aan doen. De Afghanen hebben zelfs geluk dat wij het op ons hebben genomen ze te helpen met de Taliban, dat was ook niet een vanzelfsprekendheid en willekeurige Afghanen binnenhalen alleen omdat ze uit dat land komen is al helemaal geen vanzelfsprekendheid, het is zelfs absurd.
    1
  2410. +Hashmat Kuch Wat in Afghanistan boeit me niet veel, maar wat er hier in Nederland gebeurt zeker wel. Daar is die lange comment voor. En als reactie op jouw comment, ik had het over één Amerikaanse stad: Detroit. Zo ongeveer 5 mensen per dag in die stad alleen al worden gedood. Het boeit me niet. Dit is Amerika's probleem en zij hebben het op te lossen. Ik hoef geen mensen vanuit daar naar Nederland. Hetzelfde voel ik voor Afghanistan. Als het echt niet meer kan in Afghanistan en er een acute dreiging is voor iemands leven, tuurlijk kom maar. Maar anders gewoon niet. Je kan niet heel een land opvangen omdat er 5 mensen per dag sterven daar met geweld. Dat is gewoon niet redelijk. Nederland is niet een of ander gelukszoekersparadijs waar alle personen die het minder hebben maar naar toe kunnen komen. Een vluchteling is iemand wiens leven acuut wordt bedreigd, niets minder. Het maakt me niet uit hoe lang het heeft geduurd voordat ze hier zijn gekomen: zij hebben een fout gemaakt door die reis te ondernemen. Als je niet ECHT in nood bent (als in, sterven of gemarteld worden als je de reis niet onderneemt) kun je komen, maar anders maak je echt een fout. Nederland is niet de voedselbank van de wereld of zoiets. We doen wat we kunnen in Afghanistan om ze te helpen, maar dit gaat gewoon te ver. Je kan niet zomaar miljoenen mensen welkom heten omdat er 5 mensen per dag sterven in hun land. Dit is belachelijk. Illegale migratie is illegale migratie, hoe lang je reis ook is geweest. Ik vind het zuur voor die mensen, maar je kan ongecontroleerde migratie niet toestaan. Alleen vluchtelingen, punt.
    1
  2411. It's hopelessly obsolete. Any half decent military can shoot it down with ease. It's one of those weapons that is great against a ragtag group of insurgents but mostly useless against anything else
    1
  2412. The UN is not supposed to be an independent court, the ICC is. The UN security council constantly protects friends, sometimes shamelessly so. But a judge can and should not be biased. The ICC is weak right now and probably always will be because of international politics. It's a court without any real power (at least against countries), unfortunately.
    1
  2413.  @1IbramGaunt  Yeah, the main source of power for the UK is their impressive diplomatic power. There is literally nobody who can attack the UK without facing some very powerful allies. US attacks UK? EU and UK destroy the invasion force. EU attacks UK? US swoops in and together they make the UK a fortress. Some other force attacks UK? US, EU and UK will oppose you... The UK is a major power thanks to their diplomatic influence, not their military hard power.
    1
  2414. This book is stuck in the 1930s, none of this would fly today. Taking Finland or one of the Baltic states alone would be attacking the EU, which would put a combined military against Russia that is right now about equal in size to its military, but has a war industry and population pool that dwarfs the Russian one by several times. That won't end well for Russia, and that's not even mentioning the probable involvement of the US and the fact that such a war is also very much against the interest of China which might act too.
    1
  2415. Biden moet opdonderen met z'n seniele gepraat. Bernie Sanders is de enige die een kans maakt tegen Trump. Trump zou Biden echt helemaal kapot maken over hoe hij eventjes een baantje scoorde voor zijn zoon in Oekraïene en over hoe hij vaak niet uit z'n woorden komt. Amerikanen zijn doodziek van het establishment. Dat aloude neoliberale gezeur en al die oorlogen. Men is er totaal ziek van. Maar de Democratische partij wil geen kandidaat als Bernie Sanders; die treedt op tegen het establishment, tegen de belangen van de multinationals. Trump haten ze ook omdat hij anti-establishment is. Daar kunnen ze niet tegen, als iemand die niet datzelfde spelletje speelt de macht verkrijgt. Iemand die geen spreekpop is van zijn miljardairsponsoren.
    1
  2416. We would, we've given Boris a chance at renegotiation. But if he can't threaten with no deal (something neither of us want), we all know who the deal is going to favour most. Even negotiating at all would be a farce because the EU knows that Boris can't return home without a deal. He'd have no leverage whatsoever. Parliament is shooting themselves in the foot
    1
  2417. Het beste wat we hiermee kunnen krijgen is waarschijnlijk een schadevergoeding van Rusland aan de nabestaanden. Die verdachten zien we nooit meer terug denk ik. Het is net als die keer dat Amerikaanse soldaten per ongeluk een Iraans passagiersvliegtuig neerhaalden, ook met circa 200 burgerdoden. Landen als Rusland en Amerika leveren hun burgers niet uit, best case scenario erkennen ze (ten dele) schuld en betalen ze schadevergoeding, maar de verdachten blijven beschermd. Schrale troost voor de nabestaanden, maar zo is het.
    1
  2418. +Richardezer Scrooge That's the bizarre thing about it. The Americans only need moderate gun control to effectively target school shooters, not a complete gun ban. Just think about this sad fact: if the US had a simple background check for MENTAL DISORDERS before buying a gun, the school shooting before this one (an autistic guy) would have never happened. Something any country standardly has: a system preventing people with mental illnesses from being able to carry a gun, is something the US can't even get through congress. How they can defend the position that people with dangerous or risky mental disorders should have guns? I honestly don't know. But somehow they do... perhaps that NRA money got them acting like puppets. It's truly a hell hole there
    1
  2419. +Marc Renel You're wrong... Your own country, France, is listed as having MORE soft power than the USA. So does the UK. In terms of economy, the EU and US are equal. The difference in hard power between the EU and US is also not big, but the US has the edge there. Innovation? I'm gonna give you a list of a few modern inventions (1990s+) of my tiny country, the Netherlands: bluetooth, blu-ray disk, DVD, wi-fi and more. You tell me what the US has invented lately. According to wikipedia the most impactful inventions they had are the scrollwheel for the PC mouse and a battery that is more energy efficient. Can't even equal a tiny country. Morals? European countries are the centre of upkeeping western morals. The US needed only ONE terrorist attack to chimp out and betray on some of the most important values we have: no imprisonment without trial and no torture! Yes, very christian of them to go around abducting and torturing suspected terrorists (with an unknown amount of innocents among them, to boot). And sure, giving everyone firearms and allowing them to shoot and kill anyone that enters their property is full of respect for human life... And the fact that people always go out of their way to greet veterans with a "thank you for your service", yet leave veterans to sometimes literally die on the streets or at least without the (psychological) care they at times need really reveals their "morals". But hey, America and taxes/social security don't mix, not even for their beloved veterans. Unlike you, I'm NOT trying to say that X country is superior to Y, only that there is no such thing as a "best country". Remember I didn't even mention America's weak spots here (poverty, crime, zero consideration for poor people, their position on most quality of life indices, primary school education quality, their "democracy" riddled with blatant corruption, etc.), only their supposed strong points. America is a country just like any other. It has its strong points and its weak points. Other countries outshine it in many areas and it outshines other countries in other areas. All you can say is that they're one of the better countries in the world, being part of the 1st world. Beyond that... you can't really say one country is "the best". There is no such thing, only a group of countries that are clearly of the better part of the world.
    1
  2420. +Darth Meerkat There is no push for patriotism to end, there's a push for idiots who think that being proud of your country equals thinking that other countries are inferior to piss off. Being proud of your country is good, but being so overly proud that you adopt some kind of delusional superiority complex is not good at all. And I love how you say the US had to clean up both world wars while both times they sat at the sidelines most of the time and fought the least of the major powers. WW1: British Empire & Commonwealth = France >> Russia =/> USA. WW2: Soviet Union > British Empire & Commonwealth > USA. But in both world wars you at least carried out the main final push, so I guess cleaning up is fairly accurate
    1
  2421. +Warlord25100 What if you're in a car crash with your wife and child(ren) and all need to be hospitalised? Got enough funds then? What if one of your family members gets a terminal disease that requires very intensive ad above all, expensive treatment for a prolonged period of time? You can never cover all the risks and when you're unlucky you are brutally dropped by your society. Not something to be proud of. And always remember that there at any time are multiple "competent beings" that are faced with such circumstances that even the competent hard working individual can't financially cope with and viciously dropped by YOU. A society that only rewards competent beings is a cruel society, not a good one. And even competent beings can't protect themselves against every possible circumstance they may face.
    1
  2422. Maybe even the Baltics if they got balls
    1
  2423. Sommige moslims die luisteren niet naar elke detail van hun ideologie en hebben in de plaats daarvan een veel gematigdere opvatting erover. Je kan zeggen dat dat dan geen échte moslims zijn, maar zo werkt het niet. Ook degenen die niet perfect of zelfs vrijwel niet de islamitische regels volgen zijn moslim als ze maar hun god aanbidden en hun eigen interpretaties van de islam hebben. Het probleem is dus alleen de moslims die die regels letterlijk willen volgen. Die twee groepen kun je van elkaar onderscheiden.
    1
  2424. The last thing I would do in this situation is film everything... but then again I'm already amazed at people who'd rather stare at their phone in a concert and film than actually enjoy it and a lot of people do exactly that
    1
  2425.  @ronjans7884  Nee hij is niet super slecht of zo. Hij heeft een reële kans om te winnen
    1
  2426. That's a dumb statement. Humans are a part of nature and one of the most interesting species on this planet due to our intelligence and vibrant cultures. If you were to say the industrial revolution and our current systemic overpopulation is the worst thing to happen to this planet, you'd be a step closer to a decent statement. There is nothing intrinsic to humans that is a "virus" to the planet. We can live in harmony with nature if we choose to, the problem is that our current system does not and creates imbalance. The answer to that is not to call humans as such a pestilence, it is to call that system flawed and change it for the better.
    1
  2427. No TV station is without bias. BBC leans towards the standard globalist neoliberal ideology. Some stations are downright propaganda, like CNN. BBC is one of the more okay ones, but they have their biases for sure.
    1
  2428. No you can't. This would be Vietnam 2.0 with this dumb attitude
    1
  2429. ​ @bakters  Complete abolition of class by having the proletariat seize the means of production, creating an egalitarian society (socialism). Solidification of class and having them work together in the common interest of the nation (or for NS: race), creating a hierarchical collectivist society (fascism). There you have it, folks. Essentially, class abolition versus class collaboration, egalitarianism versus hierarchy. TIK is mostly accurate with his videos, but he really misses the difference between socialism and fascism. He sadly subscribes to the overly simplified "government does something = socialism" narrative. That's his only mistake from what I can tell (so it's not that he's totally wrong or "dumb"), but it has massive impact on his videos. In truth, socialism is about a lot more than just collectivism; it's about abolishing class conflict by creating an egalitarian, single-class society. Fascism is also collectivist, but a different flavour: it strengthens the concept of class (they believe class distinction/hierarchy is necessary to run a strong nation), but stops class conflict by uniting the classes under the banner of one nation or race. A good example of fascism at work would be Volkswagen. The Deutsche Arbeitsfront (DAF, a Nazi government institution facilitating class collaboration) spoke with the upper class and workers and devised a plan that would benefit both of them, as well as the nation as a whole. A cheap car would be produced because the Nazis wanted a more mobile population (national interest). To achieve this, they sat with the upper class and working class to set up a scheme with which the workers would get cheap cars and the upper class would get a lot of orders and thus profit. Thus the Volkswagen was created. Central to Fascism is that economic projects are in the broader national interest, with the government having a large role in deciding what the national interest is. A scheme like Volkswagen would be designed to be in the interests of the working class, upper class and broader nation. Under fascism, workers unions were illegal... because they only represent the interests of the workers. Instead the DAF was a union that represented the interests of both the workers AND the upper class, setting up projects that were in the interest of both of them. This is called class collaboration and is what sets fascism apart from capitalism as well as socialism.
    1
  2430.  @bakters  >"Are you trying to claim that in Soviet Union there were no classes? That Stalin or Beria and your common Yuri Bezumov were of the same social class?" Yes, because the difference between upper and working class is determined by who owns the means of production. The upper class owns the means of production and enjoys its fruits, the working class are wage employees of the upper class. Since the proletariat seized the means of production in the Soviet Union, there is no upper class in the Soviet Union. The entire point of the class struggle is that the upper class interest in max profit from their means of production and the working class interest in getting paid the value of their work and having decent working conditions, clash. Enter Hegelian dialectics and you have Marxism. Under Socialism this clash is taken away by having the working class/proletariat take control of the means of production and using it in their interest; with wages based on the value of the work you do. The entire point of the USSR was that the proletariat had decimated the upper class. >"If so, both Third Reich and Soviet Union have failed equally badly. Where are the differences?" The Third Reich never intended to have an egalitarian society; they HATED this part of Marxism (it's in fact the main and possibly only reason they weren't Marxist, as for the rest their ideology is actually very similar). NS is all about hierarchy, all about strengthening the class divide and even adding a new hierarchy to the mix: racial purity. And they were socially very conservative, with clear roles for women and such. The USSR wanted to create an economy in which everyone is a worker and everyone gets paid what the work they do is worth. Equal, performance-based payment. There is no upper class that is of inherent higher social status by birth; there is no upper class because there is no private ownership of the means of production. There is no aristocracy. There is no superior or inferior race. And compared to the Nazis they were socially a lot more progressive. >"I was raised under Socialism. Worker's unions were illegal. Where are the differences?" That's a good question. Under Soviet Socialism, LOCAL worker's unions were deemed unwanted. The government-proletariat would represent the worker's voice under that system. Dissenting voices of any kind - including of other workers - were seen as going against the working class. As opposing the government utopia. Soviet Socialism was a heavily authoritarian kind of Socialism. Under Fascism, organisations representing workers' interests were seen as inherently against class collaboration and therefore unwanted. The entire point of class collaboration is that the classes do not fight and instead unite to act in the interest of the nation. This requires the classes to not organise around their own interests, but to collaborate with one another. This collaboration was facilitated by the government/nation, which would essentially mediate between the upper and working class and organise projects to make both sides happy. Profit for the upper class, a decent life for the workers and production in the interest of the nation. So in short, the Soviet Union disliked worker's unions because the government-proletariat already dictated what was in the workers' interest and they didn't want any dissent. Fascism disliked worker's unions because they were fundamentally against the idea of workers organising around their own interests in the first place. They HATED either the upper class using the means of production is their own interest (saw it as leeching off the Nation, kind of similar to Marxist criticisms on capitalism) and the working class trying to create a worker's paradise. They saw the class hierarchy as something a Nation needed to succeed, yet the class struggle (= Hegelian dialectics caused by each class organising purely around their own interests and clashing) as a threat to the Nation. > "Under Socialism I was raised in, it was exactly the same.(...) Where are the differences?" The difference is that the DAF (government) mediated between upper class and lower class to create projects that, to stick with the example of Volkswagen: - generated profit for the upper class (Volkswagen sales, with artificially high demand created by project) - gave something back to the workers (cheap cars, within their wage range) - produced something that benefitted the nation (mobilised the German population) The USSR just unilaterally dictated what the proletariat wanted. There is no mediation because no upper class exists, there is no profit as all value is distributed among workers. There are no clashing interests that need to be reconciled. There are only the interests of the working class to be dictated by the government.
    1
  2431.  @bakters  - "Stalin owned the means of ... " The difference is that the upper class owns the means of production PRIVATELY. I.e. purely for their personal benefit. The Nazi's employed the means of prod for THE GERMAN PEOPLE collectively. The USSR for the PROLETARIAT collectively. They were both collectivists and authoritarian, but similarities end there. For whom and why they organised the economy is different, as laid out before. - "oh that's why the Nazi's were a workers party..." The Nazi's were only a workers party in name. Though technically one could say that RELATIVE TO CAPITALISM they were a workers party, since they despised capitalism for the same reasons as the Marxists (abusing the working class and nation for personal profit) and wanted to create a society in which the upper class' private profit ambitions would be kept in check by the government to make sure they act in the interest of the NATION (and thus also the workers). In short, the Nazi's wanted to keep the class' hierarchy BUT have them act in the interest of all, i.e. more BALANCE between the interests of the upper and working class instead of the upper class purely acting in their private interests. This means LESS power to the upper class and MORE power to the workers, relative to capitalism. The Soviets didn't want balance, they wanted ABSOLUTE POWER to the workers. They wanted to solve the class struggle by making the upper class DISAPPEAR. They were fundamentally against the hierarchy of class. Nazi's: more power to workers. USSR: ABSOLUTE power to workers. - "They were aiming for an egalitarian society for all Germans..." National Socialists did NOT want an egalitarian society. They revered social and racial hierarchies. Yes, even ethnic Germans themselves were categorised along racial lines and were discriminated. Only the most "pure" among the Germans could for example apply for certain social programmes, other Germans could not. As mentioned earlier, they also loved the idea of class hierarchy, claiming that the working class needed the upper class for guidance. They believed that no not all humans are equal and that those at the top should get higher social positions and positions of power/leadership in the Nation. They HATED the idea of the common worker grabbing absolute power; that is the WEAK governing themselves. Yet, they were also against the upper class misusing their positions of power for personal gain; they should be there to guide the Nation, not their own monetary interests. - "But then war happened and in order to win...." Yes, and then America started its war economy and therefore they were Socialists! No..... temporary measures in war time =/= ideological identity of a nation. You have to look at how a country ideologically wants to shape itself to determine what ideology it falls under. - "Lenin, Stalin etc were tyrants......" You completely ignore the ideological groundwork of the Soviet Union (thereby by the way contradicting yourself, as you before rightly stated that the USSR wanted to create an egalitarian society for all workers). You can't just arbitrarily rank members of the USSR society by the power they had and say "therefore they were just the same as the Tsars". You have to look at how and why they used their power the way they did; then you see what ideology they were. - "They were not conservative at all......" Nice cherry picking. The nazis promoted women to stay home, under the nazi regime the amount of working women went down, they promoted other very conservative family values and of course their love for the class distinction and hierarchy is deeply conservative. Saying what you did here is like claiming the notoriously misogynist Ancient Greece was incredibly progressive because famous philosopher Hypatia existed. Or that hyper conservative and women unfriendly medieval christianity was actually progressive because queens existed and figures like Joan of Arc. It makes no sense. The USSR and Nazi's were not even close in terms of progressivism. The USSR had women actually fly and fight on the battlefield.
    1
  2432.  @bakters  I'm sorry to hear that. It has happened to me as well, occasionally. I suspect it's Youtube. I suppose we'll have to respectfully disagree. Good day to you
    1
  2433. Ignoring who's in power, he is strictly speaking correct. If a democrat president would have an absolute majority in congress and a party that listens to him, a majority democrat supreme court and more... what are the checks and balances? They're all gone and are fully dependent on the will of people of his own party to deviate from their party views. Yes, that would be a democrat regime.
    1
  2434. Yes, fairy tales are not about good vs bad stories, they are allegories about all kinds of themes. They reflect on certain personality traits, on themes like love and beauty, you name it. And it's also important to note that a lot of them are thousands of years old and are a big part of European culture. Fairy tales like Beauty and the Beast (estimated to be 4000 years old) have been told by mouth from generation to generation in Europe and as such is more than just a story; it is our culture too. Nobody even bothered to write down these folk tales until the 1800's, all this time they survived purely orally. And still today, parents often tell fairy tales to their children. This is why I find fairy tales a very special thing. I know I'm going to raise my children too on them
    1
  2435. Ah.... someone who understands the proletariat versus class collaboration to unite classes under the banner of the nation difference between socialism and fascism. That's a rarity inbetween all this "fascism is socialism" and "fascism is capitalism" nonsense. It really was its own thing, anti-marxist AND anti-capitalist. One thing I'd disagree with, however, is your characterisation of the Soviet Union. I'd sooner describe the USSR state as representing the proletariat than as a random state suppressing the workers. I'd say their version of socialism involved an authoritarian, organised state-wide proletariat that runs the economy centrally, rather than spontaneous and more localised worker organisation. While strictly speaking it's correct to say it was a government that suppressed local workers, I think this characterisation misses the ideological reasons behind designing the Soviet state that way.
    1
  2436. If the US empire falls they lose Guam and that´s pretty much it lol
    1
  2437. The US isn't a true western country. It's like they tried to copy our values, but failed horribly. They only look like a western country on the surface, below that surface they might as well be China or something like that.
    1
  2438.  @essieb778  A country like Saudi Arabia is today a million times stronger than it would otherwise be, exactly because of western meddling. For a nation like Iraq I agree with you, but don't make it seem like the entire world somehow would be China 2.0 without western imperialism. Sub-Saharan Africa would likely still consist of more primitive kingdoms (which would honestly be better than forcing a western system of government on them and expecting it to magically work while we needed hundreds of years to form decent democracies ourselves, especially considering those kingdoms weren't as primitive as most people think). Japan? Still feudal, locking itself away from the world or perhaps conquered by a nation like China because it never caught up with foreign technology. Now they're one of the most succesful countries on the globe because the west forced them to modernise. A place like Singapore would absolutely not have been the massive hub of commerce it is today without its colonial history. A place like India... I'd love to see what they would have grown into by themselves. My guess is they'd be better off without colonialism. Vietnam... they inherited some great cities, but I can't say whether they really benefitted from colonialism or would be better off without it. The world would be different without western intervention, that's all. Not uniformly better or worse. Some countries would be better off, some actually worse. Others yet were not deeply affected. In a lot of cases, significant things were gained, but at great historic losses as well. In several cases the gains were massive. In some cases the losses were even minimal compared to the gains. Your comment is too simplistic.
    1
  2439.  @emocowboy4684  What inevitable? No country can be run without its population cooperating, period. And the US did jack shit to defeat ISIS except being one of dozens of countries dropping bombs. It's the Kurds and other local groups that did the boots on the ground fighting. And ISIS is not comparable to begin with, because we are talking about an insurgency which virtually the entire country they're in supports. Even something like the yellow vests in France is putting a dent in their economy, let alone an entire population not wanting to cooperate with your occupation.
    1
  2440. US military: *uses metric system*
    1
  2441. New York is a large city, Venice is a historical city. So imagine NYC but several times worse. Historical cities can take a lot less tourists
    1
  2442. The Nilfgaardian armour and Fringilla casting are still downright painful to watch, but aside from that it looks exciting. I'll give this a watch for sure
    1
  2443. Zo, een ware hartjesregen hiero, wat vrijgevig
    1
  2444. Dat is wat er JUIST nu gaat gebeuren. De Britse overheid is pro-immigratie, het enige wat nu gebeurt is dat Oost-Europese migratie wordt omgewisseld met migratie uit Afrika en het Midden-Oosten. Dat zie je ook nu al in de cijfers. Het verlies aan Europese migranten wordt gecompenseerd door niet-Europese migranten. Veel geluk met je Pakistanen en Afrikanen, zeg ik tegen het VK. Doe mij maar Europeanen, gaat veel beter met de integratie! Als je niets wil moet je niet uit de EU stappen, maar je eigen overheid drastisch omgooien en een nationalistische partij kiezen. Anders krijg je linksom of rechtsom pro-immigratie beleid.
    1
  2445. Also fact: NATO is mostly being used by the US to defend their personal interests, not for protecting any of its members. In the case of Libya, NATO intervention even caused a migrant stream into Europe... Keep on paying for your precious little war game tool or dissolve it, we don't care. I would personally rather see you dissolve it and leave others alone. NATO has done more damage to us than any of our "enemies" combined.
    1
  2446.  @christophschwarzherz5909  Thank you. I also am not against social inclusivity. I think any great civilisation also is inclusive. From Ancient Rome to modern civilisation, we always had different cultures living together. But what makes modern multiculturalism different is that it doesn't happen naturally (as a hub of trade, Rome and most other civilisations ended up attracting people from all over the globe), but is actively directed by the government on the basis of questionable ideas. On the basis of the idea that all humans are good and all cultures are the same, we import people en masse without considering what will happen to our societies. This is all on the basis of fundamentally wrong ideas. On the other hand, most of the right seems to be at the opposite extreme and want to completely fend off foreign cultures even though not all foreigners are bad for our countries. I believe we should start distinguishing between good and bad immigration/multiculturalism. There is such a thing as going too far, and the left in particular hasn't realised that yet, it seems. Only few political parties on both the left and right exist that are not so extreme.
    1
  2447.  @christophschwarzherz5909  All it has to do is properly motivate why certain people do not belong here and others do. They can even set up a law which names objective factors to look at and then leaves it to the judge to decide, in which case all suspicion of prejudice is gone.
    1
  2448. With the way Erdogan is leading Turkey, might as well put it with the Middle Eastern service.
    1
  2449. EU already spends the same as China, second biggest spenders behind the US. I agree we do need better maintenance of the military, but we shouldn't become a second US when it comes to spending
    1
  2450. Stopping degenerates that commit mass murder is definitely a victory though... just a shame that in return we got degenerates that want mass migration to the point of severely changing our societies.
    1
  2451. Imagine Hillary as VP lol
    1
  2452. @The Wave Wat een domme vergelijking... artikel 1 van de Gw wil zeggen dat gelijke gevallen gelijk worden behandeld en ongelijke gevallen ongelijk. Het plegen van een moord in NL is niet hetzelfde als het afreizen naar een vijandige groepering om je bij een ideologie aan te sluiten die onze manier van leven omver wil werpen. Als ik jouw absurde redenatie volg dan zou ik kunnen zeggen dat we moordenaars niet mogen bestraffen, want moordenaars en niet-moordenaars hebben allebei de NL nationaliteit en de één bestraffen en de ander niet is dus in strijd met de grondwet... Zo werkt het niet. Gelijke gevallen worden gelijk behandeld, ongelijke gevallen ongelijk. Iedere NL die zich aansluit bij een vijandige ideologie in het buitenland en daartoe uitreist (gelijk geval) dient wat mij betreft het Nederlanderschap te worden ontnomen (gelijk behandeld). Nederlanders die iets anders doen dan dat (ongelijk geval), dienen anders te worden behandeld (ongelijk behandeld). Zo, begrijp je het nu of moet ik dit nog verder versimpelen??? Dat is geen dubbele maat, want iedereen wordt langs dezelfde maat gemeten; je aansluiten bij een vijandige buitenlandse ideologie = nederlanderschap kwijt. Dat is de maat waarlangs iedereen gelijkelijk wordt gemeten. Wat een vreemd wereldbeeld heb jij...
    1
  2453. @The Wave Doe godverdomme eens normaal man, met je derde rijk... Jij snapt hier helemaal niets van. Dat zijn allemaal wetten die wij kunnen aanpassen. En sterker nog, diezelfde wetten zijn minder strikt voor andere landen. Bijvoorbeeld heeft Groot-Brittannië bij die verdragen een voorbehoud gedaan dat zij alsnog de nationaliteit van mensen afpakken die iets doen dat de veiligheid van GB zwaar in het geding brengt. En zodoende kon GB gewoon de nationaliteit afpakken van bijvoorbeeld Shamima Begum, die nu staatloos is in Syrië. Zij zijn gebonden aan dezelfde verdragen, maar hebben een voorbehoud gedaan waardoor zij dit wél legaal kunnen doen. Jij moet echt het verschil begrijpen tussen wat nu juridisch geldt en wat politiek veranderd kan worden. Nee, GB is niet het "derde rijk" omdat zij ervoor hebben gekozen mensen staatloos te kunnen maken. En die keuze kunnen wij ook maken. Wat mij betreft is deze discussie nu over, als je met zwakke nazi-vergelijkingen komt. Echt geen stijl dit.
    1
  2454. Wtf America...
    1
  2455. Ikr, this needs to happen a lot more in media. This "anti woke" nonsense is literal propaganda. Chomsky recognised the problem of some aspects of society cancelling. But let's be honest this is mostly twitter mobs in the internet, totally irrelevant to real politics. And even then, the right cancels even more. They cancel Bud Light for.... acknowledging trans people exist.
    1
  2456.  @RutgerS.  Als je de Rutte doctrine steunt en dus staat voor een regering die de tweede kamer stelselmatig buiten spel zet, liegt en informatie achterhoudt dan verraad je de grondwet en onze democratie. NSB'er dus. Het is ook onze taak als kiezer om ons staatsrecht te beschermen tegen dit soort politiek. Als je onze eigen Orbán-light weer het torentje in stemt ben je gewoon anti-democratisch bezig.
    1
  2457.  James Registe  Ah, definitely could have known the Church would be up to something like this....
    1
  2458. He didn't include important EU member states for no apparent reason. The exact countries he included amount to a slightly inferior force to Russia. And Russia has the strategic advantage here so will of course win. Hmm.
    1
  2459. But then the USSR sattelite states would count as separate from USSR right? Otherwise it's Western Europe vs a few communist nations dispersed over the globe
    1
  2460. +Emre amk Jij hebt ook echt een begrijpend lezen niveau van een kleuter, hè? Hij bedoelt overduidelijk dat hij zichzelf wilde beschermen tegen die man met dat mes. Hij wil niet met een geweer in iemand's gezicht staan zwaaien. Hij doet dit omdat dit onderdeel is van zijn werk, maar omdat hij zijn werk uitvoert wordt hij als verdachte in een strafzaak onderzocht (standaard wanneer een wapen is afgevuurd). Hij wil gewoon zijn werk doen en naar huis gaan, zonder als verdachte te worden aangemerkt door de politie.
    1
  2461. Hij heeft de eerste moskeeaanslag gefilmd, reed weg en schoot daarna nog een tweede overhoop. Gelukkig was deze man daar... Ik heb dat filmpje ook gezien en die dader was meedogenloos. Je moet het lef maar hebben om er tegenin te gaan
    1
  2462. +Richard van der Meer Jammer voor de Britten dat hun eigen overheid nog erger is op de meeste gebieden waar ze de EU voor haten. Nu het VK heeft gekozen voor brexit is bijvoorbeeld immigratie uit niet-EU landen sterk omhoog (ter compensatie voor het verlies van EU werkers), terwijl juist een belangrijke reden voor brexit migratie was. Brexit heeft geen zin en doet maar één ding: de economie schaden.
    1
  2463. +Richard van der Meer Economisch was de EEG prima ja, politiek niet. En de Britten gaan terug tot zelfs voor de EEG met Brexit; geen interne markt. De EU is helemaal geen dictatuur, je bent zeker een van die figuren die denkt dat de Commissie de EU bestuurt of zo... Tip: de overheden van de lidstaten zelf zijn met grote afstand de meest belangrijke actoren in de EU. En met grote afstand bedoel ik vrijwel totale controle.
    1
  2464. Doe niet zo dom. Vreugdevuren kunnen kleiner zijn. Het probleem van vorig jaar was dat er competitie was om, in directe tegenstelling tot de regels, het hoogste vreugdevuur te bouwen. Dat betekent niet dat vreugdevuren op zich gevaarlijk zijn, maar dat dat gedrag van elkaar willen overtroeven zelfs waar de veiligheid in het geding is moet worden bestreden. Desnoods kun je vreugdevuren zelfs halveren om een duidelijk statement te maken, maar een algeheel verbod gaat veel te ver. Vreugdevuren zijn een traditie die letterlijk duizenden jaren terug gaat, we hebben het hier niet alleen over een vuurtje maar over cultureel erfgoed. Dat verbied je niet zonder écht goede reden. En die reden bestaat hier niet. Kleinere vreugdevuren zijn nog steeds veilig.
    1
  2465.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Omdat de besmettingen die nergens last van hebben niets boeien. Ik zeg toch gewoon een 2% sterftecijfer? Dat betekent dat er in 98% van de gevallen niks aan de hand is. Maar als miljoenen NL'ers het krijgen en 2% daarvan overlijdt hebben we het alsnog over tienduizenden doden. Met beter beleid had dat beperkt kunnen worden, hadden duizenden levens gered kunnen worden. Ik ben geen paniekzaaier; 98% van de gevallen is okee, en over een paar maanden is het business as usual, tuurlijk. Maar ik ben wel een realist: voordat het business as usual is heb ik liever enkele honderden doden ipv enkele (tien)duizenden. Daarvoor hadden we vroeg moeten ingrijpen, het is nu te laat. Dus het is wat het is en daarna weer door, maar ik vind wel dat we onze overheid hierop moeten aanspreken.
    1
  2466. +KlaxTheUnholy It is in our genes. Did you know that in our barbaric tribes, you weren't considered a man before you killed someone of another tribe? It really is in our blood...
    1
  2467. Together we really are not that small at all. We realised that we were getting small after WW2 and subsequently created the EU to stay highly influential
    1
  2468.  @alanakafang6143  ok then elaborate...
    1
  2469.  @LSebastien  Of.... ?
    1
  2470.  @alanakafang6143  lol you think that the science of global warming and the action we need to take is in FAVOUR of global corporate elites? That said, I have heard about some pretty odd views of Chomsky on vaccines so I'll give you that one. But when you juxtapose those to all of the anti establishment and anti corporate views he has it's a huge stretch to call him what you did
    1
  2471. This is what Trump's America looks like right now. They're both rubbish
    1
  2472. Yes it does. (this is the part where you say no it doesn't again)
    1
  2473. RIP the US in that case
    1
  2474.  @deprogramm  Do you know what the state of the US military was just before WW2? About the same as the bloody Netherlands. The US pre 1942 or so was really pathetic. They'd fall faster than France if they had Germany as neighbour. That against the British Empire? Don't make me laugh... The US wasn't always a superpower you know.
    1
  2475. I'd choose a firing line. You remain conscious for a bit after your head is cut off by guillotine
    1
  2476. Thanks. I'm a half black Dutch guy and it was never racist to me. I grew up with it and seeing how positive black pete is... I used to love him, all kids did. There was never any harm in it. And you could even delve into the ancient origins of Sinterklaas as final proof that black pete isn't racist. Sinterklaas is heavily based on an old Germanic tradition called the Wild Hunt, including the black paint.
    1
  2477. +Vbossbla As a European that visits the US from time to time... nope you have plenty of racism.
    1
  2478. +Robert Kubrick You didn't fight oil wars for Europe, you fought oil wars to keep the EU away from Russia and its oil supplies . We in the EU need oil from outside. The most logical partner in this is Russia. They're the closest to us and a fellow European nation. The problem is... an alliance between the EU and Russia/China means the end of the US as a superpower. Why? Because your economy runs on the petrodollar. You need the world to be dependent on the dollar as reserve currency, therefore you need large parts of the world to trade in dollars. China doesn't trade in dollars, Russia doesn't trade oil in dollars either. If the EU were to join them and switch to euro or something else to trade in dollars, the petrodollar is dead and dollar reserves might be sold en masse. For the dollar, this means hyperinflation and for the US economy, this means death. You need to keep the EU away from Russia and China if you want ot survive. And you need to wage oil wars when oil countries want to stop selling oil for dollars only (Saddam Hussein was switching to the euro - invaded. Libya wanted to switch to gold-backed oil trade - bombed and leader killed. Iran has switched to the euro for oil trade - hostilities but not yet any violence. Coincidence that all of these had just dropped the petrodollar before being attacked? Nah). The petrodollar is what is keeping the US economy alive, so you do everything you can to prevent its demise. This means two things: the EU must not ally itself with Russia or China and any big oil producer must only trade oil in dollars or die. If one of these two objectives fails, the US can get ready to print 1 trillion dollar notes in the style of Zimbabwan dollars.
    1
  2479.  @herrwagnerianer1739  Thanks for the info, thanks interesting stuff!
    1
  2480. +Nesrin Als jij denkt dat 4 en 5 mei alleen maar een herdenking van slachtoffers van een of andere oorlog is begrijp je niet waar het voor staat. De hele wereld is intrinsiek veranderd door de tweede wereldoorlog. Die oorlog is ongelooflijk belangrijk voor Europa geweest. Sindsdien kennen we mensenrechten, een verenigd (west-midden)Europa en veel, veel meer. De slavernij was een vervelende tijd waarin vreselijke dingen werden gedaan. Maar het is nutteloos om je te gaan verdiepen in ellende en die ellende levend te houden. Net zo nutteloos als dat de Duitsers de dertigjarige oorlog zouden herdenken, alleen omdat 30% van alle Duitssprekenden toen zijn gedood (in dezelfde tijd als de slavenhandel). Het is gewoon nutteloos. Het houdt de verkeerde gevoelens levend, gevoelens van haat en tekortdoening. Dat soort gevoelens moet je begraven, niet behouden.
    1
  2481. We should send our own outdated computers to such schools in Africa instead of throwing them away. They might be slow compared to the newest ones, but they work.
    1
  2482. Words precede the action. This is an indication of what the EU will now be working on; refugee centres at the Libyan border preventing them from illegally crossing into Europe. This is not something you just get done in one summit. Remember that the EU also dried up the entire Syrian refugee stream in 2015 with teh Turkey deal. The EU can do something, but we will have to see. All these words tell us is that they finally will get to work...
    1
  2483. +Kevin Madzima That the US entered the war in *1942 doesn't mean every won battle at that time should be credited to the US. In North Africa, the US forces were a very small part of a predominantly British Empire & Commonwealth force. The same goes for Italy, where the US were maybe 1/4 of all forces. The US plan was to not really get involved until D-day, which is what they did. In 1944, the US went all out. Before that, they always were a small part of a predominantly British Commonwealth force. The US joined just in time for the Allied counterattack, but missed the half the of the war where the Allies had to fight a superior Axis and turn the war around. The war was turned around by Stalingrad in the East and El Alamein in the Western front. The British and Soviets managed to gain the initiative so the Allies could counterattack, and the US essentially came just in time to join that counterattack. After El Alamein and Stalingrad, the Allies never lost again...
    1
  2484. +John Spike Are you sure? During the later stages of the war, there were MORE Axis tanks trying to stop the British and Americans in the west, than there were in the east... Of course the British would still have landed in Normandy without the Americans and succeeded all the same (assuming that the US would at least send supplies to the UK, which they bought), but if we ignore that then the USSR would have to face TWICE the force they had to face. I don't think they would have coped. The invasion of Italy meant they had to send troops there to reinforce the defence, the landing at Normandy meant they had to send troops to defend the European coasts and inland all the way to Germany itself, etc. The western front was more important than you think. And if you look at the numbers... the western allies captured and killed about the same amount that the Soviet Union captured/killed. But because the SU killed a LOT more than the western allies, people tend to think they were a lot more important. In reality, both sides neutralised an almost equal amount of Germans, but the western side just captured most of them instead of killing them in bloody battles.
    1
  2485. +julian frikken You forget the British Commonwealth, a highly important part of the European war effort, more so than the US. About the 50/50 thing, you are correct. People always look at the number of kills, but in reality both the eastern and western front took out about as many Germans. The Soviet Union killed 4.5 million Germans and captured 2.1 million, totalling 6.6 million Germans neutralised. The Western powers killed about 700-800k Germans together. The British captured 3.6 million Germans in total and the US 3 million. This totals about 7.5 million Germans neutralised for the West. But people tend to see that huge Soviet kill count and assume they must have taken care of the lion's share of the German army. In reality it's almost 50/50 between east and west.
    1
  2486. +Salterino Kripperino WW1 was not the fault of either side and there were no good or bad sides. It was the inevitable and tragic result of our European culture of clashing empires in the industrial age. We were just going to have a nice war like we always did... but this time both sides had industrial production capabilities, which made it a bit too extreme compared to the wars we had before... I'm proud to be of a country that was neutral in the disgusting waste of human life that was WW1. WW2 was again not the fault of the British. The Nazis trampled the Versailles treaty and ignored it (good, it was a horrible treaty) and all seemed well because Britain and France actually accepted this... until Germany went too far. They could have stopped at taking back Austria, Czechoslovakia and rebuilding their military beyond the restrictions of the treaty (all of which Britain and France just accepted), but no. They went further. They took Poland after specific warnings not to. At this point armies were mobilised but still nothing happened. Then... they went even more out of bounds and started attacking the Nordic countries, the low countries, France itself.... It was absolutely the Germans that escalated WW2. The Nazis were evil bastards that wanted to get rid of democracy and kill out entire races. They fully deserved the war, even if they wanted to sign peace with Britain. They are heroes for risking their country when Axis was winning HARD. They could have signed for peace and lost some irrelevant colonies to Germany, but they stood for their principles instead (democracy, etc.) and risked a full invasion. The British were courageous in WW2 and fought like lions. They're twice the men Americans were in WW2, you would have YELLED for peace if Germany had a border with you
    1
  2487.  PIMP PRIEST!  Luister naar zijn argumenten. Je zit hier één grote samenzweringstheorie te verzinnen. Je lijkt wel op die extreem rechtse gasten die over omvolking van het blanke ras praten.... Totaal wereldvreemd. Moet je nou kijken wat voor uitgebreide theorieën je verzint op basis van één of twee termen die Baudet heeft gebruikt. Maar als je naar zijn eigenlijke argumenten, boeken en partijprogramma kijkt zie je één duidelijke lijn die nog niet eens zo ver gaan als bijvoorbeeld de ideeën van Wilders over de Islam. De FvD is niet eens de meest rechtse partij in Nederland op het gebied van migratie, laat staan fascistisch/nazistisch. Je snapt gewoon niet wat fascisme/nazisme inhoudt en hoe extreem die ideologieën zijn. Het is volkomen gestoord om iemand zomaar fascist of nazi te noemen. En het is blank, niet "wit".
    1
  2488.  PIMP PRIEST!  Dat zegt heel veel over de waarschijnlijke samenzweringstheorieën en wat dan ook die er in voor kwamen. Dat is een sterke hint dat je het aan het verkeerde eind hebt. Zie niet altijd meteen het slechtste in anderen, bekijk hun standpunten en argumenten met nuance.
    1
  2489. +Gordan Shaw "Red America" refuses to acknowledge the role that firearms play in violent incidents in the US. Anyone that says "guns don't kill people, people kill people" can't take himself seriously. It's a general level of ignorance that allows gun violence to take more lives than necessary. I agree that gun control can do little to stop most of the violence in the US at this point (after all, you can't take the guns away from criminals at this stage, so it's pointless), but a lot of the arguments I hear from "Red America" show utter disdain for the human lives lost in shootings and zero interest in limiting further loss of life. SOME come with respectable arguments, but people who say "guns don;t kill people, etc." when a mass shooting just took place know full well that it is the firearm and only the firearm that enabled the culprit to take so many lives and would just rather defend their guns than acknowledge that they play a role in mass shootings. So yes, people who would say that value their guns over the human lives that will inevitably be taken in the future by mass shootings. Whatever your standpoint is on gun control is not the point, it is the ADMITTING that guns are a relevant factor in those shootings.
    1
  2490. I respect your views TIK. I consider my own views as close to yours. What I do want to share is that you seem to assume that there is only one possible "free market". Imo it is important to remember that even free markets function based on certain core rules. What can one own (good example is intellectual property. Should or should it not exist? This is far from a 'natural law' as modern capitalists tend to assume). It is NOT a given that the modern capitalist concept of ownership is the only possible one. Aspects of what you can and cannot own have been altered throughout history, mostly to benefit the elite. An example of this is publicly owned corporations. There is no "the" free market. There are many different types of free market. Please do think about that.
    1
  2491.    Discrimination in Europe is not based on arbitrary things like skin colour, but rather on culture. A lot of people despise foreigners for this reason. Xenophobia, in essence. It's a very different kind of discrimination to what is prevalent in the US. Kind of like Japan's attitude to foreigners, but less intense.
    1
  2492.  @TheMr0utside  Actually that is not true. Racism is a suprisingly new concept and if you go back far enough it didn't exist. What has always existed is xenophobia, but that is to be distinguished from racism.
    1
  2493. Paris is no longer Paris, but France is still France. For now.
    1
  2494. Meh, we can produce them ourselves. And doesn't the EU have its own sattelite system?
    1
  2495. Generally speaking, yes. But on Brexit the UK is also hopelessly divided
    1
  2496.  Thuis Home  Ik droom niet, de EU als supermacht is helemaal niet zo vreemd. Sterker nog, dat zijn we bijna al, het enige wat we missen is het militaire aspect. We hebben de politieke invloed, we hebben het economisch zwaargewicht, alleen nog een goed leger. Ik zeg niet dat de EU tegen Rusland én China op zou kunnen, maar dat als er een breuk is tussen de VS en de EU er een wereldorde zal ontstaan met 4 supermachten (VS, EU, Rusland, China) waarvan geen de overmacht heeft. De VS, EU en China zouden grofweg even machtig zijn. Over het EU leger ben ik het met je eens. Samenwerking is allemaal leuk en aardig, maar wanneer we een verenigd leger hebben waar de EU over beslist vrees ik dat wij ook dingen als Irak e.d. zullen gaan doen. Het is beter om nauw samen te werken maar de beslissing het leger in te zetten bij de landen te houden. Over Rusland die ons binnen zou vallen, dat is zelfs op dit moment al zelfmoord voor Rusland. Met of zonder Amerika. In de huidige onderbetaalde staat is het leger van alle EU landen samen al iets groter dan dat van Rusland en we zijn getraind en voorbereid op zo'n scenario (en onderbetaald betekent alsnog 200+ miljard, oftewel hetzelfde wat China in het leger investeert...). West-Europese legers zijn zwak vergeleken met Amerika omdat we niet veel capaciteit hebben om in het buitenland te interveniëren, maar defensief (het hele doel van onze legers op dit moment) zijn we sterk. Bovendien gaat het niet alleen om je leger op dit moment, maar ook om hoe snel je je leger kan uitbreiden in een oorlogssituatie. Als de EU in oorlogseconomie modus gaat en conscriptie inzet heeft Rusland nul kans. Dan hebben we het over één van de grootste industrieën ter wereld die aan de lopende band tanks, gevechtsvliegtuigen etc. produceert tegenover een industrie die niet eens de grootte van Duitsland haalt en een regio met 500 miljoen mensen waarvan zo veel mogelijk in het leger worden opgenomen tegenover een land van 100 miljoen. Binnen een paar maanden zou de EU Rusland in nummers overschaduwen. Dus het idee dat Rusland sterker is dan ons is onzin. Ze zouden alleen kunnen winnen als ze zó snel zijn met veroveren dat de Europese oorlogseconomie nooit op gang kan komen, en dat gaat niet gebeuren want dat zou nog bijzonderder zijn dan wat de Duitsers voor elkaar kregen tegen de Fransen in 1940. Zoiets gebeurt bijna nooit en alleen als de vijand niet is voorbereid of gewoon komisch incompetent.
    1
  2497.  @jeremygrimes9006  The US Iraqi invasion got over 1 million people killed; they were armed. The Vietnam War saw anywhere between 1 and 4 million Vietnamese die (stats vary); they were armed to the teeth. After WW2, Germans were placed in gulags and concentration camp-like circumstances, millions died (multiple millions in Soviets gulags, possibly up to 1 million in a US concentration camp in Germany with the true statistics unknown); they were not only armed but one of the most advanced militaries on the planet and by the end of the war civilians were armed en masse too. The Native Americans in the USA were genocided despite being armed too. In the Yugoslav wars all sides were armed to the teeth, yet both sides managed to commit ethnic cleansing on various occasions. There are many more examples.
    1
  2498.  @jeremygrimes9006  No, the point of the 2nd amendment is to defend against a tyrannical government and I'm pointing out that this is an idiotic way of battling that. Weapons won't help you against even a military that is your match, let alone a military that is many times more advanced and has all kinds of tech you don't have. What you need is a proper system to PREVENT tyranny from gaining power. In the Spanish civil war, the people even got tanks and warplanes to fight the government and at some point had comparable numbers. They still lost. Even having comparable tech is not a guarantee to win against a tyrannical government, let alone some guns (which can't even be fully automatic in most cases). It's stupid to think the 2nd amendment protects against anything, it's a futile law that is hopelessly outdated and arguably even stupid and futile from the very moment it was thought up. Maybe it will save you in a fairy tale world
    1
  2499.  harrylongbaugh1  That is exactly my point: you are protected against a tyrannical government not because of the 2nd amendment (like... AT ALL) but instead because your institutions are designed in such a way to spread power and prevent tyrannical governments from taking power. A tyrannical government is highly unlikely to succeed in America because of the military and other institutions. Owning weapons does nothing and I do mean absolutely nothing against a tyrannical government. If they have the military on their side it's over, guns or no guns. So the 2nd amendment does absolutely nothing in terms of preventing tyranny, it is other aspects of the constitution that do this, just like in any other country.
    1
  2500. Het is onchristelijk om vijandig te zijn tegen moslims. Iedereen omarmen, zegt het christendom. Kijk maar waar dat toe leidt...
    1
  2501. Or... a nice balance between the discomfort tourists bring and the money they bring. Stop thinking in this stupid black/white way
    1
  2502. Gast, zelfs Amerika heeft er maar 50 of zo
    1
  2503. Both America and its allies (in the Middle East, that is) and Iran are the problem, actually. Both are extremely hostile and stuck in a power struggle.
    1
  2504. +the critico Theo van Gogh was a vocal critic of Islam back in the early 2000's. He claimed multi-culturalism doesn't work (by now this is widely accepted in Europe as a fact) and that especially Islam was a "retarded" religion incompatible with the west. An islamic fundamentalist met him on the street and stabbed him to death. He is rotting in prison for life now, that bastard. That really shook the country back then...
    1
  2505. +Gerry Laarakker Canada is Canada and Europe is Europe. We are no immigrant countries, we are countries with native populations. So we have to combine preserving our culture with inviting other cultures in. It doesn't work. Later on we declared that multi-culturalism didn't work, so we changed tactics: if you come here you become part of our culture. This also doesn't work, as people refuse to do that. Europe and multiculturalism don't mix. We tried for a few decades and it just won't work.
    1
  2506. +Bruce Lansberg Firstly, I don't want to rule the world. All I want is for my country to be a beautiful and peaceful place to live. Secondly, it's all about who comes here. Every ethnicity that came here has integrated just fine and is completely not problematic, except the Moroccans, the Turks and pretty much every other people that adheres to the Islamic faith. I don't want my country to have separate societies. I don't want my country to have people living in it that hate our way of life and shun it. I don't want the huge overrepresentation in criminality that they have here. You just can't expect all cultures on the planet to be compatible with one another and live together happily. Islamic cultures and the west is one of those incompatibilities. So I say, it doesn't work. This is evident. And if it doesn't work we should stop letting more in. If even the third/fourth generation from Islamic countries still view themselves Muslim/Turkish/whatever before Dutch, I give up. It must end. They are to this day, foreigners living in Europe. By their own choice...
    1
  2507. This is going to sound nitpicky, but I think you're calling people racist too easily. I believe it's better to say that Bloomberg enacted racist policies in NYC with stop and frisk, rather than call him personally a racist. This not only is closer to the truth (considering that when a person as such is called a racist, this usually mean they are deep into race theories and all that stuff, which is worse than doing or saying racist things while otherwise meaning well) but also spreads the message better. When a random person hears you call Bloomberg racist, they'll likely either agree because they're already familiar with his history or they'll zone out. If you instead say he has enacted racist policies in the past, you directly place attention on that policy and new listeners are likely to look up that specific policy, see that it indeed unduly targeted African Americans and perhaps they'll find Bloombergs ridiculous justifications for it. They're just more likely to be convinced this way.
    1
  2508. We aren't really becoming poorer as a whole, but the anti-globalisation narratives do have certain truths in them. Globalisation is definitely no zero-sum game and both the west and east massively benefit from it if you look at the large scale. We get huge markets to trade with, they get an opportunity to grow their economy by manufacturing things for us and later industrialising to our level. It's a win-win. But there are some side effects. We in the west lose our factory jobs en masse. We get other jobs in return, but those are mostly skilled jobs in cities. Globalisation is as a consequence draining our countryside from jobs and making the lower classes even poorer than they already were, even though the country as a whole becomes richer. This is the reason the yellow vests protest in France and the reason the countryside voted Trump in the US. We ignore and neglect the lower classes in favour of economic growth. Another consequence is that our larger companies become more and more global entities instead of linked to a country and become powerful enough to dictate countries' policies. If, for example, one country creates strict environmental laws or chooses to tax pollution or something, the local companies can simply threaten with leaving that country for another one without such laws. If those companies leave, that country may lose out on massive amounts of GDP and jobs. So it all becomes a fight of who can appease the corporations the best. Who has the best settling climate? Who has the lowest taxes? Who allows for loopholes in the law to escape taxing altogether? Who has lenient laws in terms of workers rights or environmental laws? What is actually good for society matters less and less and that is a serious problem. There is no more link between the society and its companies, only their own corporate interests count. The days of a company feeling connected to its society and investing in it are gone; even where they do charity work, what they give is hugely overshadowed by the amount of tax money they evade. So yes, some anti-globalist movements certainly to have a point. There are massive positive sides to globalism, but also very flawed aspects of it.
    1
  2509.  @GHustle4  We already know for a fact that the death penalty does nothing to prevent crime. Criminals think they won't get caught, that is what makes them think they can get away with crime. So there is no real difference between life in prison and the death penalty in terms of prevention. Both prevent the criminal from ever again committing a crime in society. Real prevention is making the police force highly efficient at tracking down criminals and drastically increasing the chance of catching them. If they know they are likely to get caught, they won't do it, regardless of the punishment (unless it is a comically low punishment of course). And overall, most crimes are not eligible for life in prison and/or capital punishment. You get the most effect on crime prevention if you invest in a very effective police force and rehabilitation in prison. As for life in prison or death penalty.... it's a choice, really. There's effectively no difference in crime prevention so neither is really better in that regard. However, I am against the death penalty for one simple reason: you can never turn it back. If you find out years later that the suspect was innocent, it is too late and you killed an innocent person. If he was there for life, you can free him at least. Death penalty is just too permanent. There are many cases in which an innocent person was convicted for a variety of punishments. If you commit to the death penalty, you KNOW that some time, some where you will kill an innocent by mistake.
    1
  2510. I think both Dems and Reps are deeply corrupt
    1
  2511. The plane your mother flew looks like an SK60, which is in the game. It might also be the newer version, the SK105.
    1
  2512. But what if the women start beating eachother?
    1
  2513. I accidentally ended up eating mine, so now I have to stand in that damned queue again.... Hope I can control myself with my second one
    1
  2514.  @GreatAdmiral  Dat waren ook gewoon Nederlanders toen, hoewel niet etnisch Nederlands.
    1
  2515.  @WhoStoleMyAlias  En toch bestaat er een Nederlandse etniciteit. Etniciteit betekent niet "puur DNA". Er bestaat niet zoiets als een "puur" volk. Maar dat er geen "puur" volk bestaat, betekent niet dat dat volk überhaupt niet bestaat. We zijn allemaal slechts onze eigen mix van DNA, afkomstig van verschillende volken/culturen die hier voor ons leefden. Maar Nederlanders hebben, zeer grof gezegd, dezelfde mix van DNA. Bovendien gaat etniciteit niet alleen om genetisch verwantschap, maar ook om culturele en linguïstische aspecten van identiteit (en in dat verband kan gezegd worden dat ook onze cultuur en taal slechts een samenkomst is van invloeden van verschillende voorgaande culturen. Zoiets bestaat niet van de een op de andere dag, cultuur en taal is iets wat over (tien)duizenden jaren vormt).
    1
  2516. The murder of millions of people based on ideological nonsense, the needless slaughter of entire ethnicities. So… yeah quite a bit to fear
    1
  2517. Gast dit zit overal in de media
    1
  2518.  @cia4492  The EU literally is a military alliance.
    1
  2519. Ja en een vrouw die verkracht is had zich niet zo moeten kleden, toch? Het slachtoffer de schuld geven is bijna altijd fout... Een tekening zou geen geweld moeten uitlokken
    1
  2520. Laurel, definitely
    1
  2521. Link?
    1
  2522. +Randy Ohm So when a term is used by white nationalists you immediately interpret it as meaning "white power"?
    1
  2523. +Randy Ohm You make the mistake of putting all forms of nationalism in white countries under white supremacy. I agree that white supremacists also use terms like judeo-christian values as euphemisms, but that doesn't mean all or even the majority of those that use it are supremacists. There are nationalists that believe that everyone should stay in their own countries/continents and develop their own strong cultures (i.e. not believing in white race being superior), there are nationalists that actually do believe that our culture and not our race is superior and therefore certain foreigners that don't follow our culture should be pushed away (this is what you see most here in Europe; nationalists saying that the European culture is superior to Islamic culture and therefore Muslims should be shunned). Point is, there are various forms of nationalism and not all involve actually thinking the white race itself is superior. I would actually say that the grand majority of nationalists (I can only speak for Europe here) is of the school that believes our culture is superior and only those that are incompatible with it should be shunned, irrespective of race.
    1
  2524. +Randy Ohm Of course European culture exists... we share many many things across Europe. We are different, yet the same. Might as well say that there is no British culture because not everyone within Britain is the exact same, or even that there is no culture in a smaller country like the Netherlands because even here the people in different provinces differ hugely. Being different does not mean you can also have things in common , and what you have in common is shared culture. Imaginariy land borders do not stop culture, especially since those imaginary borders have not always existed in the way they do now, or even at all if you go back far enough. Culture shapes over thousands of years, including the time before borders were even a thing and we were just tribes living in villages. To name some European culture, take Easter or Yule/Christmas as an example. Ancient customs practiced by all of Europe. For (tens of?) thousands of years, people in all of Europe have been painting eggs in honour of a pagan goddess. For (tens of?) thousands of years, people in all of Europe have been celebrating Yule, even New Year's Eve down to making loud noises and the new year's resolution (!) can be traced back thousands of years at least. Fairy tales are also typically European culture, with for example Beauty and the Beast story being traced back to at least 4000 years ago, passed down from generation to generation all across Europe. Then there are things like classical music and ballet, which have grown to be part of our culture all over Europe. Then there are many values one could identify as European, etc. etc. etc. etc. These are only the things that are the same all over Europe, but you could also see similarities between European countries are European culture. Culture is gradual: Europeans are highly similar to others from their immediate regions - very similar to others from their countries in general - quite similar to others from their "tribe" (i.e. Dutch people are quite similar to other Germanic countries) - similar to Europeans in general - somewhat/not very similar to other Western countries - not similar or not similar at all to others. So there is regional culture, national culture and European culture. Even western culture exists, so it's beyond me why European culture would not.
    1
  2525. Anarchists would generally describe their ideology as wishing to abolish all unjust (incl. unnecessary) hierarchies. This is why I feel like "when there is no state" is a poor definition of anarchism. That definition to me seems like one that the "anarchy is when chaos/no rules" type crowd has formed. If you look at actual anarchist theory it's more about abolishing hierarchies. Anarchism never aspired to not be a state, as per your definition of state. I think the "anarchism is when no state" definition refers to states as simply the centralised governments we know today (and empires/governments we have known when anarchist theory formed), not the more elaborate definition that you use.
    1
  2526.  @donaldb.9995  Well said, except I'm sceptical of what you said about Venezuela. America's aversion against them and will to install a new leader there is clear, but the situation they're in right now was largely caused by their own economics. They essentially redirected oil money towards the population (not a bad thing in itself) without reinvesting into the economy. Their entire wealth was based on oil and since the oil price collapsed they've been hit extremely hard. America is using this situation to get a coup d'etat done and probably has a hand in worsening the situation, but I wouldn't say what is happening now in Venezuela truly is due to the US. They failed to diversify their economy. Which is a shame because they did have the opportunity to do so. As for the rest, I agree but don't know about the role of zionists in all this. What exactly their goal is and the degree to which they influence America is unclear to me. If I look at America's foreign policy I mainly see the military industrial complex and petrodollar politics at work, not so much zionism. But perhaps you could elaborate on that.
    1
  2527. +Carlos Contreras Exactly. I believe the quality artists are there, but they don't get enough attention from the mainstream audience to come to fruitition the way former legends have. They aren't encouraged on the same level anymore and enjoy a limited fanbase. It's sad, really.
    1
  2528. I know he just misspoke here and that can happen, but it's still pretty damn funny
    1
  2529. Dat zijn ze niet vergeten, daar hebben zij zelf willens het wetens naartoe gewerkt
    1
  2530.  @nuranaydin3372  Ja, heel veel vrouwen kiezen ervoor een hoofddoek te dragen en heel veel vrouwen moeten een hoofddoek dragen. En wij moeten de vrouwen die gedwongen worden bijstaan. Dat doe je door te laten zien dat vrouwen zelf keuzes kunnen maken en geen hoofddoek hoeven te dragen als ze dat niet willen, dat doe je door de waarden van het westen uit te dragen en te verspreiden. Hennis geeft het tegenovergestelde signaal door dat gewaad te dragen
    1
  2531. +Diane Merwin Aha, so Europe is going to win the trade war.... ?
    1
  2532.  @real43nl38  Hij bedoelde culturele verdunning middels multiculturalisme. Hij heeft ook gezegd dat iedereen die de Nederlandse waarden accepteert welkom is
    1
  2533. ​@Sandy Jones Race is not human biology, but a social construct. Biologically, there is only one human race and a lot of different ethnicities within that race. The idea of different races is in fact pseudoscience. Then again, when people nowadays say "race" they usually just mean "ethnicity" anyway.
    1
  2534. @Sandy Jones As I said, the meaning of "race" is changing to just meaning (clusters of) ethnicities. But strictly speaking we are one human race with a bunch of ethnicities. If you want to call closely related clusters of ethnicities "races" (they're not), then I won't stop you. I also definitely didn't mean to say there are no meaningful differences between humans. The entire reason why classifying us into races is a nonsensical idea is exactly because ethnicities are so complex and many differences exist within the classic 18th century race categories that are now so outdated. There is no "black" race because people exist within that group that differ more from eachother than even some African and Caucasian ethnicities do. The only category of the classic race distinction that turned out to be more or less accurate is the white one, since European ethnicities form a closely related cluster that more or less coincides with classical ideas of the European race. But the rest is so convoluted that it makes absolutely no sense to categorise people along the lines of "black", "Asian" and more. That is a way too simplistic and incredibly inaccurate way to look at human genetics. The idea of race is hopelessly outdated and nowadays purely a social construct. Even the bigger clusters of ethnicities that are closely related are far smaller than our classic ideas of race.
    1
  2535. @Sandy Jones No. Race theory in the sense of "white, black, Asian, etc." is complete and utter nonsense. I am not "taking away" people's identity, I am showing them their REAL identity which is their ethnicity and the larger cluster of ethnicities it may belong to. That is a whole lot more complex than "muh black people". West Africans and Australian aboriginals share NOTHING in identity and it makes no sense to call them both "black" as if they're one and the same. That is an insult to them. I agree our society has gone insane with race and all that, but the solution is to get rid of those hopelessly outdated ideas and build a society that judges people by the content of their character instead of their skin colour. We'd all be better off if this entire idea of race just disappeared and instead we all embraced the reality of ethnicities.
    1
  2536. Humans 2019 years ago: see eachother naked all the time Humans in 2019: omg a nipple cover that up This is just stupid, especially when we're talking about breastfeeding which is a perfectly natural thing. Sexualised nudity is different and can be prohibited, but things like breastfeeding have no reason to be banned other than pure prudeness.
    1
  2537.  @AnabelleLee100  Whatever, are we going to ban bare feet too because it can be sexualised? No. If a woman is obviously sexualising her breasts, ban it (this can include sexualisation of breastfeeding). If a woman merely breastfeeds her baby with no sexual connotations there should be no banning at all. It all depends on context, you can't just brush over everything involving breasts as being sexual.
    1
  2538. The people who wrote that article: Inclusivity is great, games should cater to all kinds of people with different expectations. Also those people: NIche games that cater to gamers that enjoy a specific subgenre should not exist.
    1
  2539.  @turbogymdweeb184  Je hebt een anarchiesymbool in je profielfoto en je steunt een door de overheid opgelegde parallelle samenleving voor niet-gevaccineerden terwijl dat ivm coronacijfers helemaal niet nodig is? Ga je schamen, nep-anarchist. Er is best goede reden om een QR code te vragen bij clubs e.d., waar mensen zeer dicht op elkaar zitten. We hebben gezien dat dat gevaarlijk is voor de coronacijfers en voor coronadoden kan zorgen. Maar restaurants en cafés waar wij al maanden zonder coronaproblemen hebben kunnen zitten? Dat is een onnodige inbreuk op onze vrijheid door de overheid. Totaal geen indicatie dat dit nodig is om coronadoden te voorkomen, en dus ook NIET gerechtvaardigd. Als anarchist zou je beter moeten weten dan de hielen van de overheid te likken. Ze gaan onvoorzichtig met onze vrijheden om. Als het om onze vrijheden gaat is MAATWERK nodig; doe dicht wat dicht moet, laat open wat verantwoord open kan. Er is hier geen maatwerk, maar er wordt lukraak een QR code ingevoerd overal, ongeacht of dat nodig is of niet. Dat is een ongerechtvaardigde inbreuk op onze vrijheden. Verander je profielfoto maar
    1
  2540. In Russia the government pays people to be positive about the government, in America the people are stupid enough to spread the propaganda all by themselves
    1
  2541. +Techno Viking Probably to intimidate. Nobody knows for sure of course, but this method of killing heavily implies it's Russia. When you send a gang after your targets it's just a killing, nothing that sends a clear message.
    1
  2542. Yeah... The Endgame scene was pretty innocent pandering in just one scene, but the pandering is reaching some very scary levels now
    1
  2543. @SchnuffelWuffel Yeah, they basically bankrupted the richest nation on earth and after the war stripped them of their colonies, leaving only the USSR as a viable contender
    1
  2544.    It was shit because he had nothing to back those investments up with. What Hitler did was spend insane amounts of money he didn't actually have to build Germany up and then make up those losses by invading other countries. It was a shitty economy, despite the initial results of spending money on developing Germany. There was no solid substance to the Nazi economy and it'd be difficult to make it work in the long term.
    1
  2545.  @0wninguplz  Wat heeft dit met democratie te maken? Op basis van een koninklijk besluit zijn wij na negenen opgesloten. Moet ik überhaupt nog meer zeggen? Ze hebben een foutieve grondslag gebruikt waardoor het parlement totaal buiten spel is gezet, terwijl de Raad van State hier van tevoren al voor waarschuwde. De Raad van State werd genegeerd. Dit is een grootse fout en een schande voor de democratie.
    1
  2546.  @stoprightthereclicker218  Most yes, but there were also many in combat roles both on the ground and in the air. Some of the fighter pilots were even an ace.
    1
  2547.  @sparhawk1228  I'm talking about actual soldiers, just like men. They didn't avoid combat, you are simply making this up on the spot. Some of the women even got hero of the Soviet Union awards, so the last thing they did was avoid combat. Among the fighter pilots there were a few aces too.
    1
  2548.  @toythief1633  By the end of the war there would be at least 500.000 women at any given time in roles that would require them to enter the front lines or fight. I would count paramedics that carry rifles and rush to wounded soldiers on the frontline to treat them as women in combat roles. I would also count manning AA guns and shooting down enemy aircraft as a combat role. 500.000 during the later stages of the war, full number of served in the military would be 800.000 (including non-combat roles)
    1
  2549.  @sparhawk1228  I'm sure they would, but hand to hand combat was pretty much redundant by WW2 so I don't get your point. It was still somewhat part of the war in WW1 trench combat, but WW2?
    1
  2550.  @sparhawk1228  Again, this isn't WW1. Bayonets have questionable use at best, they even did in WW2 already.
    1
  2551. The BBC is neutral, meaning that they don't really give their own opinion on things and just broadcast what for example the US government says about something. There is no voice of reason at the BBC, nor is there supposed to be one. They report what the US claims, they report what France claims, they report what Russia claims and it's up to you to decide who you believe, if any of them.
    1
  2552. Why are we still here...
    1
  2553. Dit was gewoon een onpartijdige berichtgeving, vind ik
    1
  2554.  @utubebroadcaster  That sounds like something Trump would say, way too exaggerated. And I'm sure Biden would be worse.
    1
  2555. +Hans Connely Unless I got the definition wrong, the Nazis were in fact fascists. Adhered to the anti-democratic belief that one leader could lead a country more efficiently than democracy (being Hitler), heavily regulated society (example: forbade farmers from selling agricultural land), regulates the economy (privatised economy, but government could order companies around and nationalise them if non-compliant). Ticks all the boxes
    1
  2556. @Keyur negi Wow, I watched it and what a dickhead he is
    1
  2557.  @KristianFraNorge  Yeah, it's not about current peace time numbers. It is about your war economy capabilities, population pool and resources. And of course technology. A country that has all of the above is very powerful, regardless of their peacetime military. Best historical example is Nazi Germany. Went from a pathetic country with a nonexistant military to beating three major powers at once. They mauled France and Britain and were in the process of mauling the USSR (before the Russians got their act together in 1942, that is). They went from pathetic to one of the most powerful militaries (perhaps the single most powerful) on the planet within a year or two. And the main reason they even lost at all is because they seriously lacked fuel
    1
  2558.  @AsukaLangleyS02  Sure, I agree that France did more in WW2 than people like to say. The Battle of France was so big that the French suffered almost as many deaths in that battle alone as the US did from beginning to end of the entire war... And the Free French Forces were much more important in North Africa than for example the Americans were (but according to pop culture....). Also in the Middle East. I didn't mean the Nazis beat France as a whole, or Britain. I meant that they defeated both in the battle of France. And they almost managed to defeat the USSR too. The main reason they couldn't was their lack of fuel. And all of that starting from their pathetic Versailles treaty state. Same with the Americans in WW2. They started out with a pathetic military with WW1 equipment and 300k personnel... That is a military compared to that of the bloody Netherlands at that time. By the end they were a formidable force because of their war economy and population pool (technology was mostly British though). So really, it's not about your current peace time numbers, it is about your underlying qualities.
    1
  2559. Beetje overdreven. Bovendien valt er veel te zeggen over de terughoudendheid van een bepaalde Amerikaanse officier om de brug in Nijmegen in te nemen, waardoor de Britten in Arnhem dagen langer moesten wachten op versterking. Hooguit kun je zeggen dat Montgomery's "ijdeltuiterij" veroorzaakte dat Market Garden een zeer gewaagde en risicovolle operatie was, maar het is niet zo dat de operatie daardoor echt faalde.
    1
  2560. And at America for electing him
    1
  2561.  @WildwoodCastle  Yes, yes it absolutely was. Especially by European/Western standards.
    1
  2562. So you want a neutral news channel to report that the chemical attacks were fake even though nobody actually knows at this stage and an official investigation is underway? Bye bye neutrality, I guess... Look, the BBC reported on what France said on proof they have, what the US and UK said about the matter, the counter-proof Russia put forward and the fact that Syria denied it. Now it's up to you to decide who to believe, if any at all. They also showed the video by the white helmets. YOU know that the white helmets are an anti-government party that would have interest in framing the Syrian government and I believe they in fact lied on other occasions as well. You know all you need to know to form a decent opinion on the basis of BBC's reporting. The BBC itself refrains from taking a clear standpoint, especially when the truth is not evident. We don't know exactly what happened in Salisbury and you can't expect the neutral BBC to suddenly pick a side. The same holds true for the chemical attacks in Syria. All the BBC can do at this point is report on what all parties in the matter have to say and leave it up to the viewer to form their own opinion. You have formed yours and that's fine, but now you're essentially attacking the BBC for being neutral...
    1
  2563. Bloody invasion of Japan to end WW2 anyway and then the Cold War would almost certainly go hot at some point into WW3.
    1
  2564. His description of god is more an explanation of why we humans created religion than an argument for the literal god being real. Strictly speaking I think he is correct in how he describes religion and what it represents, but connects the wrong conclusion to it (it therefore being "real"). God is not real, he or they - whatever form of god or spirituality your culture may adhere to - are made up beings reflecting the collective views, archetypes and evolutionary instincts of the specific culture the god(s) in question belong to. I would agree with that, but that doesn't mean god is "real", it means god is nothing more than a symbol of our collective conscience. Or in other words religion is a metaphorical representation of our culture and collective beliefs on what is right and proper. And by what is right and proper I mean what is good for the survival of our species: usually including being honourable or a good person, in certain religions also including hygienic rules or other rules that are thought to be beneficial to follow for our survival, all coupled with a punishment for non-compliance (hell, not reincarnating or reincarnating into a lower status, karma, etc.). All of this differs per culture. The religion of your culture is also your religion/god in the sense that you unconsciously also follow many elements of that belief system. So strictly speaking, "god" exists and even is also your "god", but only in a metaphorical sense. Jordan Peterson is wrong on saying god is real, but right in describing what god is. That's my view on it anyway. And one short point on why abrahamic religion in particular are problematic: they have scriptures. This means that the collective beliefs on what is "good" were written down 2000+ years ago and the religion expects people today to adhere to those rules. Good religions should evolve with their culture and with the time. Religions with scriptures are stuck in the time period when that scripture was written. But most religious people today don't follow any scripture literally, luckily. We have seen what happens when radicals do (ISIS).
    1
  2565. Traitors siding with foreigners over Europeans. Leaving is your right and it's fine, but siding with the imperialist US against Europe is a disgrace
    1
  2566.  appie D  Ok dus de door het christendom geïnspireerde kolonisatie om andere bevolkingen te bekeren was dus goed omdat een groot deel van de bevolking christen was? Het aantal aanhangers van een religie maakt de religie niet minder gevaarlijk of verwerpelijk.
    1
  2567. Je moet wel bijzonder idioot zijn om Sanders communistisch te noemen terwijl hij letterlijk alleen maar voorstelt wat we hier en in omringende landen al lang hebben qua sociale zekerheid.
    1
  2568.  @volkiruski1221  Wat zit jij in godsnaam allemaal te typen hier? Wat een kolder allemaal, het is heel duidelijk dat Bernie Sanders het communisme en andere autoritaire overheidsvormen heeft veroordeeld en dat zijn concrete voorstellen alleen maar neerkomen op Amerika de sociale zekerheid gunnen die wij al lang hebben hierzo. Hij noemt zichzelf een democratisch socialist maar zelfs dat is hij niet; hij is een sociaal democraat (en dus capitalist met uitgebreide sociale zekersheidsplannen zoals wij).
    1
  2569.  @volkiruski1221  "Nietes". Goed argument... Misschien kun je één keer in je leven eens iets onderbouwen in plaats van willekeurige, slecht geïnformeerde uitspraken te doen.
    1
  2570.  @volkiruski1221  Bij CNN zijn ze ook anti-Sanders omdat hij tegen het establishment is. Bij MSNBC vergeleken ze hem zelfs met Hitler... Het establishment houdt niet van Bernie. Hun paradepaardje is Joe Biden, die vierkant achter de deep state staat. Het lijkt eerder alsof jij naar de mainstream media hebt zitten kijken als ik je zo hoor over Bernie Sanders. Feiten zijn dat hij duidelijk heeft gezegd tégen autoritarisme te zijn, ook in Cuba. Hij heeft slechts, net als Obama, gezegd dat ze hun educatie goed hebben geregeld en meer niet. Sanders heeft nooit iets over een goelag of wat dan ook gezegd, misschien één van zijn supporters wel maar dat is hetzelfde als hier in Nederland zeggen dat Baudet vindt dat zwarte mensen dommer zijn dan blanken omdat die ene lul bij de partij dat in het verleden heeft gezegd. Dat kun je Sanders/Baudet niet zomaar aanrekenen, zeker als ze het zelf uiteindelijk niet hebben willen bevestigen dat ze dat geloven/willen. Volgens mij wil hij alleen uitkeringen e.d. voor Amerikanen, maar op dat punt ken ik zijn beleid niet goed. Kortom, als hij spreekt heeft hij het duidelijk over dingen die wij hier al lang hebben, en dan nog niet eens alles.
    1
  2571. Wie dan als premier? Kaag is de enige die überhaupt enigszins nog steun had als premier volgens de peilingen
    1
  2572. Alleen de Abrahamistische religies zijn echt slecht (christendom, jodendom, islam), de rest is ok.
    1
  2573. Nou omdat het 100 jaar geleden is is er wel een bijzondere gelegenheid het te vieren en er iets mee te doen
    1
  2574.  @Therowinn  Dat was in 2017 100 jaar geleden geloof ik. Voor zover we dat niet hebben gevierd vind ik dat we dat wel hadden moeten doen. Maar volgens mij was er wel degelijk aandacht aan besteed toendertijd
    1
  2575. 2:18
    1
  2576. The magazine is so long yet it holds only 6 shells
    1
  2577.  @singularkakapo  No, I'm surprised by the apparent size of them. I'd have guessed it could hold about 8 shells
    1
  2578.  @changachangus6930  And IRL the EU is just a bunch of neoliberal globalists, like basically all western politics right now
    1
  2579. Schotland moet jullie niet meer. Als ze een referendum voor elkaar krijgen is het game over
    1
  2580. Alles voor de foto...
    1
  2581. +Hell Cat The thing is, school shooters usually don't use illegal AKs from the street. They generally use legal firearms. Gun crime in the US is a lost cause, it's hopeless to try to regulate gun ownership among criminals, but school shooters are different. Even the simple act of making guns unavailable to mentally unstable people would have for example prevented the school shooting before this, with the autistic guy. But the US doesn't even take this simple and logical measure that no sane person could be against (why the hell would mentally ill people be allowed to purchase guns?!). But no, the US does NOTHING, not even the slightest thing.
    1
  2582. @Mocro Lion Dat heet genocide. Als je dat oké vindt ben je echt walgelijk.
    1
  2583. @Mocro Lion Dat weet ik maar daar gaat het niet om. Jij zegt heel specifiek in reactie op iemand die zegt "er zullen straks geen Nederlanders meer zijn", dat dat niet uitmaakt. Dat maakt wel uit.
    1
  2584. Western civilisation is based on Pagan values. Either those that existed in the pre-Christian era and were never abandoned, or those reintroduced in any of the renaissances in Europe. Even Christianity itself has been infused with Pagan values and customs, especially Catholicism. Early Christians were a lot like Jews. When the religion came to Europe it was Europeanised and infused with pre-Christian European values. Paganism and science is the foundation of Europe
    1
  2585. The issue is that not only is forcing something into the game a political choice, it is also political to portray history as it was but HIDE certain negative or positive sides of it. Persecution of gay ppl was part of medieval times, suppression of women who did not want to fulfill traditional roles is part of medieval times. If you only show cis hetero ppl, you portray medieval times as if gay ppl did not exist. This is a political choice, it hides how gay ppl were treated by simply pretending they didn’t exist. As if it was “back when LGBTQ didn’t exist” or something, a common right wing trope that obviously is historically inaccurate. It is also a political choice to portray women ONLY in their traditional roles and all of them as happy to fulfill these roles. As if women were not pressured into these roles and somehow “naturally” fulfilled them. Again, the right wing trope of “the good old times when women were women”, without showing what needed to be done to force them into these roles: strong social pressure and the consequences if they did not conform. I love KCD1 and will love the second. But these choices absolutely are as political as forced diversity. It shows a propagandised/“cleansed” version of medieval times that is very historically accurate, yet hides certain negative aspects of it. Gay ppl existed back then, women who wanted to or did resist traditional roles existed back then. It is part of historical accuracy to show what was done to them. And it is political to hide it. I btw think KCD1 did very well on this. The DLC with the Miller’s daughter was great and showed a strong woman. I’d also call Johanka a strong woman for how she dealt with the wounded from Skalitz and more. Strong women don’t need to be warriors or whatever, just strong in their own way. So in KCD2 I’d love to see more of this, and women who subvert their traditional roles and how they deal with the consequences. That is historical accuracy and inclusivity at once. Better historical accuracy even, cus it shows MORE about history than if you erase this and portray all women as happily subservient. On black ppl I agree fully though. Just some rare merchant in a city perhaps, nothing more. Would be good to show, but unnecessary if it was also very very rare irl
    1
  2586.  @m1k1a1  There was a quest about religious persecution, where Henry had to search for ppl with a different Christian faith. And the choice was to save them or have them be persecuted (I think tortured) by the Church. They can do the exact same with LGBT ppl. And with women who subvert their gender roles and are targeted for it. And KCD already did depict violence against women by the Cumans, only in wartime. So they can depict every-day violence against women too. They show how Cumans attempt to rape Theresa. And having said that, I already stated I think KCD did a pretty good job actually.
    1
  2587. Ja tuurlijk, zoals alle feministen elkaar ook napraten... En iedereen binnen welke politieke beweging dan ook. Het hele punt van een politieke beweging is dat je dezelfde overtuigingen hebt. Niemand, maar dan ook echt helemaal niemand, heeft alleen maar eigen, zelf bedachte opvattingen. Zou dit wel zo zijn dat zou de mensheid zwaar achterlopen ten opzichte van nu. Wetenschap, politicologie en wat je ook maar kan bedenken is gebaseerd op kennisoverdracht. Oftewel mensen die elkaar napraten, soms wat toevoegen, en dan elkaar weer napraten!
    1
  2588. Biden is voor NL standaarden extreem rechts. Er is niet eens een optie in Amerika die dicht bij de Nederlandse politiek komt qua hoe "links" wij zijn. Ja, inclusief wat voor ons "extreem rechts" is zoals de FvD. Alleen zij komen überhaupt dichtbij hoe rechts de Democraten zijn. Bernie Sanders was de eerste die een beetje dicht bij Europese politiek kwam. Biden is alles behalve links. Hij is een corrupte neoliberaal (rechts dus) die allemaal linkse dingen zegt maar in werkelijkheid lekker met de bedrijven in zee gaat. Hij heeft zijn sponsoren (bedrijven) al verteld "nothing will fundamentally change". Hij zit in de zak van de bedrijven en kan absoluut niet "links" genoemd worden. Hetzelfde als Kamala Harris die eerste als officier van justitie extreme tactieken gebruikt om voornamelijk zwarte mensen op te sluiten (zoals beleid om de OUDERS van criminelen een boete te geven, ook als zij er niets mee te maken hebben. En een paar gevallen waarin zij bewust bewijs achterhield in een zaak totdat de rechter haar dwong om de info vrij te geven, waardoor meerdere mensen jaren langer in de gevangenis zaten dan ze eigenlijk hadden moeten zitten) en dan NU doet alsof ze helemaal Black lives matter is... Eén ding is duidelijk als wij het over Biden en consortium hebben; zij zijn VIRTUE SIGNALLERS en CORRUPT. Zeker niet links. Bernie is links. Biden komt niet eens dichtbij. Hij is een rechtse globalist met linkse virtue signal praatjes. Trump is een nationalist. Deze verkiezing gaat niet om rechts/links, het gaat om globalisten versus nationalisten. Vrijhandel waardoor banen naar het buitenland gaan of America First waarmee je banen in de VS houdt. Verder zijn beide opties gewoon rechts.
    1
  2589.  @SabbaticusRex  I agree, it's like they saw the SJW caricatures of what a 'toxic male' is, and then they actually thought "yeah I want to be like that". It's ridiculous
    1
  2590. +Queen xx Leuke ironie. Je hoopt dat anderen die iets slechts wensen voor het Turkse consulaat dat hen iets slechters overkomt, waarmee je zelf dus hoopt dat anderen iets slechts overkomt.
    1
  2591. Helaas is dit één van vele onderwerpen waar de meeste mensen niets van weten of niet eens om geven
    1
  2592. That'd be a boring video, Entente would still win with relative ease
    1
  2593. Ehhhh, why are you confirming they are human beings as if there are other cultural/religious groups that are apparently not?
    1
  2594. You holding both that book and your phone just about the bathwater gave me anxiety. I'd probably have dropped both were I in your place
    1
  2595.  @benjamincannell4906  Tax cuts mean you're cutting government spending. So you're paying for tax cuts by diminishing certain government policy. For example cutting in defence spending. Tax cuts aren't free either, it means the government loses out on money that it right now is using.
    1
  2596.  @dipojones  Exactly
    1
  2597. Wonderful
    1
  2598. Got a bunch of ads though, so congrats
    1
  2599. Jesus Christ man. I pay a bit over 1300 euros a year and that includes dental and I believe vision too. 8500 dollars is insane, you should get so much coverage for that...
    1
  2600. Sink the ship so it can't bring any more. They are causing migrants to cross the desert and possibly die on their way to Libya, just to put themselves in the hands of human traffickers willingly while even paying them and ultimately venturing out at sea in a simple raft, again possibly dying. They do this for one reason: they are taken to Europe if they harm themselves and endanger their lives. STOP giving them reason to do this to themselves, STOP saving them.
    1
  2601. +sarah stampfl Zwarte Piet is ouder dan de slavernij en stamt uit een tijd waarin noord Europeanen überhaupt nooit een Afrikaan hadden gezien. Romeins historicus Tacitus beschreef in een boek hoe een Germaanse stam hun gezichten zwart schminkten om figuren uit een oud decemberfeest na te spelen dat verdacht veel overeenkomsten toont met Sinterklaas... In het decemberfeest de Wilde Jacht vliegt Odin (witte baard, oppergod) op zijn paard door de lucht, gevolgd door een leger van zwarte figuren, ontvoert mensen die iets misdaan hebben naar een andere wereld en beloont anderen. En voor dit feest schminkten volgens een Romeins historicus Germanen hun gezicht zwart. Klinkt verdacht vergelijkbaar met Sinterklaas die op zijn paard over de daken rijdt, gevolgd door zwarte pieten, en stoute kinderen naar Spanje ontvoert. Toch? Zwarte Piet is duizenden jaren oud. En het grappige is dat Zwarte Piet mogelijk gestorven Germaanse krijgers moet voorstellen die men toen vereerden, dus onze eigen voorvaderen. En dan zeggen dat het om slaven gaat. Natuurlijk is in 1800-zoveel kroeshaar, rode lippen, oorbellen en wat dan ook toegevoegd, maar dat mag (en is grotendeels) allemaal weg. Maar het zwart schminken is het meest belangrijke onderdeel van Zwarte Piet dat Germanen kennelijk al duizenden jaren doen. Dat moeten we niet laten verdwijnen na zo'n lange tijd
    1
  2602. Sood81 - Hasbara trolls go back to Khazaria Krampus is hetzelfde als Zwarte Piet, alleen in een ander gebied in Europa. Ze komen allebei van hetzelfde: een millennia oude Germaanse traditie waarbij Odin (lange witte baard, wit paard) door de lucht vliegt met een leger zwarte figuren achter zich en mensen die iets misdaan hebben ontvoert naar een andere wereld. De oudst bekende beschrijving van dit festival is uit het jaar 98, van Tacitus, waarin hij beschrijft dat een Germaanse stam hun gezichten zwart schilderden om het leger van Odin na te spelen. In de ene regio is dit overgebleven als Krampus die stoute kinderen ontvoert naar het bos en Sint Nicolaas die cadeautjes uitdeelt, in de andere als Zwarte Piet die stoute kinderen ontvoert naar Spanje en Sint Nicolaas die cadeautjes uitdeelt (waarbij Sint Nicolaas de verchristelijking van Odin is, verplaatst door een of andere heiligman). Boeien welke versie je hebt. Krampus of Zwarte Piet, welke naam je het zwarte figuur ook geeft, het word al minstens 2000 jaar gedaan in Noord-Europa dus het is onzin om het te verbinden aan slavernij of racisme. En over al die berichten, dat zijn gewoon boze reacties op hoe mensen een deel van de Nederlandse/Europese cultuur willen weggooien zonder goede reden.
    1
  2603. Sood81 - Hasbara trolls go back to Khazaria Van mij mag alles wat in 1850 is toegevoegd weg. Kroeshaar, rode lippen, etc. Waar het mij om gaat is het zwartgeschminkte gezicht dat al 2000 jaar wordt gedaan. En Krampus is ook niet de originele vorm van Zwarte Piet. Dat kwam na het christendom en is zoals vele andere tradities een verchristelijking van voor-christelijke feesten, net als kerst, pasen, onze eigen Sinterklaas en meer. En ik zal je als rechtenstudent vertellen dat je niet het recht hebt om je beledigd te voelen door een feest en daarom dat feest af te schaffen of te veranderen voor iedereen. De wereld is niet zo eenzijdig en mensen moeten allerlei dingen van elkaar accepteren. Zo werkt de wet gewoon niet: "ik vind dat niet leuk, stop ermee". Dit is een maatschappelijk debat waar de wet niets mee te maken heeft. En als je naar de historie van Zwarte Piet kijkt, ziet iedereen met een gezond verstand dat het zwarte gezicht niet racistisch is. Als er een probleem is, ligt dat bij het kroeshaar en de rode lippen die eigenlijk nog maar 150 jaar geleden zijn toegevoegd. En ik vind het grappig om gezeur over slavenhandel te horen van iemand wiens voorouders zowel honderden jaren langer slavenhandel hebben gedreven als miljoenen meer slaven hebben gehad. Het enige verschil is dat ze in de Arabische wereld slaven castreerden zodat ze geen kinderen konden krijgen...
    1
  2604. She tried, but the particularly nasty way in which parliament is divided was too much for her. I doubt anyone else could to be honest, a cross-party division is highly irregular for UK politics and needs an exceptional leader to break through.
    1
  2605.  @darkinferno4687  That's a dumb reaction with which you completely ignore what I said. I said what makes us a living breathing person is our brain. Our conscious being is our brain. Without that consciousness there is no person, but only an empty body. Calling a foetus without a functioning brain a fully fledged human is like saying if I cut off the head of a grown man and keep the rest of the body alive by putting it on a machine that pumps blood through it, that body is still a living breathing person. No it is not, that person was gone when the brain stopped working, regardless what the rest of the body does afterwards. Without our brain, we are nothing. Just some cells. Without a brain there is no consciousness, there is no person, there is no living breathing human. So as long as a foetus has no functioning brain, it's not a living, conscious person. And I don't think preventing something from becoming a conscious person is the same as ending the life of a conscious person.
    1
  2606.  @vini16f  So if some mad scientist cuts off the head of a grown human and keeps the rest of the body artificially alive by putting it on life support, you would seriously call that body a "conscious human person"? Because "it has DNA"? This makes no sense. Without a brain, there is no consciousness and there is no person. Your reasoning would mean that even a morning after pill should be considered murder, since the fertilised cells would already have the DNA of the prospective child and would be in an early stage of developing towards a foetus. And I'm not talking about a conscience, I'm talking about being CONSCIOUS. Awake, aware, alive, mentally present. You are your consciousness. Not your hands, not your feet, not any part of your body. We are our consciousness, our brains. Our ability to think, our ability to feel, our personality, that is what makes us a person and that is what makes it wrong to end our life. A brainless body is just an empty vessel. No person is in there.
    1
  2607. ​ @vini16f  Ffs, looks up what consciousness means if you don't understand..... It is NOT conscience, it's being CONSCIOUS. Being conscious means you are awake and capable of thinking, that is all. When a baby developed a brain, it is awake and capable of thinking, thus is it a conscious person. A human body is not an actual person without its brain. Because our consciousness, our ability to feel, our ability to think and our personality, everything that defines us as human is stored in our brain. A headless body is not a living human, even if that body still has a beating heart and living cells. What made that body a living person, is gone.
    1
  2608.  @johndix1820  No it isn't. Because that means even the morning after pill would be "murder". Even stopping literally one fertilised cell from multiplying would be murder, which is a ridiculous notion. And as I've said before, stopping the hypothetical life support of a human body without a head would also be "murder". We are not just our DNA, we are not our body, we are our spirit, our personality, thus our brain. Murder is the erasing of a person, it's stopping the brain from working. Murder is not killing any human cell, it's much more than that.
    1
  2609.  @johndix1820  If you agree a body without a head is not alive, then why would literally one human cell be considered to be alive, or a foetus without a functioning brain? I always saw our brains and the personality/consciousness within them to be the defining factor that makes it wrong to kill.
    1
  2610. Ligt eraan. Vorige controverse rond de wet had iemand een jongere doodgeschoten in een steegje. Geen getuigen, niks. Maar hij heeft volgens mij niet eens de binnenkant van het politiestation gezien. Gewoon vrijuit zonder rechtszaak. De wet is echt niet prima. Ik vind ook dat iedereen zichzelf moet kunnen verdedigen, maar dan moet er wel zorgvuldig worden uitgezocht wat er is gebeurd en of het gebruik van geweld gerechtvaardigd was. Ook bij deze zaak, waar je makkelijk kan twisten of de schutter wel had hoeven schieten, heeft de politie hem in eerste instantie gewoon vrijuit laten gaan. Dat klopt gewoon niet.
    1
  2611. Misschien niet in de rechtbank, maar er wordt wel uitgebreid onderzoek gedaan. Op basis van dat onderzoek wordt bepaald of het voor de rechter moet komen. Standaard vrijuit gaan zonder onderzoek is een slechte zaak
    1
  2612. Misschien niet, maar imams die haat prediken hebben dat wel gedaan en helaas zijn daar genoeg van op de wereld.
    1
  2613. They showed the blackest Iranian they could find. In truth, Persians/Iranians are an indo-European people who settled in the Middle East instead of Europe. So in American terms, "white" people who have settled the ME instead of Europe and acclimatised.
    1
  2614.  @davidulanovsky8943  Don't tell me you support the insane policy of pensioning at 55, or populists that promise to give people free money that they will just loan, or the utterly broken state of the French economy even though they have so much potential. This is not left vs right, this is sane vs insane. You cannot have luxuries like a 55 pension anymore. It costs a lot of money AND massively decreases your workforce. That is not leftist, that is just poor management. Maybe I don't agree with all the austerity measures, but we do have to have strong and sustainable economies that are not based on sprinkling around money as long as you can before you collapse in the next recession. If you need to know I am economically for leftist policies. But you can't have those policies if you don't have the money to pay for them.
    1
  2615. +Kanker Zooi Dat gezegde is "niet lullen maar poetsen". En aangezien hij het poets gedeelte al heeft gedaan mag hij lullen wat hij wil. Ik vind alles best, als hij maar schiet wanneer het moet en niet schiet wanneer het niet moet. En dat doet hij.
    1
  2616. CNN is so much worse, it's not even a contest
    1
  2617. Volgens mij duurt het nog een aantal jaren voordat die technologie volgroeid is. Ik vraag me wel af of we nu kerncentrales dusdanig zouden kunnen bouwen dat ze in de toekomst makkelijk om te bouwen zijn tot thoriumcentrales zodra dat kan. Dat zou een zeer goede optie zijn. Maar voor nu zijn normale kerncentrales de best beschikbare optie
    1
  2618. Ikr, War Thunder is so much better
    1
  2619. ⁠ @NoxAeterna-wf4iv bureaucracy and hierarchy are built into states by definition. This includes democratic centralism, which is still a hierarchical power structure. A workers state is not a workers state unless the workers materially hold all power. Otherwise we might as well call a liberal parliament “the voice of the people” just because we can vote and theoretically hold power. No, who materially holds the power is what matters. And materially there are institutions and positions of power filled by a small group of people whose decisions are enforced unto the general populace by a special enforcement institution such as police/military. A state that is governed by a vanguard party is a vanguard state, not a worker’s state. That the vanguard acts in the best interests of the workers makes this material reality no different. This misunderstanding is why in a “worker’s state” three men could use their positions of power to dismantle the revolution, against the will of the people. And why Russia is capitalist today. Structure the revolution like this again, and watch how revisionist agents in positions of power kill it time and time again.
    1
  2620. Meh France would probably win, it's not that interesting. At least not until Germany starts spending more on the military
    1
  2621. Pack your bags and let's go to war! It's been too long since we've had a good war going on... I'm sure it'll all be over by christmas, lads!
    1
  2622. +Tom Wessel If all you have to say about the difference between young men in the world wars and those today is that families used to have 3 children, you've proven me right. Those same young men can be conscripted (the family's thoughts about losing their only child is irrelevant) and produce the same results as in the world wars. And about the refugee crisis, the EU stopped the entire middle eastern migrant flow within months by making a political deal with Turkey. Meanwhile, the migrant flow in the US has been going on for literally decades and the best they've come up with is "hurr durr build a wall". The estimated amount of illegal migrants in the US is in the double digits, in terms of millions, and that on a 300 mil population. Yet everyone is talking about how 2 million Muslims that came to a region with 500million people are going to "take it over". Meanwhile Spanish is already the de facto second language in the US Anyway, I wonder what our ancestors would think of that. People being scared of a few immigrants, so pathetic. I wonder how you'd respond if you were alive during WW1 if you're already scared of 2 million Muslims that are fleeing from war. We've survived countless destructive wars, plagues and whatnot and now we're reduced to some pussies whining about 2mil immigrants "taking us over"? Please don't embarrass us like that...
    1
  2623. Respect wordt verdiend. Ik heb nul komma nul respect voor mensen die zeggen dat ik iets niet mag zeggen of tekenen en me bedreigen als ik het doe. Waarom zijn er geen Jezus tekenwedstrijden? Omdat Christenen respect hebben voor anderen en dus anderen ook voor Christenen. Fundamentalistische moslims hebben geen respect voor anderen, alles wat geldt is hun geloof en hun regels, die ze zelfs door het strot van ongelovigen proberen te drukken. Dus... wij hebben ook geen respect voor hen en hebben geen probleem met beledigingen of tekenwedstrijden.
    1
  2624. More like Visegrád group vs France on its own. Probably would still lose. Germany would be interesting though...
    1
  2625. Your use of the nutpicking fallacy seems a bit too absolute. You're looking at individual nuts, and in singling them out say that even if one nut is influential/etc. they are not representative of the broader left. But what I think you should be doing is placing all the nuts together and assess whether their nutty beliefs are just an island in an otherwise non-nutty left, or a symptom of broader nutty movement that has gotten to hold a significant amount of territory within the broader left. There must be a point at which there are so many influential nuts that one must begin to wonder whether there is something wrong with the movement in general. And by the latter I don't mean that literally every single leftist would be a nut, but that something significant is going on with the left as a political movement. If 40% of leftists support nutty ideological positions, then I would say there is something very wrong with "the left". And using not one, but multiple very influential leftist nuts to demonstrate that there is something significantly wrong with the left does not seem like a nutpicking fallacy to me insofar you manage to demonstrate that the sheer amount of nuts and the influential they have is so substantial that they can't be disregarded as exceptions anymore. So whether Sargon is being fallacious or not depends on what he means with "the left". If he means the movement and every single member of it, then surely he's using a fallacy. If, however, he means the left purely as the mainstream political movement then his point becomes a lot more solid, even if it's still too absolute for my taste.
    1
  2626. Die Amerikaanse pastoor die een beetje overdreven preekte over de liefde en vuur enzo. Ik geloof zelfs dat de BBC nog zei dat hij ook ver over zijn tijdslimiet ging en gewoon doorging. Vind ik niet kunnen, zeker niet op een koninklijke trouwerij. Ik vond 'm ook nog te luid; hij schreeuwde soms gewoon. Kon ook wel aan Harry's gezicht zien dat hij het wel genoeg vond en ik zag zelfs een royal in het publiek die letterlijk met haar mond open staarde met ongeloof hahaha. Ja die vond ik jammer, maar de rest was fantastisch.
    1
  2627.  @Waterdiver3900  Klopt. Ze geven echt niet om natuur en het is "handig" als de boeren stoppen want dan is er weer wat vrije ruimte om een nieuwbouwwijk te bouwen voor al die door massaimmigratie veroorzaakte bevolkingsgroei. Nederland is vol, al onze grond heeft een bestemming. Maar tóch wil men in Den Haag doorgaan met massaimmigratie dus dan moet er maar wat grond vrijkomen. Ze hebben hun zinnen gezet op landbouwgrond.
    1
  2628.  @ldskjfhslkjdhflkjdhf  This vaccine isn't American though so I doubt it got that funding
    1
  2629.  @ldskjfhslkjdhflkjdhf  This vaccine is 100% developed by Janssen in the Netherlands by a team of Dutch scientists. J&J just happens to own that company (actually they own a company that in turn owns Janssen). Saying this is a US vaccine is like saying Ben & Jerry's is a Dutch company because they're owned by Unilever, even though they're American in every conceivable way and have no direct involvement from their parent company in what they do. We don't call B&J ice cream Unilever ice cream either. It makes no sense. The actual trade name of the vaccine is also Janssen. American media just like calling it J&J because.... reasons.
    1
  2630. Under your definition of state, every single political ideology inherently describes a type of state, including anarchist ideologies. And arguably NOT having a state is impossible under this definition, because not having any type of social organisation whatsoever goes against basic humanity as it requires almost all social ties between humans to be severed and us to live radically as individuals to the point where it goes against our very nature. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your here though. Anyway, it's fine to use this historical definition of state, but you must also recognise that the political ideology behind anarchism mostly refers to the term "state" in a different context. Mostly in the context of states as they existed when the ideology of anarchism formed. Most ppl today when saying "state" will also only refer to government forms as they exist today. Perhaps you are using a correct, but outdated definition?
    1
  2631.  @adammontgomery7980  Exactly, then only institutions as such or members of an institution can be racist.
    1
  2632. Where are you even getting this from? Russia's strategy barely involves naval surface power. Western Europe alone would crush them, let alone with US support. They're mainly a land + air based military. All Russia cares about is being able to defend against carriers and that they can.
    1
  2633. Nah I don't think that'd happen, those Americans have lost connection with their ancestral lands and I don't see them defecting
    1
  2634. Ja islam... er zijn verschillende interpretaties van de islam en daarbij horen interpretaties die hoofddoeken of zelfs volledige bedekking verplicht stellen. Dat is ook de islam. En je kan óf in de verdediging schieten, óf je kan samen met ons tegen dit soort fundamentalistische interpretaties strijden. Maar dat laatste zie je maar zelden bij moslims. Altijd in de verdediging.
    1
  2635.  BARBATVS 89  1. I know they follow Christ because they claim to. Christians sin constantly, nobody is without sin. There is no such thing as a perfect christian that follows Jesus impeccably and a "fake" christian that doesn't. Anyone who believes in Jesus as their saviour and attempts to follow his teachings is part of the christian movement. That's really all there's to it. Regarding your justifications of past genocides, you're essentially saying that genocide is good if god commands it, which is very worrying to say the least. By your logic Israel is the promised land of Jews and they'd be justified in systematically genociding any other racial group in an effort to claim the land for the Jews. It's just wrong. This is exactly the kind of thinking that caused the brutal religious wars and oppression in Europe. It's amazing that you don't see this. Genocide is wrong, always. It happened in the past, which was more or less normal back then so I'm not going to single out the Jews as having done something "evil", but accepting that it went like that in the past and today still actively justifying what happened are two very different things. What you're doing is dangerous. If god sees it as his right to take away life just because he gave it and will send most people on earth to eternal torture in hell then I have to conclude that apparently human morality is superior to god's. It's unspeakably cruel and shows a complete disregard for the suffering of others while having no real reason to justify it. It's downright sadistic to do that and I'll support no god that behaves like that. The god that you describe doesn't meet my moral standards. He's supposed to be above us, not below. And catholics are not pagans at all. They're mainly christians, but with pagan elements. The terrible things they did are not grounded in paganism but a twisted view of christianity. Their philosophy is mainly christian for sure. 2. It was a generalisation and you speak of respecting individual animals but that's not what this is about. This is about large-scale philosophy regarding nature and man. Paganism isn't a hippy religion about not killing anything, it is about respecting the general balance of nature. Christianity doesn't promote littering and animal abuse, but it does promote the idea that nature exists for us to tend to as if we own it, as if it was given for us to use. And with that utilitarian view of nature comes a disregard for balance. The balance is unequivocally skewed towards human interests and I think that is wrong. So it's not YOU that I accuse of littering, I say that this mindset causes SOCIETY as a whole to be too human-centered without having regard for the rest. I don't see humans as equals to animals, of course I value our own species more. But I don't see humans as far above animals either, at least not far enough to justify completely disregarding the well being of animals when human interests call for that. Humans are worth more than animals, but humans are also not the only species on this earth that has worth. The christian approach is that animals only have worth insofar they serve our interests. If they don't, then them going extinct is not a problem, even actively contributing to their extinction is not a problem. I believe that's terrible and selfish. Christianity is too centered around humans, it is too narcissistic. We are not so important that it's justified to genocide an entire animal species just for our comfort. I call for balance, for respect, for preservation of nature. You keep mentioning microbes and whatnot but again: this is not about killing animals, it is about the big picture. I eat animals, I kill animals. But I don't want so many to be killed that this upsets the natural balance or causes species to go extinct. Big picture balance. 3. I do put man first, just not to the degree christians have historically done. If there was an existential struggle between humans and wolves and only one could possibly survive, then I'd choose humans of course. But the thing is, such an absolute struggle doesn't exist. We can kill wolves where they threaten our way of life, but respect them when deep in the woods, far away from humans. It's not either/or, it's both. It's balance. Regarding the "spoils of animals" passage, I meant I didn't read into that how killing animals needlessly is a sin. After reading further I understand that it states that after the forests of Lebanon were cut down, they will be cut down. After they killed the animals, the animals shall kill them. And this all happens because they terrorised humans in the area and plundered towns. I don't see how this prohibits the medieval christian practice of killing as many wolves as possible until they are hunted out of extinction deliberately, even deep into the forests. This is not a strawman, I simply state I don't read what you read into this passage, which might just be on me. Christianity presenting an absolute antithesis of heaven and hell, god and the devil and more is absolute. It's not grey. You either enjoy heaven or suffer in hell. God is good, devil is bad. There are no such things in paganism, because there's also no such thing in nature. Nature is both at once. You speak of pagan Egyptians but I already stated before I'm referring to European paganism specifically. Here the earthly life is more important. European paganism is not a death cult, it's a cult of life and nature. It's not centered around living your earthly life just to prepare for the much more important journey afterwards. According to paganism, life on earth is an endlessly repeating cycle of reincarnation. Earth IS heaven in paganism. And that is why it's paramount we take proper care for it; we return, it's our home. It's a drastically different perspective that leads to certain important differences in mindset.
    1
  2636. Haha, good riddance
    1
  2637.  @ericlanglois9194  Hence why I said "some" more oil. Some might be significant, however, because having enough oil to launch even one more offensive or to prolong a highly important offensive could change the course of the war.
    1
  2638. Well this certainly brightens my day. Always love to see you uploaded something!
    1
  2639. Their pay came in two of the most bloody conflicts in the history of man being fought on their soil and destroying their empire. Leave them be, they already paid their dues long ago. Over 100 million Europeans died
    1
  2640. Eventually, that would be the case. If no one other than ethnic Germans live in Germany, the national and race interests are in practice the same. But they are very different in how they treat other races. In a purely fascist state, everyone that serves the nation is accepted, including possibly people who come from abroad and want to serve the nation. In a NS state, only members of a particular race are accepted and the rest is removed from society and/or neglected to serve the interests not of the nation but of that particular race. And outsiders would absolutely never be accepted, they cannot enter into the group.
    1
  2641. Nee, alleen de D66
    1
  2642. +Max Trump is ook de eerste president onder wie Noord Korea Amerika heeft bedreigd met nucleaire wapens. Toeval? Nee. Kim wil alleen maar praten omdat hij denkt dit keer goede kaarten te hebben. Hij heeft zijn doel van nucleaire macht verwezenlijkt, dus nu wil hij vrede. Hij kan immers zijn dynastie nu optimaal verdedigen zonder Amerika, etc. op een afstand te moeten houden. Niemand kan een nucleaire macht wat aan doen.
    1
  2643. +Alexander Trump en nuchter, tuurlijk hahaha. Hij is recht voor z'n raap maar zeker niet nuchter.
    1
  2644. +J van der Valk Jij maakt een stomme woordgrap over nuchterheid en alcohol en je noemt mij een wijsneus? Schei toch uit...
    1
  2645. Film-length ContraPoints. I needed this <3
    1
  2646. Houdt misschien een paar raketten tegen, maar als er veel worden afgevuurd is dat schild alsnog nagenoeg nutteloos.
    1
  2647. Pretty extreme to confront high school children with this... There should not be a stigma on your town, it has nothing to do with what that bastard did. The war was full of atrocities committed both by and against Germans
    1
  2648.  @ghaleon1047  Firstly, the US is not the icon of everything good, nor is it even good at all. I wonder whether it has been good at any time in history. Secondly, scientists and the SS? The SS was an elite paramilitary organisation within the Nazi government, it had nothing whatsoever to do with scientists. Josef Mengele, being both scientist and SS member, is very much an exception to the rule. The Germans that shaped the US (and probably USSR too, let's be honest) space programmes were highly likely not associated with any military organisation within the Nazi government, but merely worked on technology for the Nazis just as they worked on technology for the Americans and Russians. Thirdly, yes this still happens around the world sadly. But that is not because of "us" (whoever you are referring to with that), it is because of sadistic psychopaths who have been born with different mental conditions to the regular human being. Any normal human would never get into such acts, only extreme sadists would. And sadists are again an exception to the rule in our societies.
    1
  2649. It's downright criminal to tell European women to stop having children at this point. The European birthrate should be a climate activist's wet dream; fairly rapid decline, yet not rapid enough to pose great demographic danger. In fact, it is probably below that sweet spot now. A birth rate lower than we already have is incredibly dangerous to demographics. A rapid decline would mean huge economic problems in the future. Just remember that today we have economic issues with an aging population just because one generation boomers had more children than normal after WW2... Whether the population grows or falls doesn't matter much, as long as the change is steady . Pushing our birthrate down further is really dangerous and those climate activists should stop promoting this immediately. Instead they should promote the rest of the world getting on our level in terms of birthrate.
    1
  2650. I'm two months late, but the intro music is called Palladio by Escala. It's a great tune
    1
  2651. Russia vs EU (including UK)
    1
  2652.  @amal_11  Het enige verschil tussen salafisten en terroristen is dat salafisten geen geweld gebruiken. Die stromingen zijn sterk aan elkaar verwant. Het gaat om fundamentalisme
    1
  2653.  @amal_11  Boeit me niet echt wat ze precies is, het gaat erom dat het een meer fundamentalistische stroming is. Alleen dat soort stromingen hebben regels die zo ver als dit gaan.
    1
  2654. That's wrong. There is widespread coersion in wearing the hijab even in more moderate muslim countries, even among muslim communities in the west. It's not a choice when you're expected to wear one as a teenager and beaten if you don't. For many women it never was a choice. There's no way to accurately say how many, but it's a lot more than 1%... Even in a moderate country like Turkey, there was a trend to stop wearing hijabs a while ago and there was an issue with women getting beat up by their fathers for taking part. It;s more widespread than you think
    1
  2655. Ja... doen we nu alsof dit niet normaal is daar? Politici zitten continu op hun telefoon van alles te doen. Als je hier kritiek op levert, pak dan meteen het bredere probleem aan van politici die niet naar elkaar luisteren in plaats van zo selectief verontwaardigd te zijn. Ik begrijp dat dit zichtbaarder is dan iemand die zit te appen of op facebook kijkt, maar het is in wezen hetzelfde probleem. Dit is niet anders dan wat de ministers naast ze ook doen. Het is een breder fenomeen waar we van af moeten. Er moet in het parlement meer aandacht komen voor de inhoud ipv als een zoutzak daar zitten als je opponent spreekt totdat je zelf kan gaan staan om politieke puntjes te scoren met je eigen speech. Uit welgemeende discussie komen betere ideeën voort, da's ook wel een beetje het punt van de democratie (naast representatie).
    1
  2656. Het is over voor Rutte, dit overleeft hij niet. Hij kan nu al geen meerderheid meer vormen doordat CU hem uit heeft gesloten
    1
  2657. Hmm, we have a deal which ensures that Iran doesn't make nuclear weapons until 2030. Let's blow it up with no plan/policy to replace it and risk a worse deal or even Iran making nuclear weapons right now! Trump is such a genius...
    1
  2658. +The Slim Reaper Ik vind de media inderdaad vrij anti-Russisch (jammer), maar dat betekent niet dat ze verdachte situaties als deze moeten negeren. Ik kijk zowel Russisch nieuws als ons eigen nieuws om (hopelijk) tot een goede balans te komen qua nieuwsconsumptie. Ik merk zowel van westers (zeker de Amerikaanse zenders... sjongejonge daar besteed ik geen tijd aan) als Russisch nieuws dat er propaganda-achtige nieuwsstukken tussen zitten, maar over het algemeen zijn die er aardig goed uit te pikken. Ik vind zowel West-Europese als Russische zenders goed, met zo nu en dan wat propaganda ertussen. Amerikaanse zenders zijn letterlijk een en al propaganda waar overal een linkse/rechtse mening wordt gepresenteerd als feit en ook veelvuldig feiten worden verdraaid, volkomen absurd. Maar ja... private zenders hè.
    1
  2659. "Iedereen doet het dus Rutte kan toch blijven lol" Doei democratie
    1
  2660. Will you destroy your local culture and ability to live somewhat peacefully just for more wealth? Venice is no longer Venice, it's an overly touristic shell of what it once was. A glorified tourist attraction. But hey... money!
    1
  2661. Excellent, this looks great!
    1
  2662. Ik vind het jammer voor Schouten want ik mag haar wel, maar dit is echt zo serieus dat geen andere oplossing kan zijn dan aftreden. Dit is nalatigheid van de hoogste orde, met zeer verregaande gevolgen voor ons land. Dit kan gewoon niet. We moeten het echter niet houden bij de verantwoordelijke minister, want ook de politiek in bredere zin draagt hier schuld van. Eindeloos bijbouwen (niet alleen huizen, maar ook infrastructuur en meer), gepaard met natuurkap en stikstofuitstoot (allemaal ten behoeve van populatiegroei, oftewel de immigratie omdat dat de enige reden is waarom we groeien. Daar hebben we gewoon controle over maar dat blijft onbespreekbaar binnen het parlement. Onterecht, kortzichtig, totaal blind voor de consequenties van hun beleid). De politiek heeft totaal geen visie voor de lange termijn en ziet ook totaal niet hoe bepaalde beleidspunten elkaar beïnvloeden. Als we over immigratie nadenken moeten we niet alleen denken aan de vraag of die immigratie zelf gewenst is, maar ook of de daarbij behorende populatiegroei en consequenties daarvan gewenst zijn. De politiek komt niet verder dan de eerste vraag. Kortzichtig. Immigratie is te dien aanzien slechts een voorbeeld, dit geldt voor heel veel beleid. Het falen van Schouten is een "mooi" voorbeeld van hoe de politiek in zijn geheel te werk gaat. Zij moet weg en de politiek moet meer zelfreflectie hebben.
    1
  2663. You're hypocritically quick to call people fascists. Calling Trump and Bloomberg fascists is equally nonsensical as calling Bernie a communist. It just doesn't make sense. Fascism is extreme nationalism with heavy government involvement in the economy, nobody you mentioned comes even close to that.
    1
  2664.  @pearlsbeforeswine1731  Dat is niet hetzelfde. Het enige verschil tussen koeien en ons mensen is dat zij minder intelligent zijn. Verder voelen zij gewoon dezelfde pijn en emoties als wij, hebben ze ook elk een eigen persoonlijkheid en geven ze om elkaar. Dat heb je niet met planten. Het is fout om dieren te mishandelen en te vermoorden. Gelukkig snappen wij dat al als het gaat om huisdieren zoals katten of honden, maar het moet nog inzinken dat koeien, varkens etc. eigenlijk niet anders zijn en dezelfde bescherming verdienen.
    1
  2665. He hates Biden too. He just hates Trump more
    1
  2666.  @remcoenashley8528  Liever Kaag dan de Rutte-doctrine moet ik eerlijk zeggen. Heb echt genoeg van al dat gelieg. Kan dat Kaag dit gewoon voortzet en dan moeten we ook van haar af, maar voor nu zou ik zeggen alles liever dan Rutte.
    1
  2667.  @YorktownUSA  It wasn't a bad treaty. Iran was not developing nuclear weapons and trade with Europe went into the billions. If trade went up further we'd have had Iran in our pockets, dependent on our trade and scared of sanctions. You ruined this for no apparent reason. Everyone was keeping to their side of the deal and the outcome was more than satisfactory. We made money off it and gained a bit of control over Iran to boot.
    1
  2668. Natuurakkoord is wel een heel goed idee. Klimaat toch veel minder
    1
  2669. +Rcc C It is you that is confused. Religion and culture are deeply intertwined. The different religions are specific to a certain culture, created by a certain culture and instilled with the moral considerations of the culture they were created in. If you convert to islam as a non-Arabic woman and start wearin a niqab, for example, you are adopting Arabic culture through islam. It is all infused. About Christians distancing themselves from things, the pope always distances himself and the church from any acts committed in name of the church that he doesn't condone. This is a well known fact.
    1
  2670.  @mgc7199  To be honest, I largely watched the campaign on BBC and it was disgusting how much misinformation was spread by both camps. The entire "Brexit = instant recession" and "EU is an undemocratic money sink" angles were both pure lies and constituted the main arguments of remain/leave. I never saw a worse campaign than that of Brexit. And what made it more painful was that I watched random voters get interviewed and some of them said they voted Brexit "because the government won't do anything with it anyway" and other dumb reasons. There is real criticism to be had on the EU and there are even valid reasons to be for leaving, but I heard none of those valid criticisms from the leave camp, which instead opted to spread exaggerated and unnuanced lies about the "evil" EU. And all remain could do was yell about a supposed economic disaster that never came and probably never will come. Leaving the EU is bad for the economy and will likely cost the UK some growth if not cause minor shrinking, but it isn't this instant economic apocalypse and imminent recession that remain was painting a picture of either. Some even went as far as questioning whether there would be peace in Europe afterwards (lol). Both heavily relied on lies to further their agenda. I sincerely hope I never have the displeasure of having to endure such an abysmal campaign again. Grave disappointment and a farce. But unfortunately we can't just have a do over.
    1
  2671. Saying Joker is a "dangerous" film is like saying any film about ghettos in America and any kind of gangsta rap is "dangerous" because they give us a "clear insight in black crime and may inspire more crime".
    1
  2672. If they were talking about non-scripturebased religions this discussion would be a lot simpler. Religions in general are in my view very useful as sources of value systems (heuristic in nature), but certain religions have committed the ultimate sin: adopt a scripture, claim your values from 2000 years ago are literal words of god and will remain relevant forever. And that's pretty much the Abrahamic religions in general. If you look purely at more conventional religions like pagan beliefs over all kinds of societies, all you see is a collection of stories (which, importantly, are NOT claimed to be a literal truth) which tell us archetypal truths and grant us a value system. And under religion without scripture, rationality has free reign to counterbalance its values where necessary. Our collective unconscious provides us with low-resolution information on archetypal truths and values and whatnot in the form of culture and religion, which is valuable information. But sometimes our rationality catches up with or even supersedes the low-resolution information it provides us with its own high-resolution factual explanation of why something is good or better than our religion/culture. You need a balance between the two: the rational side for obvious reasons, but also the unconscious to supplement our rationality where it is insufficient to calculate what is good. We need to stop looking at religion as something "true" in the literal sense or completely irrelevant. Religion is produced by us as humans and it is useful to provide values where our rationality lacks the capability to produce them. On the other side of the token, rationality is useful to provide values in general and to override religion where necessary. Neither is "superior" over the other, both are highly important to the functioning of our societies.
    1
  2673.  @worstnaturaldisasters  Ja, als we zoiets bekends weghalen bedenk dan tenminste iets om ervoor in de plaats te zetten. Ik vraag me ook af of Halsema dit gewoon heeft gedaan vanuit persoonlijke overwegingen, omdat zij het zelf niet mooi/passend vindt.
    1
  2674. The West currently has Africa in its grip, that's why. It's almost a form of economical colonialism. China is doing the exact same with a different method (Europe is engaging in massively unfair trade but giving billions in free foreign aid; the keeps Africa from growing. China is granting Africa massive loans, which allows growth but under the direct and very firm control of China. Europe kept Africa down, China is putting Africa on a tight leash)
    1
  2675. Ze willen een referendum over onderwerpen waar wij nooit echt over gestemd hebben (dan wel een eerder referendum over is genegeerd).
    1
  2676. Political beliefs are not a club. You can't "leave" the left. You change your world view and opinions to not fit in leftist politics anymore.
    1
  2677. The Al Aqsa mosque is architectural amateurism compared to the highly influential Notre Dame. That's why nobody is paying attention to it
    1
  2678. +Monsuco You call generic Hollywood films (which are riddled with Europeans and Americans alike, btw) and modern consumerist music creative? Creativity refers to art, classical music, dance, fashion, architecture etc. etc. and not that nonsense. The point of Hollywood films and most modern music is money and popularity, not creativity and intricacy. And Europe is the centre for art, classical music, dance and fashion. As for technological inventions, do tell what the US has invented in modern day times (1990's+ or 2000's+). Perhaps even a single European country can beat it, let alone all of Europe.
    1
  2679. +Creepy uncle Joe Biden Ja, een achterneef van me mailde me het bewijs. Een foto van Assad die hoogstpersoonlijk een kind een potje chloor door z'n strot duwt. Vrij sterk bewijs
    1
  2680. @Said Boudriz Inderdaad, dit soort migranten moet je kunnen opsluiten in een gesloten opvangcentrum speciaal voor misdragende illegale migranten en zo snel mogelijk terug sturen. Allerlei onzin strafbaar stellen stopt ze niet en ze verpesten het ook voor iedereen. Het beeld van vluchtelingen zou tien keer beter zijn zonder al dat gezeur met die economische migranten.
    1
  2681. @Said Boudriz Precies.
    1
  2682. +Aziz Mujawar Nope, the BBC reports on Jemen frequently, especially the latest bombing by Saudi Arabia that killed civilians. What they don't do is point out that especially America is complicit in this and very hypocritical in how anti-Iran they are while being pro-Saudi even though both are two sides of the same coin.
    1
  2683. +MR DON TRUMP KING god America doesn't only sell the weapons to Saudi Arabia, but also actively aids the Saudi military in targeting their missiles. That includes the latest missile attack that killed something like 12 civilians. They actively aid the Saudis in ravaging Jemen. Even condoning it while being a strong ally of Saudi Arabia is enough to call them out for, let alone aiding in this stupid war.
    1
  2684. Sinds altijd, maar ze staan wel onder invloed van het ministerie dus als de politiek dit écht niet vindt kunnen dan kunnen ze wel wat doen door allerlei aanwijzingen te geven aan het OM.
    1
  2685. It's possible, people have survived that
    1
  2686. +Socrates Johnson You mean this is what happens to your allies when you destabilise countries at their border and cause a migrant crisis?
    1
  2687.  @williamcondon7729  Ethnicity is a fact. You can't "identify" as Italian when you're not. The only exception would be growing up in Italy as a foreigner and becoming a true part of the society. Then you'd be Italian despite the ethnicity discrepancy.
    1
  2688.  @williamcondon7729  Ethnicity is a factual, observable thing. You can not "identify" as an ethnicity. You either have that DNA or you don't. You also act like ethnicity is meaningless just because it changes over time, but that's nonsense. The point of ethnicity is that you have shared ancestry, wherever that ancestry may come from. And shared ancestry means shared culture and history. Ethnicity can point you directly to which culture you originated from. Every culture has their own unique mix of DNA, roughly speaking. There is no such thing as a "pure" ethnicity, nor does any ethnicity stay the same over time. Ethnicity is just a mix of DNA of many past ethnicities that have come together. There is no continuous line of one ethnicity existing unscathed forever, perhaps with the very very rare exception of some. But ethnicity is still an accurate way to denote a particular group at a particular time. Italy has several ethnicities within its borders that are considered "Italian". If you are one of those ethnicities, which is not a matter of identifying but a matter of which DNA you have, you can say you're of Italian descent. What really matters, though, is being culturally part of that identity. Only then are you a "true" Italian. To be part of a group, you have to be accepted by that group. This also is not a matter of identifying. You're Italian when the Italians accept you as such. In most of Europe the rule is to acquire citizenship and then integrate into society. Or to grow up in a country and be part of that culture. To take the example of the Jezidis in Iraq, they have stricter rules as to who is part of their society. They are more ethnicity minded people and only ethnic Jezidis are accepted to be Jezidis. They take this as far as shunning IS children that are the result of IS raping Jezidi women. In this case it is obvious that identifying as Jezidi does not make you a Jezidi. You can't enter into a cultural group without the consent of that group. Being part of a cultural identity is entirely dependent on who the culture accepts. But you're right about one thing; that culture can tell the person falsely identifying as them that that person is wrong, but they can never stop that person form being deluded... You're just missing the fact that it is a delusion.
    1
  2689. Soviet Union would have invaded the Nazis. They had a plan ready. So in the end Barbarossa was the best way to go for the Germans. The only thing that kept them from winning was lack of fuel.
    1
  2690. Vrede?! Nee joh, we vechten, tot de laatste Oekraïner! /s
    1
  2691. The man tried to protect his family against the bear and the bear tried to protect her family against the man. Confrontation is not always the best option
    1
  2692. Matias Makinen Well the aircraft on carriers are usually part of the Navy. In the UK you have Fleet Air Arm, literally the air arm of the naval fleet. It's part of the fleet, same in the US Navy
    1
  2693. I'd call this a piece of art, but one not to show off too readily
    1
  2694. Hitler didn't want to start a world war. Strictly speaking he didn't even want to fight western Europe, only the east. But since the western powers declared war on him after he invaded several countries in middle and east Europe, he was at war with them as well. Things escalated as they do.
    1
  2695. Riiiight.... and that makes the group that beat him up any less horrible?
    1
  2696.  @srd430  Hallo, ik noem het toch een complottheorie en een grote overdrijving???
    1
  2697.  Googol  Nee het is gebaseerd op wat ik op het internet zie. Er zijn echt heel veel aanhangers van dat "great replacement" complot. Wat antisemitisme betreft ben ik het zeker met je eens dat de voornaamste reden de islam is. Je hoeft niet ver te zoeken voordat je antisemitisme ziet bij moslimjongeren, maar een extreem rechtse antisemiet? Zie je weleens op het internet, meestal gepaard met dat "great replacement" spul maar daar is alles dan weer mee gezegd, die zijn naar mijn beleving redelijk zeldzaam in vergelijking met moslims die joden haten. Maar het antisemitisme groeit wel binnen extreem rechts denk ik, want ik zie het steeds vaker
    1
  2698. Ah, Pocahontas' success must've come from her 1/6542th Native American heritage! I swear the one drop rule is still alive and well in the US....
    1
  2699. The leaders want money, the locals want rest. Paris is not a single entity and multiple groups within it can have different interests.
    1
  2700. +Jean Bethencourt Britain is 88% white and 2.7% muslim. So yeah there's that. But hey, "Brittannistan" right? And "in 30 years Britain will have a white minority" right? You people are a bad joke. I don't like immigration either but this rhetoric is just stupid
    1
  2701. +Sagir Ashraf The more there are of you, the closer you are to being removed from Europe and you know it. There are barely any of you there now and look at how far right is flourishing. If the number of muslims increases further you will see Europeans getting more and more extreme and it will all end with you either forcibly expulsed or in mass graves if the Europeans reach a critical point in anger. You'll all have it owed to yourselves with this stupid idea of "flooding Europe". Maybe if you were decent people there would not be such a response to your presence. You are playing with your lives with this attitude.
    1
  2702. Dems suppress the Green Party vote lmao. Damned hypocrites...
    1
  2703. It is incremental. Those weapons themselves can be relevant but they don't exist yet, or at least aren't installed yet. It's like saying a new destroyer that in itself has no new features but can launch a CAMM missile is relevant. No, the CAMM missie itself is relevant, not the destroyer that can fire something that's relevant. The Ford class itself offers no real advatage, but future weapons that may be installed on it may do that.
    1
  2704. En nu gaan wij weer terug naar dat soort politiek met Joe "nothing will fundamentally change" Biden.
    1
  2705. Waarom brengen we Yule niet gewoon terug?
    1
  2706. @Pablo Abedul Mooi om anderen te zien die dat ook doen. Ik vind de heidense natuurgebaseerde tradities veel interessanter dat die neppe christelijke verhalen die er later overheen zijn geplakt. Mijn kinderen zullen de échte betekenis van onze tradities kennen, althans voor zover ik ze zelf weet want soms kan het nogal vervaagd zijn met de tijd. De joelboom staat voor mij voor het binnenhalen van groen en licht als symbool voor hoe na de donkerste en kaalste tijd van het jaar de natuur en het licht al wederkeren. Pasen voor het vieren van de terugkomst/vruchtbaarheid van de natuur. Sinterklaas ben ik nog niet helemaal uit maar dat lijkt iets te maken te hebben met de Wilde Jacht. En ik gooi midzomer er nog tussen zoals ze dat ook nog in Scandinavië vieren. Ik heb nog veel te leren, maar wat ik leer zullen mijn kinderen ook weten. Ik denk dat de natuur als inspiratie tegenwoordig veel sterker is dan het geloof in een god. De originele betekenis van onze tradities opgraven kan de spiritualiteit van Europa herstellen nu het christendom aan het afsterven is. We zijn te kritisch geworden om in goden te geloven, maar de natuur bestaat gewoon en is een prachtige bron van inspiratie.
    1
  2707.  @ForOdinAndAsgard  In principe niet, maar ik heb toch het gevoel dat het mooier zou zijn als de bredere samenleving zich bewust zou zijn van de échte betekenis van het joelfeest. Maar in de kern klopt het dat het nooit is weggeweest.
    1
  2708. @Trump good You bad Wat voor leugens?
    1
  2709. His family had nothing to do with it, take him and him only. Perhaps make it a... long death
    1
  2710. No, the Leopard 2 is over a decade older. But Leopard received a lot of upgrades whereas the Challenger 2 was neglected.
    1
  2711.  @KAvanAlten  Maar wel als vertegenwoordiger van de liberale wereldorde dus, geleid door landen met dezelfde westerse waarden als wij. De VN-waarden zijn dezelfde als die van ons: wij en onze bondgenoten hebben de VN in het leven geroepen, onder meer om mensenrechtenproblematiek zoals gedwongen bedekking tegen te gaan.
    1
  2712. Very good response when it comes to leftist ideologues specifically. But not all leftists are like this. Most seem to be though. Most socialists seem to be stuck in very dogmatic thinking about how capitalism works. I once had a discussion with someone who insisted loans, even with a 1 dollar interest on them, are inherently exploitative because it's "dead labour vampirising living labour" (this is a Karl Marx quote). These people are so stuck in dogmatic thinking that they unironically call giving someone a 1 dollar reward for loaning you a million dollars is so exploitative it ought to be outlawed. Can't argue with dogmas like that. But there are also socialists who are simply critical of f.e. capitalism's growth imperative, capitalism's tendency to have a lot of wealth concentrate in the hands of few, etc. and propose a different system that they view as superior. Those types are less dogmatic and can be argued with just fine. You're honestly better off ignoring the more dogmatic types, as discussing is pointless anyway.
    1
  2713. @Michael P. The big ones were put to death. You're talking about camp guards that are now in their 80's getting 2 years. And 2 years is still quite a lot of prison time by European standards, since our prison system is focused on rehabilitation rather than pure punishment like in the US.
    1
  2714.  @Narda185  I feel like you're going too far here. German colonies are really not that important to your overall history. History is not just about covering whatever terrible things you've done, but about the relevant bits of history that have big influences on the way your country and the world around it is shaped today. German colonies are not very relevant in this regard and there are many historical events that deserve a spot in the curriculum over that. For a country like mine (Netherlands) or the UK, colonies are a much more important part of our history and ought to have extensive coverage, but Germany doesn't have a long and impactful relation with its colonies.
    1
  2715. Elk voorbeeld is de schuld van het land zelf. Maar het probleem is dat WIJ via de EU die lokale problemen ook voelen. WIJ betalen voor failliete landen. En wat Brexit betreft... dat is het resultaat van hoe slecht de Britse overheid heeft gezorgd voor voornamelijk de populatie buiten de grote steden en hun immigratiebeleid en deels ook terechte kritiek op hoe de EU maar niet wil hervormen (wat hard nodig is). Ze zijn straks uit de EU en zien nu al dat er maar weinig migratie uit Europa meer komt, maar raad eens? De niet-Europese migratie is hoger dan ooit. Ik zeg geniet ervan VK, jullie hebben Oost-Europeanen ingewisseld voor Afrikanen. Migratie was zo ongeveer het grootste thema tijdens Brexit, maar het is altijd al het beleid van de lokale overheid geweest die dat veroorzaakte, niet de EU. Ik vind dat de EU te groot aan het worden is. Hoe groter de EU wordt, hoe meer last wij gaan hebben van de malaise van andere landen. Wij kunnen alles goed doen, maar als er een transferunie is... zeg maar dag tegen je zwaar verdiende centjes, zelfs als je ze eigenlijk zelf hard nodig hebt. Wij zijn niet hetzelfde, we kunnen niet één worden. Maar wij zijn wel vergelijkbaar en delen heel veel waarden en cultuur. Daar hoort een EU bij die ons verenigt op de gebieden waar wij hetzelfde zijn, maar elk land in zijn waarde laat waar we verschillen. Gaan wij voor te veel éénwording, dan komt het volk in opstand. En terecht.
    1
  2716. In the event that he'll do that? He WILL do that.
    1
  2717. Socialism IS the revolutionary extreme. Communism is just the utopia the socialists aim for, not a separate ideology. Socialism is about getting rid of capitalism by revolutionarily changing the economic system. And yes, according to the idea of class struggle the interests of classes are inherently counter to one another and one class must therefore eradicate the other and take full control of society: the proletariat working class. Under Socialism the working class has gained full control of the economy and is self-governing and anyone who disagrees with that is summarily killed or thrown in the gulag concentration camp. Socialism is the removal of other classes from society so that the working class is the only one that remains. NatSoc is even worse because it's this but with race (you can at least switch support for classes, but not race)
    1
  2718. Notre Dame is more than just a catholic building
    1
  2719. Jeetje zeg, het is één dag per maand, wat zitten jullie toch te zeuren. Ik snap wel dat er weerzin is tegen het feit dat de gemeente dit oplegt (en terecht), maar aan de andere kant is er niks mis mee om één dag in de maand geen vlees te eten, alsof dat een probleem is of zo. Ik eet zo'n drie dagen in de week vegetarisch en dat is gewoon lekker en goed voor het milieu. Niks mis mee, maar ja ik zou ook niet willen dat mijn eetgedrag echt zou worden opgelegd van boven
    1
  2720.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Heb ik gezegd dat vlees eten fout is? Ik eet zelf ook vlees, zij het minder dan de meesten. Ik hou van vlees, ik geef vlees niet op. Maar er is ook helemaal niets mis met vegetarisch op z'n tijd (of zelfs het merendeel van de tijd). Je doet alsof het een drama is als je niet letterlijk elke dag vlees kan eten, wat echt nergens op slaat. Dat wij Nederlanders überhaupt elke dag vlees zijn gaan eten is een nog niet zo oud gebruik. Ik vind elke dag vlees een overmatige luxe, zoals wij onszelf zo veel overmatige luxes hebben aangepraat. Ik vind het belachelijk en vooral ook zwak/triest dat mensen kennelijk niet meer zonder al die overbodige luxes kunnen. Man je zou sterven van verdriet in 1850. Ik vind het schaamtevol dat wij zo zwak zijn geworden als we vandaag zijn. En dan heb ik het overigens niet alleen over vlees, maar comfort/luxe over het algemeen, waar wij schijnbaar niet meer zonder kunnen. Neem dit ook niet persoonlijk, dit is gericht jegens de maatschappij van vandaag. We zijn een stel verwende snollen geworden en dat gezeur over elke dag vlees moeten eten is daar een symptoom van. Vroeger at men helemaal niet elke dag vlees. Dat is één van vele overvloedige luxes die wij onszelf hebben aangepraat en daardoor eten wij veel te veel vlees. En we zijn zo zwak geworden dat wij niet eens één dag in de maand zonder die luxe kunnen.
    1
  2721. Hoe kun je nou respect hebben voor iemand die met smaad aan komt zetten. Bedreigen, smaad, het zijn allebei schandelijke uitingen. Tenminste heeft de Graaf nog excuses aangeboden
    1
  2722. Goeie
    1
  2723.  @Twiggy163  En je weet of je met een vluchteling of migrant te maken hebt wanneer..... juist, wanneer je ze hebt opgenomen en gecheckt of hij recht op asiel heeft of niet.
    1
  2724.  @Twiggy163  Het duurt op dit moment 2 jaar om asielaanvragen te checken, grapjas. En wij zijn een van de snellere landen ook... Je kan niet bij aankomst controleren. Je moet volgens de wet checken of iemand die asiel aanvraagt daar recht op heeft (en dus vluchteling is).
    1
  2725.  @Twiggy163  De meesten gaan in beroep, wat de procedure ernstig verlengt. Zoals de ouders van Howick en Lilli, die in totaal 6 keer in beroep zijn gegaan en in de tussentijd jaren in Nederland zijn verbleven. De mogelijkheid tot beroep wordt steevast misbruikt. Maar zelfs zonder dat misbruik is de wachttijd voor de eerste gesprekken zo'n 2 jaar op dit moment, maar het hoort enkele dagen te zijn: https://joop.bnnvara.nl/nieuws/wachttijd-asielprocedure-loopt-op-tot-twee-jaar
    1
  2726.  @Twiggy163  Ja, als je weet dat je totaal geen zaak hebt en alsnog in beroep gaat, misbruik je je recht op beroep. En dat artikel dat ik linkte gaat over de eerste gesprekken, niet over enig beroep daarna. Er is een zeer lange wachttijd op dit moment
    1
  2727.  @katiaharvey5244  I didn't refer to Maori in general, I refer to people who are so adamant about the suffering of their great grandparents affecting them to this day that they think reparations are in order. I find that a counterproductive way of thinking that sooner stands in the way of proper coexistence between peoples than that it promotes it. I believe today there should be equal opportunities to achieve success and insofar there aren't equal opportunities for the Maori (including due to the effects of the past), that must be changed. But to demand reparations purely because of what was done because "suffering in inherited", regardless of whether it actually created unequal situations today is nonsense. So in short I despise the "settling past scores" mindset some people have, but insofar you meant that any present-day inequalities ought to be alleviated I wholeheartedly agree. Maybe I misinterpreted what you said and if so, I apologise.
    1
  2728.  @Guesswhokk  It's a side effect of their dysfunctionality. The US and UK are deeply divided at the moment and many distrust just about anything that can be called "establishment".
    1
  2729.  @adamorick2872  If you combine all of the EU navies, they actually have more warships than the US and about equal amount of attack subs. The question is whether the US would ever reach European shores to begin with.
    1
  2730. I agree if we fix our environment pollution, most of the extinctions should be fixed... the climate change thing is a separate issue where we may or may not be accelerating a warm up period. Right now the worst of what is happening is corporate agriculture using pesticides en masse, which almost drives bees and other insects to extinction, it is corporations engaging in mass deforestation, it is people in general dumping their plastics in nature, etc. These envirnmental issues have a much larger, much more imminent effect on species right now, but we keep on talking about climate change...
    1
  2731.  @irinabos  Als wij België binnenvallen is dat een annexatie. Of wij nu hetzelfde volk zijn of niet maakt dat niet anders.
    1
  2732.  @eldermillennial8330  Remember we're talking about culture here, not whether genes have any effect or not. I stated that shared history/experiences is/are the main catalyst for culture and other customs and I don't think that's inaccurate. The impact of genes is there, but even that impact works through experience. To stick with the food example, what we eat massively impacts our experience in life, which in turn massively impacts how our culture forms. Culture is not something that directly flows from our genes is my point. But you're correct that genes do have a significant impact on elements of our culture. I responded to a comment that implied someone who is completely severed from their ancestral culture, yet does have the genes, is somehow still part of that culture purely because of the genes. As if genes are the be all and end all source of identity. That is what I don't agree with, but with your point I do agree.
    1
  2733.  @darkwind2024  Because identity is not just about genetics. In fact, culture and tradition is much more important in defining identity than genetics.
    1
  2734. +Geth Creator "The law is the law" Ah, the famous nazi defence at the post-WW2 trials... If the law is wrong, challenge the law, speak out about the law. The law is nothing more than some rules made up by a collection of aging men sitting in a building somewhere in Washington. Those old men can be wrong from time to time. Shocking, isn't it? Ripping families apart where this is unnecessary and not in the interest of the child (i.e. when the parents can't properly take care of the children) is wrong. It is wrong for American families and it's wrong for foreign families. This woman spend a few weeks in jail and got het child seemingly permanently removed from her.
    1
  2735.  @dennisweidner288  The EU spent considerably more on Eastern Europe alone than the entire Marshall plan. Adjusted for inflation. The Marshall plan was important, but don't overstate its importance either. And from what I recall, proportionally by far the most went to the UK as well.
    1
  2736. Mate I thought the title was about the British taking South Georgia from Russia during the Russo-Georgian war in 2008 and I just thought "what in the hell is this"? Lmao
    1
  2737.  @solarisy456  Volgens de NOS ging ook dit weer om gesjoemel met geld en heeft Otten het ook weer erkend dat er iets is gebeurd, maar dat het allemaal niet zo erg is als de FvD claimt. Ik hoop dat er een gedegen onderzoek komt, want ik vraag me nu wel af wie nou onzin zit te verkopen aan de media. Óf Otten graaide meerdere keren naar geld en probeert het te profileren als een machtenstrijd, óf er is wel degelijk sprake van een machtenstrijd maar de FvD wil dit onder het tapijt vegen. Het is te vroeg hier uitspraak over te doen, ik vind het verre van duidelijk.
    1
  2738. It is illegal in Florida to teach about LGBT people in school. Bud Light is cancelled for simply featuring a trans woman in an ad, which means according to the right it should apparently be illegal to recognise that trans women exist at all. Etc. What do we see from the left then?
    1
  2739.  @o00nemesis00o  I agree, but the opposition is rising. The EU is not some distant organisation that can't be changed, the EU is what its member states want it to be. The problem with Cameron was that at the time he was one of the few to want reforms. Now more and more countries want the EU to respect national sovereignty and want reforms to make it more effective in how it deals with f.e. immigration. If we sit this ride out and wait until the sceptics have a majority or at least a proper opposition, we can change the EU. And it is a shame that Britain is no longer there to be part of that movement, they'd have been a big factor. The way I see it you can either give up, leave the EU and leave the other sceptic countries in a weaker coalition or you can stay in and fight for a different EU that has the positives but less of the negatives. And yes that fight may take some time, but nationalism is on the rise, it's only a matter of time. Now we have Italy, Austria, soon to be the Netherlands (largest party of the country is sceptic, not yet in government), Poland, Hungary and more than are nationalistic. Plus the Netherlands leads the newly set up Hanse group, made up of all smaller northern European countries, sceptic of the monetary policy of the EU. This group is already a factor of power. Imagine if the UK was there to join that group... In the end the sceptics will prevail, I believe that. Nonetheless I understand that the British people weren't up for that fight and saw it as a useless endeavour back in 2016. Shame
    1
  2740. Scarlett Johansson plays a Slavic character in her role as Romanov, but she is not Slavic! Only a real Slavic woman should be able to play her.... Oh wait, I forgot that all white people are the same according to SJWs
    1
  2741. +Akshat Chaaras The USA couldn't even invade the EU if it really wanted, let alone the EU and Russia, let alone the entire world.
    1
  2742. Yeah, we are all guilty of this horror
    1
  2743. dramatic effect for their propaganda
    1
  2744.  @glenmoray2812  Als je met geïntroduceerd bedoelt dat ze kruistochten in Europa organiseerden en Europeanen geforceerd bekeerden, dan ben ik het met je eens. De komst van het christendom naar Europa was vreselijk en ging gepaard met heel veel dood en onderdrukking. Met het later geëuropeaniseerde christendom is niets mis, maar voor de renaissance/verlichting leek het verdacht veel op de islam...
    1
  2745.  @glenmoray2812  Ja daar ben ik het wel mee eens. De islam heeft de verlichting niet doorgemaakt en dat merk je ook... We clashen te hard en het is gewoon duidelijk dat wij maar moeilijk samen kunnen leven, zeker met types als salafisten
    1
  2746. +Claudia Trumpsta En waarom zou de NOS anti-Trump zijn dan? Ik verdedig de NOS omdat ik die anti-Trump houding simpelweg niet zie. In deze video zie ik gewoon dat ze de komiek laten zien. Ik vind dat die komiek ongepaste grappen maakt en de NOS probeert mij niet van gedachte te veranderen. Ze laten ook zien dat Trump liever bij zijn fans is dat in Washington. Dat is voor velen een positieve eigenschap van Trump en de NOS probeert het niet als negatief te presenteren. Vertel me nou maar in welk opzicht de NOS "propaganda" is. Als ik naar bijvoorbeeld CNN kijk is het overduidelijk dat ze anti Trump zijn, schaamteloos vooringenomen en koortsachtig op zoek naar kritiek die ze op Trump kunnen hebben. Maar als ik naar de NOS kijk zie ik dat niet. Ik zie alleen een neutrale weergave van gebeurtenissen.
    1
  2747.  Edward Gross  Nice victim complex you have there
    1
  2748. Een Europese oorlog is een wereldoorlog. Je zal China en de VS niet als neutraal zien in zo'n groot conflict
    1
  2749. Dit is een zeer verkorte versie van het debat. Dan moet je toch begrijpen dat niet alle nuances erin terug komen? En zelfs in deze korte versie legt Baudet uit dat hij zou beginnen met het niet in behandeling nemen van asielaanvragen van illegale migranten.
    1
  2750. Is goed kees
    1
  2751. +Acceleration You have right and left wing policies on very varying subjects. An ethnostate is right wing, but that doesn't mean that that ethnostate can have left wing economic policies. In fact, left wing economic policies are most logical in an ethnostate: you create a society that cares about one another because of their strong cultural ties, therefore individuals will happily work for the greater good of their ethnostate in the socialistic fashion. In National Socialism, the National stands for developing a strong national identity and group mentality by creating an ethnostate (right wing), but the Socialism stands for caring about other members of that ethnostate and working for the good of your fellow Aryans (left wing).
    1
  2752. The internet is a nasty place. People just aren't themselves when they can say anything in anonymity. Everyone has experienced some form of insults on the internet, I'd bet
    1
  2753. "Let's make every black character a stereotype of my specific view of blackness. This certainly should erase racism and totally not make it worse!" - BBC 'diversity' chief
    1
  2754. I saw a picture of the Holodomor in which two parents were standing next to the severed head of their child, who had starved to death. The explanation of the picture stated they were selling the meat of their deceased children in a last bid to survive. I'll never forget that. The next one is unrelated to history per se, but I'm a law student and I once read a judgment about tort damages that had a terrible story behind it. A child was playing outside and a ball or whatever she was playing with ended up behind a taxi. The taxi reversed as the child was trying to fetch her toy and hit her. The mother ran out of their home towards the child, seeing her unconscious. She picked up her daughter, but as she rested her hand behind her head, it didn't support the head but instead disappeared within the cracked skull of her daughter. The mother ended up with severe psychological damage from this experience and got paid damages for this, but the real damage was done. The idea of trying to pick up your child but suddenly realising your hand is not on but inside her head and then seeing the terrible gore is such a punch in the gut. Last one is about history again. My aunt was held in a Japanese concentration camp in the Dutch East Indies during WW2, but never wished to speak about it. Reading up on some accounts of what it was like was a punch in the gut that made me understand...
    1
  2755.  @aussiemenace6897  The days of the week come from Germanic mythology in general, which includes Scandinavian but is not just Scandinavian. So it is Scandinavian but other Germanic countries did not get it from Scandinavia but their own (shared) culture. Scandinavians has their own culture, they have many things, many great things even today.
    1
  2756. @Zaheer Gangat The winner has the say? Occupied Palestine belongs to Israel then?
    1
  2757. Don't care. You call the British English sometimes and constantly call the Netherlands Holland. Proper names are just distorted internationally, they always are.
    1
  2758. It's not about the oldest, it's about the influence this church has had. It's the pinnacle of gothic architecture. I can go into the forest and see structures and dolmens made 5000 years ago
    1
  2759. Hij heeft waarschijnlijk nul gevolg hier, maar ik vind het alsnog goed om zo'n idioot te weigeren. Hetzelfde voor haatbaarden e.d.
    1
  2760. +bottige piemels Klopt niet eens. Je mag een wapen trekken, zelfs een vuurwapen is legaal om jezelf mee te verdedigen. Het gaat erom wat je er vervolgens mee doet. Gebruik je het vuurwapen om de aanvaller af te schrikken of schiet je 'm meteen dood terwijl hij geen directe, acute dreiging vormde? Bijvoorbeeld in deze video, je zag dat de man stopte en achteruit ging toen hij het wapen zag, maar toch schoot de man het dood. In Nederland zou je hierover een discussie krijgen in de rechtbank of hij te ver is gegaan door zo snel te schieten, in Amerika gaat hij standaard vrijuit.
    1
  2761. You can say what you want about aircraft carriers, but whenever a war is fought with a more modern military than that of the typical 3rd world country, all it takes is one submarine to create a billion dollar wreck. Better leave that thing at home in a real war
    1
  2762. Several countries already have in training with the US. The Swedish navy once sunk a US carrier in training with a sub. The Dutch navy sunk half a Carrier Strike Group (or carrier support fleet) and got away unscathed sinking the carrier, a cruiser, a US nuclear submarine, several destroyers and frigates. I know that submarines from my country used to get right under the surface less than a metre from Russian warships during the Cold War to spy on them. In 2015, France sunk a carrier and "most" of its escorts (destroyers, other submarines, etc.), but it's unknown if that one got away. Canada sank one too, as did Australia and I think Germany. Submarines are extremely powerful if an attack is carried out correctly and not even a carrier strike group is safe. It literally only takes one submarine and a good crew. So whenever the US faces a country with a military more impressive than that of Saddam Hussein or a random terrorist group, better leave those carriers at home because you never know.
    1
  2763. Nobody wants a United States of Europe, except a very small amount of morons. A US of EU would be unsustainable. None of the population wants it, none of the member state leaders want it (and they control the EU so it will never happen). It's unrealistic and stupid to think a US of EU would be a good thing or even a possible thing. Besides, when the six first members were talking about a United States of Europe, they weren't referring to something like the USA, they were referring to something like what we have today. Technically, we already are the United States of EU, but instead of a federal government it's the member states themselves that dictate what happens. The EU that we have today is what the original six wanted, not an all out federal government with provinces. The idea of the EU is cooperation between sovereign countries, not the destruction of sovereignty
    1
  2764. Fixing the economy means investing in business. When business starts running and paying more and more taxes, the government can spend more and more on social welfare. Macron is a centrist and before the leftist side pops out, he has to get France's economy running
    1
  2765. The very first sentence you uttered in this video already confirms that Americans are rude. Boasting about American culture being influential, really? That´s rude, arrogant and not to mention completely untrue
    1
  2766. Yes NATO would be called in, but depending on the US policy they could support the war effort by either going in in full force or only sending a token force purely as assistance. When the UK was literally invaded during the Falklands they did nothing at all, simply because they didn't care about British foreign territory. NATO is not that certain and still very dependent on the political will to send aid. Under Biden I think the US would send at least a decent assistance force, if not go all in on the military presence. But under Trump it would be completely realistic to think of a situation in which the US says fight the war out yourselves, maybe we'll help a bit but no more than that. If answering a NATO call for aid is not in the political interest of a nation, whether it will actually send aid (unlikely they won't) and more importantly HOW MUCH aid is sent is still up in the air.
    1
  2767. Koninklijke besluiten worden door Ministers opgezet. De Koning ondertekent ze alleen maar, net als wetten van het parlement. Hij zegt in principe niks over de inhoud. Dus... het valt altijd weer terug op de politiek die te ruime normen stelt en ook te kortzichtig is om rampsituaties als met de stikstofcrisis tijdig te voorkomen. Het lijkt het één of het ander te zijn met die lui... of veel te streng of nalatig coulant. Soms is het echt beschamend om de kwaliteit van ons bestuur te moeten aanzien.
    1
  2768. Well this just confirms you're trolling the comment section lol
    1
  2769. @E Ner Het is tijd om de waarheid onder ogen te zien; Biden gaat waarschijnlijk winnen. Maar één ding klopt wel; Biden gaat geheid oorlogje spelen, zoals ook alle presidenten voor Trump dat deden. Hij is alles behalve een non-interventionist zoals Trump. Amerika zal heel wat agressiever worden onder Biden en ik vrees voor de gevolgen
    1
  2770. Wauw er zijn echt iets van drie keer zo veel pro zwarte piet demonstranten
    1
  2771. No... it's 1 year for lying and 20 years for rape . Do you seriously think lying about a serious incident should have the same punishment as committing violent rape?
    1
  2772.  @CrazyNikel  The EU alone could produce the same as or more than the US if it switches to a war economy. Add Russia (not that impressive nowadays tbh), India and China and you're looking at a massive disadvantage in production. I'm not spewing anti-US bigotry, I'm giving you a reality check. No country on the planet can withstand the onslaught of the rest of the world, it is not possible to defend against that. And Iran is not a small military, it can protect itself decently well. The US could definitely have it, but that would require a very large operation I don't think the US has the political and popular support for. It's like Vietnam. You completely demolished them with 55.000 deaths compared to over a million enemy kills, but those 55.000 American deaths were just too much for the public and politicians to justify continuing the war. A modern army vs modern army situation takes years and always has a lot of mutual casualties. The US can only easily invade countries that do not have modern anti air systems, submarines and other technology that prevents the US from having absolute aerial and naval superiority. It's much more difficult to attack a country like Iran for that reason.
    1
  2773.  @CrazyNikel  No... Iran is not Iraq. Iran actually has a pretty decent defence force. The US would need to set up a big operation to make an invasion happen. Realistically I doubt that they'd have the political and especially popular support to do that. Invading Iran is no joke. My money would be on Iran succesfully defending. If we ignore the political/popular element and assume the US government has full support, they could invade Iran but at a fairly high cost of US lives. Nonetheless they should be able to make it happen.
    1
  2774. Don't worry. Liking him doesn't make you racist. Zwarte piet isn't even meant to be racist. I'm half black and Dutch and I love zwarte piet.
    1
  2775. Democrats do this too. It was on the news here in the Netherlands yesterday. Democrats divide voting districts so that probable dem voters are lumped together (and it gets really crazy how they do this, for example connecting two neighbourhoods that aren't even close to eachother by including a road between them in one district) while at the same time dividing republican districts. America's democracy is deeply screwed up and riddled with corruption on every side. And on TV, it will always be "dems did this" from one side and "reps did that" from the other side (which you are watching right now), but in reality both are rotten to the core.
    1
  2776. This vaccine is fully developed by Janssen in the Netherlands, not J&J
    1
  2777. @Vladimir_Bone Spur_tRump And more importantly, too busy whining to vote... Really disappointed in my generation on that point.
    1
  2778. Jammer dat de burgemeester zo reageert. Tuurlijk moeten demonstranten volgens de wet gelegenheid krijgen te spreken, maar de wet voorziet er ook in HOE dat recht ingevuld kan worden. Bijvoorbeeld mag het verboden worden in het belang van openbare orde of veiligheid. Het minste wat de burgemeester GEHEEL BINNEN DE WET had kunnen doen is de demonstranten een paar straten verder, weg van de kinderen, kunnen plaatsen met het oog op de openbare orde. Dat is kennelijk in Tilburg gedaan, maar in Eindhoven ging het er zo fel aan toe recht voor de kinderen dat er zelfs video's zijn van kinderen die aan het huilen zijn gebracht door het geschreeuw van die anti zwarte piet zielepoten. Dan weet je toch dat je fout zit. Volgende keer uit het zicht van de intocht, weg van de kinderen. Het waait wel weer over...
    1
  2779. @jantje de bie Niet haten op Friesland, hè
    1
  2780.  @richardkent9275  Both the Sami and ethnic Swedes/Norwegians are indigenous to Sweden/Norway. This isn't like what happened in the US with the Native Americans, if that's what you're trying to imply... You're distorting history here. There also was no German occupation of Sweden, they were surrounded by Germany and forced to trade, but that is all. They were not occupied and they were in tacit support of the allies despite their difficult situation of being surrounded by Axis.
    1
  2781.  @clarke1878  Actually, nuclear powered subs are inferior to diesel subs. The nuclear reactor is much louder, giving those subs a distinct disadvantage in warfare. However, nuclear subs can travel very far and stay submerged very long, that is their main benefit but they can't fight as well as a diesel. For the US it makes sense to have nuclear powered subs to project power further away, but for a defensive navy a diesel sub that operates relatively close to shore is superior.
    1
  2782.  @epzanoletty  I'm saying that it isn't self-evident that the US would be able to use its carriers. It would lose at least a few, along with hundreds of jets. If in training the US had a carrier and multiple destroyers sank by ONE submarine that they knew was coming and had their own subs and helis hunting down, then it's unfair to just assume that British subs would be easily hunted down. And this training fiasco happened on many occasions, not just one. Submarines are incredibly difficult to find and if operated by a competent crew, ridiculously dangerous. It only takes one competent crew to take down half a CSG, including the carrier, judging by the training missions.
    1
  2783.  @kareldekale4987  Ik denk dat we niet snel genoeg Amerika kunnen laten vallen. Het is tijd om voor onszelf te zorgen, de tijd van de VS is over en ze waren nooit goede bondgenoten.
    1
  2784.  @neliz8  Nee, gewoon een zelfstandig Europa. Dat betekent niet dat we geen goede relaties met bv Amerika kunnen hebben, maar ook dat we niet blind alles volgen wat ze doen en/of afhankelijk zijn van anderen. Ik zou graag een onafhankelijk EU zien dat vriendelijk is tov zowel de VS als Rusland en zich inzet voor diplomatieke oplossingen zoals we dat nu eigenlijk al doen (maar dan met daadkracht).
    1
  2785.  @neliz8  Geniet ervan om het kontmaatje van de VS te zijn dan. Ik heb daar niet zo veel zin in
    1
  2786. Maybe... higher taxes and bigger government can bring benefits? Maybe... the world is not black and white and you should actually think something over instead of saying "hurr durr communist" to anyone with an even vaguely left political stance? Or maybe... you're just ignorant.
    1
  2787.  @carloschua4369  Look, our possibilities are limited, we can't force China not to do it, but the least we can do is apply economic pressure. I'm not saying we can effectively protect HK, but we can HELP them. We van give China an extra incentive not to intervene, that is all we can do. But doing nothing is in my opinion not an option.
    1
  2788.  @LIDYAEIL  If HK wants to leave it is because your government chased them away. I'm not for removing HK from Chinese control, but I am for respecting HK's wishes for democracy. If the Chinese government wishes to restrict HK democracy, then I support Hong Kongers defending their rights and even leaving China if they have to do that to retain their democracy. I do not support oppression, I do not support China's Communist Party crushing HK democracy and imposing its will of the HK people. That is why I think the west must warn China and threaten with economic sanctions. HK can be democratic and part of China, but this is only an option when the Chinese central government is prepared to respect the wishes of HK. If the Chinese government tries to impose its will, then we will either see a HK free and independent from China with their democracy or a HK that is oppressed by Chinese central policies. And I will choose a free and independent HK if that is what the Chinese government chooses to provoke. But it doesn't have to be that way, it is all up to the Chinese central government.
    1
  2789. There's this thing called balance. You accept a certain level of inconvenience from tourists in exchange for the money they bring. In Venice that balance is nowhere to be found and it's a complete mess. And about you whinging about colonialism, get over it... We did horrible things to eachother as European countries too but today we are best of friends. There is no reason to create problems where there are none. It's in the past. And if you want to destroy Europe, you soon will be paying the price for that as well. And then we will be paying the price for destroying you an then you will be paying the price for destroying us again. Ah, what a wonderful world you live in.
    1
  2790. +SRB1389 xD Spanje erkent Kosovo ook niet, dus waarschijnlijk kunnen ze überhaupt niet toetreden. Misschien was Albanië een beter voorbeeld
    1
  2791. Ze weten het wel, ze willen alleen de oorlog escaleren door de term te misbruiken. Bijvoorbeeld genocide werd genoemd als reden om Libië te bombarderen en de overheid aldaar af te zetten. Maar de huidige situatie die de NAVO heeft veroorzaakt lijkt meer op genocide dan wat er toen aan de hand was.
    1
  2792. Die "extreem linkse fracties" willen alleen wat wij al lang hebben in Europa (sociale zekerheid, (semi-)publieke healthcare e.d.) ook in de VS introduceren. Wil jij zeggen dat wij in Nederland "extreem links" zijn???
    1
  2793. One million people died in Iraq, by far most in the chaos AFTER the fall of the Iraqi army and under the US administration. Getting rid of a dictator is only the beginning. Afterwards you have to bring order to a land in chaos. The US failed to do that and criminals killed and looted indiscriminately. Hundreds of thousands died, the conditions for ISIS to form were laid down and the Iraq economy is in shambles. We need to stop these useless interventions. They trade dictators in for chaos and killing and looting, giving terrorists free reign. Stop foreign interventions.
    1
  2794. In a way he is a traitor who abused the power of the police. Power that only was given to them because we believe they can resolve crime and other situations with only necessary violence. And indeed we trustingly even gave up our own rights to use violence while going after criminals (except of course when needed for self defence). This is an extremely important social contract and whoever breaches it as a police officer has committed a serious crime and a serious breach of trust. If trust in the police is gone, society might descend into a cesspit of vigilantes using excessive violence to hunt down criminals... and innocents.
    1
  2795. Beauty pageants judge women for their qualities. One of those qualities is looks. Whether they do it in bikinis or dresses or whatever is irrelevant, but judging beauty is part of beauty pageants. If this isn't part of it, the 'beauty pageant' you're holding is more like a women-only "who's got talent". It makes no sense. And Me Too has nothing to do with judging women; it's about unwanted attention and sexual intimidation. So this again makes no sense. I say turn the bikini segment into a dress or fashion segment and be done with it. It'd be more interesting than a bikini segment anyway
    1
  2796. Nee zo achterbaks zijn ze niet hoor. Dat hoop ik tenminste
    1
  2797. Israël omdat niemand in het midden-oosten ze moet hebben, dus het is gewoon omdat ze zo zielig zijn en anders nergens bij horen. Australië omdat ze altijd ongelooflijk veel kijkers hebben en eigenlijk ook soort van Europees zijn. En er was een Amerikaans gastoptreden, da's niet echt participatie.
    1
  2798. +luq man Russia is not attacking Europe and won't be, but we DO have to stay together to make sure nobody would think of attacking. We have to have our defence in order, just as simple as that. So IF something ever goes wrong (it won't) we must be prepared to act together.
    1
  2799. In an immigrant country I can at least half understand such ads because everyone originally came from somewhere else and the native population is pretty much non-existant, but to say such a thing in a country with a long history and native population is just a hate crime against those people.
    1
  2800.  @tanjil40  Western version of human rights.... your version is modern slavery? Lol. I respect cultural differences. We for example see alcohol as a freedom, you see it as something negative in your society. So you ban its sale and I fully respect this cultural difference. But modern slavery is not a cultural difference, mate. It's complete disregard for human rights and the basic freedoms of migrant workers. You take their passports to force them to stay, you force them to work inhumane hours, you do not care for their safety to the point of allowing thousands to die unnecessarily, you withhold their salaries for months and you cram them in tight spaces to sleep. If they get to sleep inside at all. You treat them like garbage. If this is the "Arab version" of human rights, then you might as well have none. I have zero respect for people who defend modern slavery. None at all. You should thank your god that we don't think of human rights like you, because you have all your riches to thank to the West treating you like trade partners instead of potential colonies. Yet you still treat other people like you should be so thankful for not being treated like today.
    1
  2801.  @michaelotieno6524  The difference is that we had no major power in the world that was morally ahead of us in these topics and in a position to show us the right way. For us in Europe the only way to improve was through internal criticism and slow process. Because only a small group of progressives from within could argue for this change. Another good example is slavery. Internally, Europe had a long process of the anti-slavery movement growing and growing before we banned it. But abroad, we fought wars and exerted political pressure (and also colonised) to stop other slave trades. There was no need for these countries to slowly grow out of slavery on their own. We were there to show them, back then also by force, that slavery needed to be stopped. So others stopped later, but much faster than we did. Today we would obviously not start wars or colonise to end human rights abuses, but we are there to criticise others and to help speed up the process of improving on human rights issues. If we had this, we'd have probably accepted gays much faster than we did, for instance. So this is a poor excuse for slow (or no!) improvement on human rights.
    1
  2802. Both the democrats and republicans are deeply rotten. It's the fault of the US government in general, not a specific political party.
    1
  2803. It is protected by freedom of religion because in Europe we had catholics murdering protestants and vice versa on a huge scale. The solution was to give both the right to practice their religion in order to stop violence. Today we no longer have any need for this right, it has outgrown its use by centuries now and was also not created to protect islam. We need to get rid of freedom of religion, as all people's thoughts and beliefs are already covered by freedom of speech, yet religions get all kinds of unnecessary extra privileges. Why can for example my boss tell me to dress differently when I dress inappropriately for the job, but when a religious person with religious clothing does the same that is suddenly protected by the law? And why doesn't the same apply to cultural/traditional clothing? Religious clothing IS essentially just cultural clothing, but tied to religion. It is unequal and unfair, special privileges for those that believe in some random religion.
    1
  2804. Problem is that it isn't just them. I remember Juncker being pissed a while ago when like half the parliament didn't even show up when he visited because they could take early vacation days. It's a general culture issue. I understand that the parliament is right now not very powerful within the EU and therefore not very interesting to take part in, but I would like to see a future with a trustworthy and decisive parliament that can strengthen the EU and before the parliament gets more power it needs to show that we an trust it. For now I don't feel like the parliament functions properly. There have been more cases of money-grabbing behaviour. Both by declaring too much money like Le Pen or by showing a general attitude of just going there and not caring about the work. It's unfortunately a real problem right now.
    1
  2805. Socialism doesn’t mean “when the government nationalises things”. Firstly this ignores the many libertarian forms of socialism, especially anarchism. And secondly all socialist experiments and ideological texts are deeply connected with the progression towards communism, a stateless and moneyless society that is thought to be the logical successor of capitalism. The reason why people don’t regard NS as socialism is because it completely falls outside of this tradition and weirdly uses “socialism” outside of the context of it being a transitory and temporary state meant to precede communism. The ENTIRE point of a socialist state, as per ALL leftist theory preceding the NS, is to build communism and guide society towards it with its policies. NS use “socialism” to describe their end goal state, which is already a massive departure from leftist theory and uproots what “socialism” even means at a fundamental level. Thirdly, Hitler calls Marxism “international Jewish finance” for no apparent reason. This sentence makes zero sense. There is no coherent idea behind this except racism against Jews “therefore they’re evil and Marxism is part of the evil international Jewish plot or something”. This isn’t a serious critique of Marxism or a serious leftist disagreement with Marxism. It’s a reactionary dismissal of Marxism, based in racism. So in short I think it’s great you point out that they nationalised the industry, but they have ZERO ideological connection to socialism/communism except very superficially using the name and some collectivist talking points. It’s a stretch to call them socialist
    1
  2806. Nah, the UK would fight against whoever is the aggressor which is this case is the US. Nobody in their right mind will support an aggressor attacking free western democracies. Of course there will be no split.
    1
  2807. I agree. If we have to pay for our defence, then why not defend ourselves? Why would we allow the US to use NATO as its personal war game tool? We don't need the EU + US to defend against Russia. Their military is about the same size as the combined EU military in its underfunded state right now... If we get to the 2% treshold we'll already be able to defend ourselves. We don't need the US.
    1
  2808. Jesus Christ the amount of salt over TLoU2 is insane... What is it with this sickly need to compare Ghost of Tsushima to TLoU2 all the time? The games are very different, which makes it pointless to compare them. TLoU2 has a very risky and ambitious story that for many is a hate it or love it experience. GoS is follows a classic recipe for a great open world game that makes it beloved by pretty much everyone. I personally love both. There's no reason to be salty over TLoU2 just because the story isn't what you wanted it to be.
    1
  2809. +vigenlona Think long and hard about the state of the German army before they started WW2. They weren't even allowed to have tanks by the versailles treaty... A few years later they butcher France in a few weeks. You underestimate what building up a war economy can do. Both the US and EU have the industry to massively blow up their military if needed. In their current states, both the EU and US are about a match for Russia, with the US having a bit better chances. If they use their industry, Russia has little chance against either the EU or the US alone, let alone them together. But that's in the long run of course
    1
  2810. This is not made for men, but neither is it made for women. It is made for SJW ideologues. If it was made for women they'd have focused on good writing and character development for a female lead. Like Wonder Woman. What they did here is go the SJW route and write a bland, unlikeable character and make her win everything because she is a woman. This is the equivalent of an 80's action film: no personality whatsoever, the lead is just a stoic hardass that makes snarky comments, the true core of the film is action sequences. Here they literally made Batwoman like Arnold in Commando or something, but instead of action sequences, the core of the story is to simply see women win at everything. Cap. Marvel was similar, but at least not as bad as this... Women don't like that, men don't like that, only SJWs do.
    1
  2811. Kaag als premier met minderheidskabinet is de meest logische optie op dit moment. Ik snap niet waarom iedereen de optie van een minderheidskabinet altijd vergeet
    1
  2812.  I'm not a chicken  nsb'er
    1
  2813. +it's me So you think you can place sanctions of the two biggest markets of the world and be completely fine? And THEY will collapse? Alright, buddy.
    1
  2814. Not the EU and probably not India either
    1
  2815. TIK, stick to banks please ;)
    1
  2816.  @daviddoran3673  Documented war crimes of bombing hospitals, seemingly deliberately (it certainly is a trend of the Russians, incl. in Syria). And pretty much confirmed cases of murdering civilians behind the front lines by Russian forces. I say pretty much confirmed because they strongly point towards Russia, yet there has not yet been a full investigation into the matter. And technically the invasion of Ukraine is in itself a war crime, considering it is an illegal act of war under international law.
    1
  2817.  @liekevdpoel  When I say "they" I mean the Democrat establishment. If you hadn't noticed there are several different wings within the Dem party, including the progressives like Bernie/AOC that I support, but the main wing is still comprised of neolibs that actively attempt to undermine the more progressive elements of the Dem party. I don't know where you get the idea that that is a Tabby kind of statement. I don't think their supremacy within the Dem party will ever end if voters keep playing along with their games. Voters need to show their actual preference instead of letting themselves be pushed around. Change doesn't come out of nowhere. It doesn't just happen if we wait for AOC to change the party from within. It's a mix of politicians and voters that decide how the Dem party changes. AOC can try all she likes to change the party, but without the support of voters demanding the party change in the direction of her views, she has no actual power within the party. So you need the voters AND the politicians. Voters rejecting an establishment candidate will empower figures like AOC and give them a more influential voice within the party, exactly because voters have expressed a preference for her views. The poorer the performance of the establishment ideology, the more likely it is they will look to the more progressive side to renew their connection with voters and win the next election.
    1
  2818.  @oOoteethoOo  Nice. I hope the Dems learn this time that they actually have to excite voters with good candidates...
    1
  2819. If we assume northerners went through the same growth process throughout the centuries (becoming slightly taller on average, like the Italians have), then I think the answer to this question would be yes. Yes, on average an Italian Roman soldier would be shorter than your average northerner, just as it is today. But if a legion is specially selected for height, that could be a different story. Considering that Rome raised legions specifically from the Mediterranean and perhaps Northern Africa, it doesn't matter much where they come from. All those regions have quite significantly lower average height to the north of Europe.
    1
  2820. +AJ P That is the sad truth. Our governments have exchanged wealth and economic growth for our culture and people. They bring in the cheap work force en masse without seeing the non-economic consequences of it. We "need" people for our economy, so they import them. They are exchanging the very fabric of our countries for the "wellbeing" of our countries. I'd rather be poor and happy than rich and without culture or identity. An unidentifiable melting pot of nothing, but hey... a good economy. The same holds true for climate change. Our governments destroy our environment and nature in exchange for economic prosperity. I'd rather be poor and happy than rich and living in a wasteland. They are turning our countries into cultural wastelands and ecological wastelands all in the name of "wealth", but is that truly what a wealthy country is? A revolt will sadly see a lot of people die, but I think it will come at some point if this continues
    1
  2821. Good. He's shown some disgusting behaviour
    1
  2822. +Wendy Alexander The EU gives a total of 90 billion euro in foreign aid. The second largest foreign aid spender is the US at 30 billion.... We are to foreign aid what the US is to defence spending. And now we'll have to spend more, as economic migrants come here to grab their social security. Perhaps that 90 billion in foreign aid is useless to helping them, if they come anyway. Perhaps we'd be better off cutting it off altogether.
    1
  2823. Except Russia, China and the EU military alliance (not one country, but still it means no EU member state can be invaded). I also doubt they could invade India.
    1
  2824.  @agrosia5199  You think there would be infighting in the case of a literal invasion? I personally don't think so. If push comes to shove, the EU usually delivers, but only if they're put under pressure. Most of the time there is infighting, but not when something serious has to be done quickly. During the refugee crisis the Turkey deal came in a matter of weeks/months and dried up the stream from Syria. That's quicker and more effective than anything the US has done to try and stop their Latin American refugee crisis. When the US pulled out of Iran the EU was pretty quick in how they provided an alternative trade route for companies to circumvent US sanctions and keep trading with Iran. They CAN do things quickly, if put under pressure. I think that at the worst, the effectiveness of the EU military would be lower due to communication difficulties. But I wouldn't expect infighting. There have been much looser alliances in the past that worked well, so I really wouldn't expect any such thing as infighting.
    1
  2825. Maybe you should do your research more prudently then. I'll do it for you: Treaty on the European Union, Title V on common foreign and security policy (an entire chapter dedicated to common defence), article 42 paragraph 7: 'If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.' (art. 51 of UN Charter is about self-defence being a legal means of engaging in war). So yes, the EU is very much a military alliance. Its main focus is the economic and political union, but it is also a military alliance that collectively defends itself if one of its member states is attacked. There is no EU army because the EU is a military ALLIANCE, not a military UNION. Though with talk of an EU army we might be a military union as well in the future.
    1
  2826.  @badhero88  The NATO treaty article 5 is ".... if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force". Not only does the NATO treaty also use "to assist", but it states "such action as it deems necessary", which is LESS clear about the obligation to use force than "by all means of their power", which obviously includes military action. If the US decides simply supplying the EU when it has been attacked is enough to assist them but for the rest stay neutral, technically they complied with the NATO treaty. If Germany does the same with, say, Finland being attacked, they are in breach of the obligation to support them "by all means in their power". At this point you're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. Especially considering the EU literally has military missions going on, like the anti-piracy mission in Somalia, which is not NATO, not UN, not just a group of countries, but a designated EU mission. It is clearly a military alliance. NATO is the primary defence of Europe and the main channel through which we coordinate our common defence, but the EU is also a military alliance that protects all its member states against attack, independently of NATO. The EU common defence principle is especially important when non-NATO EU members are attacked, but otherwise the NATO treaty is the main defence of Europe.
    1
  2827. Die Amerikanen vinden ook altijd wat om over te zeuren. Als bijvoorbeeld Obama dit had gedaan weet ik zeker dat er niemand was die zou zeggen "dit is alleen om zijn ego te bevredigen". Hooguit zou er een beetje geklaagd worden over de kosten, maar tweedracht op dit niveau was er niet geweest. Er zijn heel veel mensen die Trump gewoon haten om hem te haten en vice versa. Tot op het bot verdeeld en hevig gepolariseerd, dat land.
    1
  2828.  @joskoeleman950  Over lidmaatschap van de EU. En wellicht meer specifieke aspecten van de EU, zoals de euro.
    1
  2829.  @joskoeleman950  Dan veranderen we de grondwet of halen we het raadgevend referendum gewoon terug. Het is onzin dat het niet werkte. In het VK hebben ze ook alleen raadgevende referenda vanwege de grondwet (parliamentary supremacy, hetzelfde als hier). Het referendum is afgeschaft omdat men de uitkomsten ervan niet aan stond. Ik zeg ook niet dat de democratie niet werkt als er een opkomst van 35% is voor de EU verkiezingen en dan maar niet moeten gaan stemmen. Dan zorg je er maar voor dat de opkomst stijgt.
    1
  2830.  @joskoeleman950  2/3e meerderheid en herzitting na nieuwe verkiezingen, ja. Gaat waarschijnlijk niet gebeuren. Ik heb ook liever een raadgevend referendum dat heel zwaar weegt dan een referendum dat 100% gevolgd moet worden. De politiek zal altijd bepaalde nuances moeten toepassen en wellicht bij hoge uitzondering een resultaat naast zich neer leggen omdat het nagenoeg onmogelijk is dan wel zeer schadelijk.
    1
  2831.  A L  Behalve het feit dat Nederland als één van de hoogste scoort op de geluk index, boven elk land dat je net noemde. Compleet ongefundeerde onzin die je uitkraamt.
    1
  2832.  @Romatisa  Dit zeggen en dan zichzelf afvragen waarom moslims gehaat zijn in de Nederlandse samenleving. Typische moslim
    1
  2833. +GamingLegendary Of course the European powers colonised part of America and of course a lot of natives died by disease, but my point is that Americans went further. European conquered part of America only (coastal areas) and settled there and set up trading posts. The inland native population was mostly left alone and just traded with. What Americans wanted is more expansion inland, coupled with complete genocide of the native population. And that is what they did after the revolution. If you accidentally carry over some disease that kills millions you did not commit genocide, but if you yourself kill all native populations or purposefully spread those diseases then you did commit genocide. Americans killed the natives that SURVIVED the European diseases and took all their land by force. They murdered an entire race. Intentionally. Not all natives died when Europeans came, not by far. Afterwards, the Americans finished them off by killing them themselves. This was after that book you talk of.
    1
  2834. I wouldn't even support modern reinforcements or a fire system. It stood for 800 years, it will stand another 800 years if we rebuild it to be 100% authentic.
    1
  2835. Yes, this is getting out of hand. People get offended at the snap of a finger
    1
  2836. EU obviously. UK would never allow an aggressor to take over free western democracies and its closest allies. If the EU attacked the US that'd be another story
    1
  2837.  @rachida7235  Denk is een polariserende, identiteitspolitiek bedrijvende rotpartij. Ze zijn zelfs NOG polariserender dan de PVV. Ze filmen kamerleden op basis van RAS en proberen deie kamerleden af te schilderen als "verraders" omdat ze niet hetzelfde denken als Denk. Denk is de meest walgelijke partij in de kamer. Blijf maar bijdragen aan de polarisatie, extreem rechts zal alleen maar groeien hierdoor... met alle gevolgen van dien
    1
  2838. +R Greenup You moron, think why those migrants are coming. Yes, the NATO intervention in Libya and the US fuelling of the civil war in Syria. And you have the guts to say the EU is acting stupidly lmao. You are the biggest cause of problems, a bull in a china shop
    1
  2839. If 2 out of 10 actors are black, and the black population of the US is 12%, then they are overrepresented in filmmaking and the current situation is just fine. It's never enough for them, are they seriously expecting a 50/50 job split between 12% of the population and 60%? As if that is somehow fair and balanced?
    1
  2840. Verbieden moet niet, maar wat PowNed in die video heeft gedaan is walgelijk. Mogen ze keihard op worden aangesproken, zeker.
    1
  2841.  @krijn7719  Links maar ook anti-establishment. Ik denk dat hij dat bedoelde. Strikt genomen is de PVV ook links op economisch gebied
    1
  2842.  @JaN-Pigeon  Dat vond ik nog niet zo stom, eigenlijk. Toendertijd was Oekraïne een verdachte, maar toch werd besloten ze bij het onderzoek te betrekken. Niet alleen werken ze mee met het onderzoek, maar ze hebben ook een veto op de inhoud ervan. Ik betwijfel de uitslag van het onderzoek niet, voor zover ik het heb gezien is het heel goed onderbouwd. Maar ik dacht toen het onderzoek begon ook dat Oekraïne er eigenlijk geen plek in zou moeten hebben. Ze zouden net als Rusland vanaf de zijlijn informatie moeten kunnen toespelen, maar niet van binnen het onderzoek beïnvloeden. Maar achteraf bezien sta ik achter de uitkomst van het onderzoek, zoiets zei Baudet volgens mij ook. Maar ik ben het met je eens dat Rutte veel genuanceerder is en weinig tot geen domme opmerkingen maakt, wat bij Baudet bijna standaard te verwachten is. Hoewel er meestal een genuanceerd argument achter zit, kan Baudet wel eens stomme opmerkingen maken. Neem bijvoorbeeld die onzinnige vergelijking tussen Napoleon, Hitler en Juncker.... Of "er is al een keer geprobeerd van heel Europa Duitsland te maken, maar dat is toen ook mislukt". Zulke onnodige en domme opmerkingen.
    1
  2843. +alex t Meanwhile you have been invaded several times worse and you do the same. 63% white people left and going down. Europe: 95% white.
    1
  2844.  @criminaliteitcijfersenafkomst  Het is verboden niqabs te maken en verkopen. Dus dat is de facto gewoon een verbod gericht op het verminderen van het aantal vrouwen dat een niqab draagt
    1
  2845. Goed om te zien dat de schade beperkt is gebleven tot het dak... wel vrees ik nog voor het interieur van de kerk
    1
  2846. H B We'll tear you a new one.... literally
    1
  2847. +Glob Omdat ze simpelweg in Nederland horen. Wij mensen zitten al decennia lang roofdiertje te spelen door wilde zwijnen etc. af te schieten omdat ze geen natuurlijke vijand hebben hier. Doen we dat niet, dan ontploft de populatie van dat soort dieren en vreten ze de bossen helemaal kaal en/of sterven ze massaal van de honger (met alle gevolgen van dien voor de natuur). Strikt genomen hebben we nu een soort nep natuur juist omdat de wolf niet meer in Nederland voorkwam. Nu komen ze terug en dat zie ik als iets moois. Geef het tijd en misschien zullen we dan eens echte natuur hebben, zoals het hoort. Dan kunnen we de natuur wat meer zijn gang laten gaan, zonder constant er te moeten zijn om de populatie herten en zo in bedwang te houden. Er zijn genoeg manieren om ons vee te beschermen zonder wolven daarbij te hoeven afschieten.
    1
  2848.  @boyteebah3794  Yeah the Swiss Navy is badass. They have full control of their... lakes. No destroyer, cruiser or even battleship dares to venture close
    1
  2849. France is actually today one of the most influential soft powers globally. They only lack hard military power. They basically have 1/3rd of Africa in their pocket and a bunch of influence elsewhere.
    1
  2850. Sorry to disappoint you but Easter is a pagan holiday. Hell, most "christian" holidays are. Yes traditions such as easter and yule are eternal, even the suppressive church failed to get rid of them and instead tried to christianise them. It wasn't for lack of trying but luckily they failed to destroy European traditions, we all still celebrate them. Sinterklaas is originally pagan too btw. It's supposed to be the Wild Hunt and the celebration (including black face paint!) was first documented in the year 98 by Roman historian Tacitus. Pretty damn amazing that we still do that. Traditions never die, you have to kill us for them to die!
    1
  2851. I respect their cultural decision to ban alcohol. All visitors should respect this. I do not respect their modern slavery and terrible human rights for migrant workers. This is not a cultural choice, but it is plain abuse of human beings. Nobody should condone such violations of human rights.
    1
  2852. It's not that simple. We needed to gain control over Iran, increase trade to the point where sanctions would be worse for them than not having nuclear weapons. Now the US can threaten with sanctions all they like, but Iran is very unikely to give in in this situation
    1
  2853. I don't even get why. The Chally 2 is a perfectly fine platform for further upgrades. It still has better armour than the Leopard 2, it just needs upgrades to catch up in other areas and/or buff its armour even more. Wouldn't retraining the crew and repurchasing all spare parts for a completely new tank (that is not even better than a possible modernised Chally 2) be costly in itself? And all that for a tank that could use an upgrade package itself, to counter the newest Russian tech (talking about the Leo here)? It just doesn't make any sense. Upgrading the Chally seems like the obvious choice here.
    1
  2854. There's this thing called balance. You accept a certain level of inconvenience from tourists in exchange for the money they bring. In Venice that balance is nowhere to be found and it's a complete mess
    1
  2855. Not even the Dutch AIVD/MIVD? You know why America even knows about Russian mingling with the elections? The AIVD managed to hack into a Russian secret service compound and monitor the entire mingling operation they ran from there. They sent this information to the CIA later on and now you have this Russian mingling political crisis unveiled. During the Cold War, Dutch intelligence was famous for its naval espionage. We had (and still have) extremely silent submarines that used to spy on Soviet ships by surfacing right next to it and listening in. Those submarines sometimes partially surfaced just 1-2 metres away from a Soviet ship to spy on them and they never noticed. Apparently we still do this, as a few months ago one was caught and chased off by a Russian ship! It was spying on Russian ships in the mediterranean that came to aid Syria. I guess the crew made a mistake and they were detected. This deserves a spot at 9 or 10 at least, definitely more interesting than some of the agencies you listed.
    1
  2856. I'm pretty sure its just a saying he uses, not an actual argument
    1
  2857. Keep stepping on the legacy of Atatürk, you fool. Taking Turkey backwards, not forwards
    1
  2858. Planes too, dammit!
    1
  2859. That's not even a contest though
    1
  2860. No, of course not. Who would cause an all out nuclear apocalypse because a fucking carrier sank? Even in Korea, when the US didn't have to deal with nuclear deterrence yet and a nuke was needed to prevent China from nabbing North Korea, the US decided against using it. The nuclear option is the absolute last option available and will of course not be used for a mere carrier.
    1
  2861. Halsema is veel te ver gegaan hier. Een burgemeester kan niet ervoor kiezen een wet niet uit te voeren, dat kan gewoon niet. Als ze hiermee door gaat zal Den Haag moeten optreden. We zijn hier geen soort van federatie waar gemeenten eigen soevereiniteit hebben, we zijn een eenheidsstaat. Dat betekent dat als de hogere wetgever iets zegt, je het gewoon doet. Stel dat de tweede kamer geen zin heeft om de grondwet ten uitvoer te leggen en allerlei grondrechten lekker naast zich neer legt, dat een ministerie de wet negeert en gewoon zelf beleid gaat maken met ministeriële regelingen, dat een gemeente kiest welke wetten ze wel of niet willen uitvoeren want "dat past zó niet bij ons". Kom op nou, als burgemeester moet je toch beter weten. Dit is echt basale kennis van hoe ons land werkt.
    1
  2862. War was declared on Nazi Germany, not Hitler personally. In the case of Napoleon, he wasn't the leader of France at that time, just some bloke with a personal guard. And various European powers declared war on his person.
    1
  2863. +Rustedblade Well then, that's another crazy American thing then. I assume you're talking about the tip system (no stable income) and the government essentially assumes what you earn and collects taxes on that made up value? That's also typically American and problematic in itself. We have something similar here in the Netherlands for tax on certain savings (the government assumes you earn 3.5% interest on saving accounts and collects 0.035% from your savings as tax on the interest you apparently received, even if interest is 0%) and it's a huge discussion here, as the 3.5% interest assumption is hugely wrong in most cases and the government taxes more than it should. But that's different from the horrible situation you describe because the tax is 0.035% (tiny percentage) and it's tax on a preexisting sum of money you own (meaning the tax can never exceed what you own). There is already a huge discussion over that 0.035% tax here, we would honestly have riots if the government did what you just described. That is unacceptable. So you have two major issues with debtor's jail
    1
  2864. ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ＳＨＵＴ　ＵＰ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
    1
  2865.  @bbqreunie984  Het christendom was niet alleen vergelijkbaar met de islam qua misstanden, maar veel erger. Toen het christendom hier in Europa kwam werd de Europese cultuur volledig kapot gemaakt, althans dat probeerden ze en ze waren ten dele ook succesvol. Heidense feesten werden verboden of waar dat niet lukte gekerstend, het uitoefenen van het heidense geloof stond de doodstraf op, het christendom werd binnen Europa met kruistochten en geforceerde bekeringen verspreid. De enige reden dat het christendom vandaag de dag een beetje normaal is is onder invloed van de Renaissance (waarmee we de manier van denken van klassiek Europa deden heropleven) en de Verlichting (de rede boven alles, inclusief geloof). De islam is vandaag de dag echter achterlijk vergeleken met het geëuropeaniseerde christendom.
    1
  2866. Same here, so guess I'm not "really" black lmao. Just another example of white progressives meaning well, but being the biggest racists out there
    1
  2867. This is what they will try. The US is almost sure to cooperate, but I still have some hope for EU leaders to stand up to the Saudis instead of bending for oil.
    1
  2868. Question is, will they come back or will the raised price only damage other steel companies further?
    1
  2869.  @tigerbomb2464  Wholeheartedly agree, very well said.
    1
  2870.  @falcononpc9845  Ellie being present when Joel dies was only to get the players extra invested in her story of revenge and also shows that Abby thought she was doing to right thing and that only the "guilty" should die. The same story could easily be written with Ellie finding Joel afterwards, but this was likely an artistic decision to portray the trauma Ellie has a bit more intensely and already offer a bit of insight in how Abby might not be completely evil, early on. Loose ends can't be prevented when enacting revenge, there's always someone dear to them that may not be present.
    1
  2871. +YraxZovaldo Onze grootouders wachtten geen 70 jaar voordat ze met verzet begonnen. Toch een verschil, zou ik zeggen. Bezet worden en meteen verzetten tegen de bezetting is anders dan bezet worden, tientallen jaren gewoon doorleven en dan opeens terreuraanslagen plegen. Overigens is er ook een verschil tussen onschuldige burgers doden (Oeigoerse terreuraanslagen) en soldaten die je land bezetten (het verzet). Ik begrijp dat de Oeigoeren zich verzetten en vind dat China in het verleden walgelijke dingen heeft gedaan door allerlei landen voor zichzelf te claimen (ander voorbeeld is Tibet), maar terreur gaat veel te ver. Eveneens snap ik dat China vandaag de dag geen terreur wil, maar heropvoedingskampen en uitwissing van de Oeigoerse identiteit (strikt genomen een vorm van genocide) gaat veel te ver. Het is geen eenzijdig verhaal, de Chinezen noch de Oeigoeren zitten hier goed. En het feit dat zwart-witte verhalen zelden voorkomen is iets wat de media niet altijd even goed weet te presenteren.... Het is altijd één kant die onderdrukt of wat dan ook wordt en die wordt als slachtoffer gepresenteerd. Maar de realiteit is dat alles een reden heeft, dat is het volle verhaal. China doet dit niet zonder reden, noch plegen de Oeigoeren zonder reden terreurdaden. Maar beiden zitten fout, dat zeker.
    1
  2872.  @mimounjouhri1305  Nee, ik vind wat met de Oeigoeren wordt gedaan zelfs een vorm van (culturele) genocide. Ik schreef dat slechts als uitleg waarom China dit doet. Dat hoort ook in een nieuwsbericht te worden betrokken. Dat betekent niet dat het goedgepraat wordt, maar dat we begrijpen waarom China dit doet. Niettemin is het nog steeds zeer slecht wat daar gebeurt en ik wil het zeker niet verdedigen.
    1
  2873. Those are Germanic gods and goddesses, not Norse in particular. We share our old gods in all Germanic lands
    1
  2874. +Oh Lawd Just paraphrasing your mentality here, "pal".
    1
  2875. +Andy Mills Exactly. US strategic goals are: keep the EU dependent on US military protection so they aren't too independent (threat to US' little war adventures, which the EU would mostly oppose if it could) and keep the EU from allying with Russia/China (sell US gas/oil instead of us buying Russian, make the EU economically dependent with a huge deficit on the US side, etc.) The EU opposing the US would mean the end of US global hegemony. There'd be too many great powers opposing their bullshit wars. With the EU they can just keep the balance in their favour. Not to mention that they need as many countries possible to only trade oil for dollars (petrodollar). If enough countries renounce the petrodollar (something that is usually retaliated with an invasion... see Iraq that changed to petroeuro before the invasion, Libia that was planning to drop the dollar, right now the hostilities to Iran after they switched to euro, hostilities to Russia), the US economy will be in serious trouble. The US is holding the world hostage and European independence/strength is key in stopping it. So they do everything to stop it. A Eurasian alliance is the definite end of the US.
    1
  2876. +A. Salmon Because we don't want an economic disaster. Some countries would have like 20% of their exports vaporise instantly if access to the UK is lost. It's something we have to prepare for to make it smooth.
    1
  2877.  @Windsguidance  Volgens mij mogen zij van ons gezellig mee doen met Sinterklaas hoor. En ze mogen gezellig hier komen wonen en werken. Dit heeft niets met racisme te maken, dit gaat om mensen die cultuur van andere mensen willen aantasten. Dat is fout, tenzij er een hele goede reden is om dat stukje cultuur aan te passen. Gezien de origine van zwarte piet allesbehalve racistisch is, bestaat die reden niet.
    1
  2878. The guy in the video earns 3000 a month and still can't pay for an affordable home. It's society's fault on this one.
    1
  2879.  @KJ-gr1gs  Ja in de jaren 60. En misschien een heel klein aantal daarvoor al
    1
  2880. Nice, I guess... but why is this "news"? This feels more like a political message towards European countries where Muslims and Europeans don't live together that well. And I don't like political news channels... This is not special or newsworthy at all. A news channel is supposed to bring me relevant facts so I can independently form my opinion on it, not stories devised to influence me into thinking more positively or negatively about a group. As good as your intentions are, this is not done for any proper news channel.
    1
  2881. First and foremost, acknowledging that many aspects of our modern society came from abroad and that connecting with other societies can bring new things back to your own is a good thing. But this commercial... it's like the polar opposite of extreme nationalism claiming everything we have is made by ourselves and all other cultures are inferior. It's equally extreme and nonsensical in that it essentially says that everyone else is vastly superior and we are worth nothing. It's dumb, it's stupid, it's an extremist way of viewing the world. In truth one must find a good balance between loving your own culture, being proud of what your society produced and respecting other cultures and acknowledging what you can learn from them. Respecting yourself is extremely important to have a healthy society. That commercial is crazy...
    1
  2882. +james west The deal only lasts for a few more years, but that doesn't mean it should be blown up now. Trump just did something idiotic. The EU, China and Russia still support the deal and it's only the US that wishes to renegotiate at this stage. And the US is in a prickly situation because if it imposes sanctions on Iran, it will also hit European and Chinese companies. Imposing sanctions on Iran could cause a trade war with the two biggest markets on the planet. We used to have the 150 billion dollars of frozen Iran money and sanctions as leverage in negotiations when this deal was made. Now we only have sanctions (only by the US and not by the rest of the world) and we have an angry Iran (rightfully so, as Trump just breached international law by breaking up a treaty even though it doesn't allow for it) that is unwilling to negotiate. And as mentioned before, even the sanctions are a risky action for the US. There is no way in hell the US is going to get a better deal out of this and it might even cause Iran to walk away and make nukes right now. Iran is in a much better negotiation position right now.
    1
  2883. Doe dat nou godverdomme niet joh
    1
  2884.  Kingshuk Monsur  Shut up, don't make this a race thing. We Europeans fucking hate American imperialism. We have to deal with radicalising muslims here and refugee crises because of US interventions.
    1