Higher % of Black's excluded from schools in croyd
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Stirlingsays  12 Feb 20 10.17am |
   |
|---|---|
|
Ok, lets look deeper at what's happening in Japan. It appears that the recent Abe government in 2017 indeed has introduced a slightly more relaxed immigration policy for skilled workers in some areas. It has done this quietly as it does not have popular support in the country. This was unknown to me and hence is a correction of sorts because the real picture is far more nuanced. Japan are now naturalising 1000 workers a month, of which the vast majority are Asian from their region....compare that to Germany who are naturalising around 12 times that a month....most of which aren't European. It is wrong to paint a picture of Japan opening up to immigration in anything like a European sense. Indeed the PM is quoted as stating in 2018, 'We have no intention of taking a so-called immigration policy (of unlimitedly accepting immigrants). Revisions are aimed at accepting industry-ready human resources for limited periods of time. We're considering improving the working environment, improving Japanese-language education, helping foreign workers find residences and encouraging them to take out social security insurance policies.' My own view from looking at this is that internationally I see a huge pressure from 'human rights' groups and UN and other Soros backed immigration focused and corporate organizations external from Japan to wanting it to 'de-Japanese' and who want it to not stand out as different from other world leading counties. I view these people as the enemy, and I stand with the majority of Japan when I state that this has no national consent. We will see what happens going forward. If Japan wants to avoid the social problems of Europe and maintain a Japanese identity it won't move onto the disastrous path internationalists and corporations wish for it. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 10.19am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
Attachment: | Stirlingsays 12 Feb 20 10.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
Interesting article. Stirling does love Japan - absolute fanboy. However this article is consistent with my overall thoughts on where we’re headed - and Japan is not immune to that. They’ve only delayed the inevitable, as this article proves. Guilty as charged m'lud.....being a nationalist that's only natural. I think the tone of that article is very one eyed and you'd do better to read my response in the previous post for a more balanced picture. The future for Japan isn't non Japanese.....I just don't see that. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 10.25am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 12 Feb 20 10.32am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ex hibitionist
When people visit Hastings they say it's lovely but it's full of white trash, and I don't think they're referring to me Plenty of that in Kent. Being of modest upbringing myself, I do often wonder how so many people became so awful.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 12 Feb 20 10.49am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
Also - attempting to get back on topic here The first few pages of this thread were a pretty good read. Have to say Serial / Stirling tennis was higher quality than the usual penny dross on here. For what it’s worth I find it hard to understand how one can be so determinist about either nature or nurture as an 80/20 either way - last time I checked it was and still is a topic of hot debate and very difficult to have definitive answers or even accepted theory on. So for me the jury is still out on precision but to say both things play a role, yeah sure. I just don’t think you can say for certain that one dominates the other, let alone start talking with authority about the relationship between genetics and culture. That’s an extremely theoretical area I was in a similar position to you a few years back. Having been a teacher and wishing for people to improve their lives via effort I have to say I'd rather a fifty/fifty reality were true rather than an eighty/twenty one.....but that just doesn't appear to be the case from the non political studies that I've been exposed to. Obviously now that I'm moving in more dissident right circles we could speculate that we are ignoring the counter evidence....but I have looked at the counter arguments....we have seen some in the thread....and frankly I find them to be socially and politically motivated....and all I'm interested in is what is true. Nature does appear to be much more deterministic than we would prefer as human beings. The problem we have is that isn't what people wish to hear....it's understandable. I'd say that genetic inheritance is mostly at the eighty/twenty range for intelligence in most situations....but that this is subject to natural variation like everything else. You are right to say that this is still up for discussion....I think most areas in science should be open to review mainly because science is interested in truth over dogma (or meant to be when it hasn't been infiltrated by politics)....and maybe the precision figure is 70/30 or whatever. Still, from what I've seen it's going to favour genetics over environment....because obviously, environment is nebulous and an acting force....there are only genes as the real tangible. This doesn't discount the affect the environment can have on genes and I recognize that it would be better for humanity more generally if this proportion were more equal.......If only the average child could effort their way into Einstein...but this is wish fulfillment over reality. it's just not what happens. Still, they can fulfill their potential and with average intelligence that generally has decent outcomes for themselves and wider society. In the future with the various 'nice' names we give eugenics nowadays I'm hopeful that we can make serious advances with intelligence and banish the life destroying realities of low IQ along with all the other mental impairments. However this itself comes with lots of dangerous pathways and authoritarian questions itself. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 11.56am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Eaglecoops CR3 12 Feb 20 11.06am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I was in a similar position to you a few years back. Having been a teacher and wishing for people to improve their lives via effort I have to say I'd rather a fifty/fifty reality were true rather than an eighty/twenty one.....but that just doesn't appear to be the case from the non political studies that I've been exposed to. Obviously now that I'm moving in more dissident right circles we could speculate that we are ignoring the counter evidence....but I have looked at the counter arguments....we have seen some in the thread....and frankly I find them to be socially and politically motivated....and all I'm interested in is what is true. Nature does appear to be much more deterministic than we would prefer as human beings. The problem we have is that isn't what people wish to hear....it's understandable. I'd say that genetic inheritance is mostly at the eighty/twenty range for intelligence in most situations....but that this is subject to natural variation like everything else. You are right to say that this is still up for discussion....I think most areas in science should be open to review mainly because science is interested in truth over dogma (or meant to be when it hasn't been infiltrated by politics)....and maybe the precision figure is 70/30 or whatever. Still, from what I've seen it's going to favour genetics over environment....because obviously, environment is nebulous and an acting force....there are only genes as the real tangible. This doesn't discount the affect the environment can have on genes and I recognize that it would be better for humanity more generally if this proportion were more equal.......If only the average child could effort their way into Einstein...but this is wish fulfillment over really. it's just not what happens. Still, they can fulfill their potential and with average intelligence that generally has decent outcomes for themselves and wider society. In the future with the various 'nice' names we give eugenics nowadays I'm hopeful that we can make serious advances with intelligence and banish the life destroying realities of low IQ along with all the other mental impairments. However this itself comes with lots of dangerous pathways and authoritarian questions itself. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 10.58am) Nice speech, what's it got to do with getting thrown out of schools in Croydon? Are you saying your genetics are rubbish therefore you are more likely to be excluded?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 12 Feb 20 11.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Eaglecoops
Nice speech, what's it got to do with getting thrown out of schools in Croydon? Are you saying your genetics are rubbish therefore you are more likely to be excluded? It's in response to a post that dates back to previous conversations. We have discussed the Croydon topic, which you can read earlier in the thread. I don't think threads need to be so rigid that they can't go off piste for a bit. The genetics issue is related to arguments about exclusion rates anyway. As for 'are you saying'......Sounds a bit Cathy Newman. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 11.57am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  12 Feb 20 11.56am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
As I said that was the point. The original comment suggested all visitors made negative comments but not all areas are the same. About 10 years ago I spent some time in Chicago. Never saw anyone get shot and concluded that it is a crime free city. No idea how it got a reputation for being a bit dodgy.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 12 Feb 20 11.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Plenty of that in Kent. Being of modest upbringing myself, I do often wonder how so many people became so awful. Too much of the wrong types of social liberalism. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 12.00pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Eaglecoops CR3 12 Feb 20 12.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It's in response to a post that dates back to previous conversations. We have discussed the Croydon topic, which you can read earlier in the thread. I don't think threads need to be so rigid that they can't go off piste for a bit. The genetics issue is related to arguments about exclusion rates anyway. As for 'are you saying'......Sounds a bit Cathy Newman. Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Feb 2020 11.57am) Jeez, I've just read the last 10 pages, not sure about off piste, its a totally different thread to what was started. If you agree that genetics is related to exclusion rates then my question was quite simple. All I asked was, are you saying that those with poor genetics are more likely to be excluded because that is how it reads and you can try and deflect all you like with this nonsense about Cathy Newman.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 12 Feb 20 12.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Eaglecoops
Jeez, I've just read the last 10 pages, not sure about off piste, its a totally different thread to what was started. If you agree that genetics is related to exclusion rates then my question was quite simple. All I asked was, are you saying that those with poor genetics are more likely to be excluded because that is how it reads and you can try and deflect all you like with this nonsense about Cathy Newman. Of course they are, I would have thought that was rather obvious. As for your comments on the thread. Is it your view that threads should only stick to one topic and not evolve as they go....As long as the diversions are related in some way it seems perfectly acceptable to me and plenty of others.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 12 Feb 20 1.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Eaglecoops
I've just read the last 10 pages, not sure about off piste, its a totally different thread to what was started. It is the nature of forums that long threads will meander and diversify
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| DanH SW2 12 Feb 20 4.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
It is the nature of forums that long threads will meander and diversify They don’t diversify though do they? They all end up talking about the same subject thanks to the same posters.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.