Austrian right-wing candidate barely loses..

[The balkens]

Foresight is a trait that is lacking.

*shrug*

*Stares intently*

[STARING INTENSIFIES]

[Imperializt Russia]

Like I said, left, left and left.

No-one cares for the difference anymore. It's just "left", it's all the same, so people seem to think.

What lefts do you recognize?

Economic left and right, social left and right.
There's a lot of overlap, and sometimes this is used to conflate both.

[Olerand]

What lefts do you recognize?

Economic left and right, social left and right.
There's a lot of overlap, and sometimes this is used to conflate both.

I think that's a little reductive for a classification system, but I agree that there are many who conflate societal leftism with economic leftism.

[The East Marches]

I would call engineers and the like far more innovative than those on the left.

Eh, that really depends. Engineering, like mathematics and physics, is a discipline that works on a different basis than social sciences do today. STEM disciplines have the benefit of accumulating knowledge in a fairly complementary way.

Social sciences seldom have that benefit. Few things, if any, are set in stone. Attempts at vast theoretical groundworks collide against one another on a regular basis, and few ever really get refuted and forgotten. Arguably, this forces social scientists to double their efforts in their studies to produce new knowledge, since they do not truly have a definitive, unquestionable basis to work with, beyond the basics of scientific thought (and even those get their occasional critique).

Very fair observation, I had not thought about that aspect of it from the angle of somebody involved in that field as yourself.

I always found that social sciences were a diaster with little to no real world value. I disliked that nothing could be set in stone. In addition to the usually ideological hypocrisy that accompanies dealing with SJWs. I believe I fit the bill of one of those people who gravitate to the right whom you mentioned earlier. I could not understand for the life of me why people would study theater management or the stereotypical woman's studies and expect to change the world.

I have a respect for culture and art. I could see why slme students would go down that path. I could not for social sciences and still really can't.

[Imperializt Russia]

Economic left and right, social left and right.
There's a lot of overlap, and sometimes this is used to conflate both.

I think that's a little reductive for a classification system, but I agree that there are many who conflate societal leftism with economic leftism.

It is reductive, because the realities are far too complex to boil down into "you're left/right and therefore a cunt".

The third left form is LEFTIST!!!! as in the super-pejorative almost always incorrect slur that it has bizarrely become.

[Risottia]

Those who might be described as dealing with the real world lean right, those who deal in abstractions lean left.

I doubt anyone deals with the real world more than a physicist. And most physicists I know are quite on the far left side of it.
So, I would take your comment as purely anecdotal.

[Imperializt Russia]

Those who might be described as dealing with the real world lean right, those who deal in abstractions lean left.

I doubt anyone deals with the real world more than a physicist. And most physicists I know are quite on the far left side of it.
So, I would take your comment as purely anecdotal.

*e-peen swells mightily*

[Arridian Islands]

I'm generally a leftist on most things, but letting your country get taken over by foreigners is very bad. Europe needs the far-right to save it from invaders

[Liriena]

Eh, that really depends. Engineering, like mathematics and physics, is a discipline that works on a different basis than social sciences do today. STEM disciplines have the benefit of accumulating knowledge in a fairly complementary way.

Social sciences seldom have that benefit. Few things, if any, are set in stone. Attempts at vast theoretical groundworks collide against one another on a regular basis, and few ever really get refuted and forgotten. Arguably, this forces social scientists to double their efforts in their studies to produce new knowledge, since they do not truly have a definitive, unquestionable basis to work with, beyond the basics of scientific thought (and even those get their occasional critique).

Very fair observation, I had not thought about that aspect of it from the angle of somebody involved in that field as yourself.

I always found that social sciences were a diaster with little to no real world value. I disliked that nothing could be set in stone. In addition to the usually ideological hypocrisy that accompanies dealing with SJWs. I believe I fit the bill of one of those people who gravitate to the right whom you mentioned earlier. I could not understand for the life of me why people would study theater management or the stereotypical woman's studies and expect to change the world.

I have a respect for culture and art. I could see why slme students would go down that path. I could not for social sciences and still really can't.

I will not deny that there are problems in social sciences today, and they can be quite the clustercuss at times. Some of those problems are remnants of modern thought, whereas others came more recently, with post-modernism.

And yes, the works of social scientists, save perhaps for sociologists, seldom have much instrumental value, if any. This is due in large part to contemporary social sciences tending to be interpretive or critical, rather than positive. The days of social sciences trying to imitate the natural sciences, and being at the service of the 19th century liberal ideal of human progress, have long since passed. I do not see this as a bad thing in and of itself. If anything, I think it is far healthier and far more truthful to the spirit of social sciences than what was before.

[Liriena]

I'm generally a leftist on most things, but letting your country get taken over by foreigners is very bad. Europe needs the far-right to save it from invaders

A tiny minority of the population = getting taken over

Right.

[The East Marches]

Those who might be described as dealing with the real world lean right, those who deal in abstractions lean left.

I doubt anyone deals with the real world more than a physicist. And most physicists I know are quite on the far left side of it.
So, I would take your comment as purely anecdotal.

No, I was basing it off both a study previously mentioned in this thread. My own experiences put most physicists on the alt-right or far right fringe. Perhaps it is different in Europe.

[The East Marches]

Very fair observation, I had not thought about that aspect of it from the angle of somebody involved in that field as yourself.

I always found that social sciences were a diaster with little to no real world value. I disliked that nothing could be set in stone. In addition to the usually ideological hypocrisy that accompanies dealing with SJWs. I believe I fit the bill of one of those people who gravitate to the right whom you mentioned earlier. I could not understand for the life of me why people would study theater management or the stereotypical woman's studies and expect to change the world.

I have a respect for culture and art. I could see why slme students would go down that path. I could not for social sciences and still really can't.

I will not deny that there are problems in social sciences today, and they can be quite the clustercuss at times. Some of those problems are remnants of modern thought, whereas others came more recently, with post-modernism.

And yes, the works of social scientists, save perhaps for sociologists, seldom have much instrumental value, if any. This is due in large part to contemporary social sciences tending to be interpretive or critical, rather than positive. The days of social sciences trying to imitate the natural sciences, and being at the service of the 19th century liberal ideal of human progress, have long since passed. I do not see this as a bad thing in and of itself. If anything, I think it is far healthier and far more truthful to the spirit of social sciences than what was before.

What purpose do you think social sciences serve? In your own opinion, I ask not out of spite or because I have some snarky remarked saved up. I am genuinely interested in knowing.

One group that does deserve an honorable mention is my raft of communications professors. Though I was often the dissenting opinion, my right to voice that opinion was carefully guarded despite the shrill cries of our local campus do-gooders. I appreciated their kindness in that regard. I have been out of university for a few years now. Given the trend of censorship towards opposing ideas, I am not sure they are still able to let students of my viewpoint speak out.

Second honorable mention goes to the lone loltarian troll in the Linguistics department. It is a thing of beauty to see a man relate Hitler and MLK in the same sentence. One day, I hope I can achieve such a feat.

[Olerand]

I will not deny that there are problems in social sciences today, and they can be quite the clustercuss at times. Some of those problems are remnants of modern thought, whereas others came more recently, with post-modernism.

And yes, the works of social scientists, save perhaps for sociologists, seldom have much instrumental value, if any. This is due in large part to contemporary social sciences tending to be interpretive or critical, rather than positive. The days of social sciences trying to imitate the natural sciences, and being at the service of the 19th century liberal ideal of human progress, have long since passed. I do not see this as a bad thing in and of itself. If anything, I think it is far healthier and far more truthful to the spirit of social sciences than what was before.

What purpose do you think social sciences serve? In your own opinion, I ask not out of spite or because I have some snarky remarked saved up. I am genuinely interested in knowing.

One group that does deserve an honorable mention is my raft of communications professors. Though I was often the dissenting opinion, my right to voice that opinion was carefully guarded despite the shrill cries of our local campus do-gooders. I appreciated their kindness in that regard. I have been out of university for a few years now. Given the trend of censorship towards opposing ideas, I am not sure they are still able to let students of my viewpoint speak out.

Structuring and analyzing society. Creating, and defining, the State. Elaborating and expanding on ideologies that shape economic systems, nation-States, and personal lives.

[The East Marches]

What purpose do you think social sciences serve? In your own opinion, I ask not out of spite or because I have some snarky remarked saved up. I am genuinely interested in knowing.

One group that does deserve an honorable mention is my raft of communications professors. Though I was often the dissenting opinion, my right to voice that opinion was carefully guarded despite the shrill cries of our local campus do-gooders. I appreciated their kindness in that regard. I have been out of university for a few years now. Given the trend of censorship towards opposing ideas, I am not sure they are still able to let students of my viewpoint speak out.

Structuring and analyzing society. Creating, and defining, the State. Elaborating and expanding on ideologies that shape economic systems, nation-States, and personal lives.

Thank you for your opinion, do you have experience in that field as well?

[Olerand]

Structuring and analyzing society. Creating, and defining, the State. Elaborating and expanding on ideologies that shape economic systems, nation-States, and personal lives.

Thank you for your opinion, do you have experience in that field as well?

Yes, mostly in public administration, so less theoretical than most social sciences are, and much more bureaucratic, but it is within the same universe.

[Rutannia]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36362505

...and all the people rejoiced.

Or did they? I find quite scary that Austria (homeland of the moustachio and of a fair lot of Nazi top-jobs) gave 49.7% of its presidential votes to a far-right candidate. Especially since even the SPÖ caved in to a widespread xenophobic sentiment lately.

What most people fail to see is not that people turn to the extreme left or right because they agree with it, but because the established parties, especially countries with two dominant parties, appear so out of touch, so above everyone else that people will turn to anyone who sounds different.

The FPO have around 35% in the national polls and won 35% in the first round, those are votes for the FPO. The people that then went on to form 49.7% that voted for Hober in the second round are people that are so disillusioned that they'll happily vote for someone to 'kick the establishment'.

[Liriena]

I will not deny that there are problems in social sciences today, and they can be quite the clustercuss at times. Some of those problems are remnants of modern thought, whereas others came more recently, with post-modernism.

And yes, the works of social scientists, save perhaps for sociologists, seldom have much instrumental value, if any. This is due in large part to contemporary social sciences tending to be interpretive or critical, rather than positive. The days of social sciences trying to imitate the natural sciences, and being at the service of the 19th century liberal ideal of human progress, have long since passed. I do not see this as a bad thing in and of itself. If anything, I think it is far healthier and far more truthful to the spirit of social sciences than what was before.

What purpose do you think social sciences serve? In your own opinion, I ask not out of spite or because I have some snarky remarked saved up. I am genuinely interested in knowing.

One group that does deserve an honorable mention is my raft of communications professors. Though I was often the dissenting opinion, my right to voice that opinion was carefully guarded despite the shrill cries of our local campus do-gooders. I appreciated their kindness in that regard. I have been out of university for a few years now. Given the trend of censorship towards opposing ideas, I am not sure they are still able to let students of my viewpoint speak out.

I think the purpose of social sciences is to help us understand ourselves beyond the purely biological.

I initially chose to study Communication Sciences as a pathway to journalism, but I stayed because it also allowed me to delve into anthropology, sociology, cultural critique, political philosophy, etc.

My professors so far have been mostly fantastic. And save for a small handful of people demanding that specific students be banned from our faculty's Facebook groups for being right-wing, most have shown themselves to be remarkably open to dissenting opinions.

[The balkens]

What purpose do you think social sciences serve? In your own opinion, I ask not out of spite or because I have some snarky remarked saved up. I am genuinely interested in knowing.

One group that does deserve an honorable mention is my raft of communications professors. Though I was often the dissenting opinion, my right to voice that opinion was carefully guarded despite the shrill cries of our local campus do-gooders. I appreciated their kindness in that regard. I have been out of university for a few years now. Given the trend of censorship towards opposing ideas, I am not sure they are still able to let students of my viewpoint speak out.

I think the purpose of social sciences is to help us understand ourselves beyond the purely biological.

I initially chose to study Communication Sciences as a pathway to journalism, but I stayed because it also allowed me to delve into anthropology, sociology, cultural critique, political philosophy, etc.

My professors so far have been mostly fantastic. And save for a small handful of people demanding that specific students be banned from our faculty's Facebook groups for being right-wing, most have shown themselves to be remarkably open to dissenting opinions.

I would figure that the board would punish these asshats.

[The East Marches]

Thank you for your opinion, do you have experience in that field as well?

Yes, mostly in public administration, so less theoretical than most social sciences are, and much more bureaucratic, but it is within the same universe.

What has your experience been? Has it been a tool to improve the lives of others, a double edged sword, etc. etc.

I'm getting into the realm of threadjack, it may be best to continue this via TG.

[The East Marches]

What purpose do you think social sciences serve? In your own opinion, I ask not out of spite or because I have some snarky remarked saved up. I am genuinely interested in knowing.

One group that does deserve an honorable mention is my raft of communications professors. Though I was often the dissenting opinion, my right to voice that opinion was carefully guarded despite the shrill cries of our local campus do-gooders. I appreciated their kindness in that regard. I have been out of university for a few years now. Given the trend of censorship towards opposing ideas, I am not sure they are still able to let students of my viewpoint speak out.

I think the purpose of social sciences is to help us understand ourselves beyond the purely biological.

I initially chose to study Communication Sciences as a pathway to journalism, but I stayed because it also allowed me to delve into anthropology, sociology, cultural critique, political philosophy, etc.

My professors so far have been mostly fantastic. And save for a small handful of people demanding that specific students be banned from our faculty's Facebook groups for being right-wing, most have shown themselves to be remarkably open to dissenting opinions.

You are lucky then. Outside of my normal economics or business classes, I was unable to voice my opinion. The one time I did do so, I was promptly failed and referred to the university for sexism. Luckily, I am brown and they were too cowardly to do anything to me. However, I fear that had it been a white student, they would have been doomed.

It seems your interest in the social sciences is multi-faceted as is your understanding of it. While I disagree with your opinions on many things related to this subject, I can see where you are coming from. We simply draw difference conclusions.

[Liriena]

I think the purpose of social sciences is to help us understand ourselves beyond the purely biological.

I initially chose to study Communication Sciences as a pathway to journalism, but I stayed because it also allowed me to delve into anthropology, sociology, cultural critique, political philosophy, etc.

My professors so far have been mostly fantastic. And save for a small handful of people demanding that specific students be banned from our faculty's Facebook groups for being right-wing, most have shown themselves to be remarkably open to dissenting opinions.

I would figure that the board would punish these asshats.

Eh... not really. Those people were students, not professors, and the Facebook groups are not official, so...

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm generally a leftist on most things, but letting your country get taken over by foreigners is very bad. Europe needs the far-right to save it from invaders

A tiny minority of the population = getting taken over

Right.

Note: I've attempted to refer to the actors here appropriately. I'm discussing Muslims as a community. Individual muslims may well not fall into this pattern, but a majority do in many cases, as i'll consistently show, and i'll also show that despite being a minority, they have drastically effected British society.

Muslims as a group feel they are better represented by the current UK government and system than the natives do.

British Muslims are more likely than the rest of the population to feel that they can influence decisions affecting Britain (33% vs 21%)

• British Muslims are more likely than the rest of the population to feel that their local MP reflects their views (44% vs 41%)

With good reason.

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news ... ally-think

For 5% of the population, they dominate a lot of the discussion and institutions. Their presence managed to turn the labour party into an anti-Semitic and misogynistic mess, for example. One was elected to chair NUS and is likewise anti-semitic, and has managed to basically destroy student union... well, unity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35504185
http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... h-students

The prisons are a mess now too, with Muslim gangs ruling the roost there.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8558590.stm
(Still a problem, notice fuck all has been done about it, and attempts to do so just result in cries of islamophobia)

In addition, due to the way their community representatives act and make demands, the police going hysterical and arresting people for criticizing refugees.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016 ... s-scotland
And tripping over themselves to apologize to the muslim community for Rotherham and it's Muslim rape gangs. (Notice, the muslim communities response to the report exposing muslim rape gangs was to throw a tantrum and refuse to cooperate with the police in their investigations.)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 09356.html

So much for them being "appalled" by the rape gangs and such, they actively tried to perpetuate the culture of silence through their community representatives.

Not only that, but since they've been arriving in larger numbers and become politically active, they've managed to curtail free speech in the country through a combination of identity politics and violent terrorism.

Some will infiltrate institutions and try to turn them Islamic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Trojan_Horse

Meanwhile operating in a parallel society immune to our cultural influences, only interacting with ours to try and Islamify it.

Their breeding practices and hair trigger temper as a community to criticism from the establishment of their culture means we have to deal with them being a disproportionate burden on our health services, our welfare services, and our economy in general, with no re-education effort in sight.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/n ... 442010.stm
(Again, look, a majority!)
And yes, they're disproportionately unemployed and on welfare too.

That's by no means everything, but i'm getting bored.
They've managed to do this despite it not being all of them, and despite it being only 5% of the population.
And the establishment is intent on importing more and more of them.

If over the next 10 years, we imported so many foreigners that 1/20 people were baptist, and 1/2 of those were WESTBORO baptist, do you not think it would feel like the country was being taken over to gay people? especially when it's been routinely demonstrated that they are above the law and can do as they please for years before the police will finally act, but god help you if you lay a hand on one of them to defend yourself.

Yes, it's being taken over. You can manage that with a small and organized force of people, especially when you have a collaborator government determined to import more colonists. Until there is any indication that muslims can be integrated, there should be no more. None. And I don't think they'll be possible to integrate as a community.

As far as i'm concerned, they'll eventually have to go. All of them.
Some are probably fine as individuals, but as a group, they are the only one i'm aware of where their inclusion is a net negative for society AND they are numerous enough to make a negative impact on public policy and national culture, and that makes it simpler to just change laws to pressure them into leaving.

Don't give me "But it's racism doing all that."
Sikhs are often confused for Muslims by racists, and yet the Sikhs have managed to become a very successful minority in the country. It isn't racism doing this to muslims.

Suppose you were to meet one of the 1400 girls raped in Rotherham, or their parents, would you be so mocking of the notion that Muslims are taking over the country?
When they had to watch the police and their limp wristed PC response to the affair, getting more pissy that these victims wouldn't just shut the fuck up and stop making things difficult?

So you'd probably concede they have taken over at least parts of the country, if you were being honest. So it's like churchill and the whore. We've settled what they are, we're merely quibbling over the extent of the damage already done and how to respond to it.

“Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?" Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course... "
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!" Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”

If Rotherham is overused, try one of these:

Rochdale, Derby, Oxford, Bristol, Telford, Peterborough, Banbury, Aylesbury. Keighley

[The balkens]

I would figure that the board would punish these asshats.

Eh... not really. Those people were students, not professors, and the Facebook groups are not official, so...

ah.

Still a bunch of asshats.

[Olerand]

Yes, mostly in public administration, so less theoretical than most social sciences are, and much more bureaucratic, but it is within the same universe.

What has your experience been? Has it been a tool to improve the lives of others, a double edged sword, etc. etc.

I'm getting into the realm of threadjack, it may be best to continue this via TG.

It depends on the social science in question, and even then, it further depends on the "ideological" -if it can be called that- bent of any particular school in social sciences. I believe in the usefulness of sociology -most of the time-, anthropology -most of the time-, etc. I do not see the usefulness in some of the new "branches" being created in the Anglo-Saxon world recently, but academia being so close to becoming a market there, I understand why supply must meed -inane- demand.

[Imperializt Russia]

Muslims as a group feel they are better represented by the current UK government and system than the natives do.

British Muslims are more likely than the rest of the population to feel that they can influence decisions affecting Britain (33% vs 21%)

• British Muslims are more likely than the rest of the population to feel that their local MP reflects their views (44% vs 41%)

With good reason.

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news ... ally-think

Bet you a fucking tenner you're taking way out of context "British muslims think that democracy is a good thing"

More positive findings include:

• A large majority of British Muslims feel a strong sense of belonging to their local area (91%). This is higher than the national average (76%)

• A large majority of British Muslims feel a strong sense of belonging to Britain (86%). This is higher than the national average (83%)

• A large majority of British Muslims feel that they are able to practice their religion freely in Britain (94%)

• British Muslims are more likely than the rest of the population to feel that they can influence decisions affecting Britain (33% vs 21%)

• British Muslims are more likely than the rest of the population to feel that their local MP reflects their views (44% vs 41%)

• 88% of British Muslims think that Britain is a good place for Muslims to live

• 78% of British Muslims would like to integrate into British life on most things apart from Islamic schooling and some laws

Oh fucking look.