This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Marine Le Pen
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 26 Apr 22 1.14pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
We created the need. Well done. You’re getting there. By we, I mean the country. Well actually the Labour government. Companies didn’t help, but there could’ve been incentives. And Labour did encourage East Europeans over here. It takes some believing. Ignore the working classes, encourage 50% into university. For what purpose nobody knows, but he still thinks it’s credible.
We didn't "create" the need. That implies it was deliberately designed. It arrived as a consequence of events. Hindsight may suggest another course would have produced a better outcome, but decisions are taken with the best intentions based on what can be seen at the time. That will always be the case. Decisions being taken to day won't always look wise in a few years from now. Having skill shortages whilst we were in the EU allowed gaps to be filled via free movement. That's not "encouraging". It's using the system, which in the process has also provided us with some high quality new citizens. Improving the availability of vocational training, and its perceived value to society, so that a vocational award is regarded in the same way as a degree, is something I completely agree with.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Apr 22 1.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by W12
You do not understand the difference between globalisation and globalism. Globalism is an "ism" i.e. an ideology. This ideology is summed up by people like Yuval Noah Harari. Basically national identify and spirituality can go hang, you are no more than a meat puppet and you will be replaced or subsumed by technology. For most the two are interchangeable, but if you wish to be pedantic, then what is under review here is globalisation. I have no interest in subverting national identities into one homogenous mass of humanity, which is the ultimate destination of pure globalism.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 26 Apr 22 1.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
We didn't "create" the need. That implies it was deliberately designed. It arrived as a consequence of events. Hindsight may suggest another course would have produced a better outcome, but decisions are taken with the best intentions based on what can be seen at the time. That will always be the case. Decisions being taken to day won't always look wise in a few years from now. Having skill shortages whilst we were in the EU allowed gaps to be filled via free movement. That's not "encouraging". It's using the system, which in the process has also provided us with some high quality new citizens. Improving the availability of vocational training, and its perceived value to society, so that a vocational award is regarded in the same way as a degree, is something I completely agree with. It was created via Tony Blair’s vision. It didn’t need to be and he was told in no uncertain terms what a mistake he was making. It was possible to invest in youth or skills, not cr&ppy useless degrees. Most who go to university aren’t in the slightest bit interested.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  26 Apr 22 1.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
It was created via Tony Blair’s vision. It didn’t need to be and he was told in no uncertain terms what a mistake he was making. It was possible to invest in youth or skills, not cr&ppy useless degrees. Most who go to university aren’t in the slightest bit interested. Over 50% of school leavers now go on to a degree course. Wonder how many of them regret it with the average student debt at £35,000.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| W12 26 Apr 22 2.02pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
For most the two are interchangeable, but if you wish to be pedantic, then what is under review here is globalisation. I have no interest in subverting national identities into one homogenous mass of humanity, which is the ultimate destination of pure globalism. Most people are wrong. Globalisation is basically the global infrastructure and processes that connect us together (internet, supply chains etc) and Globalism is as I previously described. The reason why conflating these is a problem is that Globalists will claim that Globalism is inevitable *because* of globalisation. So basically they are inserting their ideology on the back of the fact that technology is driving change that they want to control in their own particular way. Globalism makes no account of national borders or national sovereignty, independent cultures and societal norms, religions, property rights, personal privacy, bodily autonomy etc etc. There is also a much wider agenda here that relates to things like smart cities, "sustainable development", quantum computing, it's singularity and things like trans-humanism. The basics tenets are: One world government This little to do with globalisation other than you can use it as a tool to enable this and the agenda of Globalists is obviously global and pretty well advanced. That's not pedantic and that kind of thinking is short sighted, ill informed and dangerous considering what's at stake. Edited by W12 (26 Apr 2022 2.12pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 26 Apr 22 2.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
For most the two are interchangeable, but if you wish to be pedantic, then what is under review here is globalisation. I have no interest in subverting national identities into one homogenous mass of humanity, which is the ultimate destination of pure globalism. But that is the ultimate goal of globalism. Consumers buying the same products everywhere while working for fewer wages.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Apr 22 2.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Over 50% of school leavers now go on to a degree course. Wonder how many of them regret it with the average student debt at £35,000. The vast majority will never pay it back. It gets wiped after 30 years! It's not really a "loan". It's much more a tax for the highest earners to have benefited from a university education.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 26 Apr 22 2.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Marine Le Pen is so ugly even Boris Johnson would not sleep with her. Russia has offered her a new position as a decoy to their whaling fleet. They would have offered Ukraine but their soldiers would mutiny.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Apr 22 2.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
But that is the ultimate goal of globalism. Consumers buying the same products everywhere while working for fewer wages. Who do you imagine is designing, and managing this? You need a world government, and that is not going to happen. It's a fanciful conspiracy theory, and nothing more than that. Creating worldwide brands makes commercial sense, but we don't have to buy them, and they are often tailored to suit local tastes. Did you know, for instance, that even Coca-Cola varies from country to country? Edited by Wisbech Eagle (26 Apr 2022 2.38pm)
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Apr 22 2.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by W12
Most people are wrong. Globalisation is basically the global infrastructure and processes that connect us together (internet, supply chains etc) and Globalism is as I previously described. The reason why conflating these is a problem is that Globalists will claim that Globalism is inevitable *because* of globalisation. So basically they are inserting their ideology on the back of the fact that technology is driving change that they want to control in their own particular way. Globalism makes no account of national borders or national sovereignty, independent cultures and societal norms, religions, property rights, personal privacy, bodily autonomy etc etc. There is also a much wider agenda here that relates to things like smart cities, "sustainable development", quantum computing, it's singularity and things like trans-humanism. The basics tenets are: One world government This little to do with globalisation other than you can use it as a tool to enable this and the agenda of Globalists is obviously global and pretty well advanced. That's not pedantic and that kind of thinking is short sighted, ill informed and dangerous considering what's at stake. Edited by W12 (26 Apr 2022 2.12pm) "Globalists", such as they exist, can claim whatever they like. It isn't going to happen. It's a conspiracy theory with absolutely no prospect of it happening. The structure doesn't exist, and nor does the will to build one. Globalisation is though a reality.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| W12 26 Apr 22 3.00pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
"Globalists", such as they exist, can claim whatever they like. It isn't going to happen. It's a conspiracy theory with absolutely no prospect of it happening. The structure doesn't exist, and nor does the will to build one. Globalisation is though a reality. "Globalists" are in the drivers seat mate. Here is just a few of the usual suspects which include every major corporation, government agencies, security services, media, central banks and global agencies (World Bank, Bank of International Settlements, World Health Organisation, UN, EU, NATO), NGO's - you name it - almost everyone represented that runs the current global society. Our laws are gradually being changed to enable this. Been happening for years. (there are many more such organisations) Do you think you can stop this by choosing not to go along with it?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 26 Apr 22 3.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Who do you imagine is designing, and managing this? You need a world government, and that is not going to happen. It's a fanciful conspiracy theory, and nothing more than that. Creating worldwide brands makes commercial sense, but we don't have to buy them, and they are often tailored to suit local tastes. Did you know, for instance, that even Coca-Cola varies from country to country? Edited by Wisbech Eagle (26 Apr 2022 2.38pm) Oh, shut up with your buzz words. There is no 'conspiracy theory' here. You can see how relying on resources from other countries fails when someone doesn't play by the rules. A more sensible policy would be greater self sufficiency of resources and a move back towards raising more children to reverse the slow extinction of Europeans, rather than making both parents in a family work for the wages of one. Restricting the labour market would mean higher wages and less profit for the increasing monopoly of multinational companies, who pay limited tax and low wages.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.