So he is pretty much confirmed for being wrong by now right?

So he is pretty much confirmed for being wrong by now right?

In his book he made the point that Islamic Fundamentalism will not supersede liberalism because it has no appeal outside the middle east, but recent events would prove that to be untrue, and he never even brought up the impact of immigration.
Massive influxes of muslim populations into places like Europe, and the partial adoption of sharia law in fucking England of all places, has got to be a sign that he underestimated Islam.
AND the Arab Spring was a massive defeat for liberalism since the tyrannical governments that were replaced were replaced not with liberal governments, but with Islamic governments. It cant even be said that liberalism wouldnt allow the nasty bits of Islam to take root, if the absolutely disastrous state of the European refugee crisis isnt proof of that enough.

Other urls found in this thread:

dw.com/en/germany-has-become-safer/a-19444826
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

25 year rule, take it to /pol/

>It cant even be said that liberalism wouldnt allow the nasty bits of Islam to take root, if the absolutely disastrous state of the European refugee crisis isnt proof of that enough.
dw.com/en/germany-has-become-safer/a-19444826

those god damn muslims riding the metro without paying, european society is DOOOOOOOOOOOMED

Kill yourself.

oh shit sorry i totally forgot
/pol/ would be pretty shit for this discussion though

>European refugee crisis
thats been in the making for a long time. large birthrate, huge unemployment, a giant youth population, urbanization, corrupt and inefficient bureaucracies, poor school and judicial systems; even if so-called liberal governments captured power in the Arab spring all these factors ripened under decades-long dictatorships or monarchies across the middle east. in some ways islamism offers a more potent vision than liberalism in that region.

>t cant even be said that liberalism wouldnt allow the nasty bits of Islam to take root, if the absolutely disastrous state of the European refugee crisis isnt proof of that enough.
but actually what did you mean by this

1992 was 25 years ago, kys.

Germany is still like 90% German.
You can't just ignore the extremely disproportional amount of crimes migrants are committing.

>partial adoption of Sharia law in England

Jeez, dude. Where are you getting your information from? The back of a cereal box?

Of course he's wrong. I mean, people hate liberalism on every front.

Russia hates liberalism because it makes them weak and materialistic, hence Putin is allying himself with people like Dugin.

The Chinese hates liberalism because it makes the Central Committee weak, and would give 1.3 billion Chinese too many rights.

South-America, obviously hates liberalism because they associate it with American hegemony.

And slowly, but surely Europa is turning more and more right-wing, as has the U.S by voting Trump.

>The partial adoption of sharia law in fucking England of all places.
Isn't this complete bullshit tho?

>Liberalism isn't right wing
Is this bait or are you seriously using US pop politic lingo when discussing Fukuyama?

It's not right-wing in the traditional sense no.

>Paying trillions of dollars to support people that kill and rape your own countrymen, while simultaneously causing a massive brain drain from underdeveloped areas.

Yes you are a good humanitarian indeed.

I think it comes from headlines saying that majority muslim communities are enforcing it internally.

There is a significant number of people in England who, by choice or otherwise, will take recourse to Sharia courts and not actual courts for a wide array of legal matters.

This is a proven fact.

Yes, it's complete bullshit.

that's pretty fucked up, but not as bad as the memes.

Ah, I see, because OP talked about England you decide to be a cheeky bastard and pretend to be retarded? Fuck you.

What are you talking about?

Completely unofficial though, that's no different from going to a mediation service because you want to resolve a dispute that way rather than going through the courts. Describing that as "the adoption of sharia law" is idiotic.

People are allowed to settle affairs privately.

A lot of contracts for services that you sign up for say that you can not sue them, and all claims must be made in private arbitration, not the public legal court system. Or Judge Judy for example, is not a real court system Judge. The claimants agree that her arbitration will be binding, so she gets to hold a mock trial.

>This is a proven fact.
says the random guy on the internet
post sources or you're just talking out of your ass

A woman in these communities who wants a divorce will not agree with your comparison to mediation services.

Fuck you, use fucking google.

>A woman in these communities who wants a divorce will not agree with your comparison to mediation services.

A sharia court can't grant a divorce, she has to go to a proper court if she wants one.

>Fuck you, use fucking google.
The burden of evidence is on you, cupcake. Your assertions are completely baseless and built on half-truths and exaggerations.

It's not about getting the divorce the issue is that the sharia court may block her from going to a real court.

They have no legal power to do so.

Triggered.

They have the power of social shaming and ostracisation.
It's like saying domestic violence isn't a problem since the woman can go to court except in this case her entire community may be unwilling to help her.

But regular English society shames women for speaking out about domestic violence.

>They have the power of social shaming and ostracisation
How is that any different from Christian churches which require strict social conservatism? Or Scientology, for that matter?

>They have the power of social shaming and ostracisation.

Well that's up to individual Muslims to decide. If they give a shit what their local community thinks they can go to a sharia court, if they don't they can go to a real one. Everyone has choices to make in life. That's like saying I can't go to court about something because it would upset my mates and my mum.

And you're losing track of what is under discussion, it might be "a problem" if you want to consider it that but that's not the same as "the partial adoption of sharia law in England".

>AND the Arab Spring was a massive defeat for liberalism since the tyrannical governments that were replaced were replaced not with liberal governments, but with Islamic governments.
This happened nowhere. Tunisia is now a liberal democracy, Libya is in a state of anarchy, Egypt briefly had a muslim government but is now in another military dictatorship, and Syria is still in a civil war where the islamists are losing. The other countries involved didn't switch governments.

I can't really speak on that since i'm not english.

That's bad too? but i don't think churches typically try to enforce law on their members in the modern day.

your family not approving of something you do is different from a organised court of your whole community trying to police your actions. It's also a lot easier for a community to cover something up than for a single family or group of friends.
A European family is also more likely to not give a shit what you do.

>your family not approving of something you do is different from a organised court of your whole community trying to police your actions. It's also a lot easier for a community to cover something up than for a single family or group of friends.

You're still missing the point. You're talking about social issues among Muslim communities. That is completely different to "the partial adoption of sharia law in England", which is what OP claimed and everyone pointed out was bullshit, which it is.

Out of all the possible instances where neoliberal globalisation has failed over the past two decades, you choose radical islamisation as your go to? Brah.

Sure.