Christian view of Liberalism

[MFA]

http://world.time.com/2013/04/08/quebecs-war-on-english-language-politics-intensify-in-canadian-province/

Hmmm...that might be a continued rivalry that most of the rest of Canada is either unaware of doesn't care.  Similar to my experience living on the west coast and finding out about this longstanding rivalry between British Columbia and Ontario that those in Ontario didn't know existed.

I've been to Montreal and apparently you can get by quite nicely in Montreal without any French whatsoever (a bastion of English in the middle of Quebec?).  I haven't really been anywhere else in Quebec so I couldn't really comment about attitudes outside of Montreal.

As I've said elsewhere, though, any culture (or language, in this case) that requires government protection doesn't deserve to survive.  Survival of the fittest, when it comes to culture.  I would guess that if the French culture was actually suppressed, it might thrive underground.

Reminds me of an anecdote that I heard from a family member...a coworker was in France and could get around with his Quebecois, until he tried to get a train ticket at the booth.  It went something like this:

Tourist:  "Puis-j'avoir un billet, s'il vous plaît?"
Ticket-guy:  "Pardon?"
Tourist:  "Un billet, pour la train, s'il vous plaît..."
Ticket-guy:  "Ah!  Un ticket!"

[Solar]

Hmmm...that might be a continued rivalry that most of the rest of Canada is either unaware of doesn't care.  Similar to my experience living on the west coast and finding out about this longstanding rivalry between British Columbia and Ontario that those in Ontario didn't know existed.

I've been to Montreal and apparently you can get by quite nicely in Montreal without any French whatsoever (a bastion of English in the middle of Quebec?).  I haven't really been anywhere else in Quebec so I couldn't really comment about attitudes outside of Montreal.

As I've said elsewhere, though, any culture (or language, in this case) that requires government protection doesn't deserve to survive.  Survival of the fittest, when it comes to culture.  I would guess that if the French culture was actually suppressed, it might thrive underground.

Reminds me of an anecdote that I heard from a family member...a coworker was in France and could get around with his Quebecois, until he tried to get a train ticket at the booth.  It went something like this:

Tourist:  "Puis-j'avoir un billet, s'il vous plaît?"
Ticket-guy:  "Pardon?"
Tourist:  "Un billet, pour la train, s'il vous plaît..."
Ticket-guy:  "Ah!  Un ticket!"

Kind of the obverse here in the US, where the Govt is promoting Spanish rather than English, all for political gains.

[MFA]

Thank you for this explanation.

It seems like Canada is one rare example of succeeded multiculturalism. Do you in Canada have a feel of a Canadian nation? I have nothing against a multicultural mosaic, on the contrary. I was born in the former Yugoslavia, and I really believed different peoples, like Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, and the others, could live happily together and be proud of their multicultural mosaic. (Which was not that much "multi" at all, actually very similar.) But, recent history taught us the opposite - very few of us really enjoyed being together in the same country. Former Yugoslav kingdom before WWII, and later communist Yugoslav republic, both wanted to establish a new Yugoslav nation as a melting pot instead of a mosaic, but it could never happen. It seems European peoples have a strong will for self determination.

I am not sure United States weren't also meant to be a mosaic rather than a melting pot. A mosaic of different states and a mosaic of different peoples. But maybe it's up to peoples themselves to stick together if they want to? For example, Irish or Italian or Jewish, i think they stick together more than English or Germans in the USA? Not to mention Native Americans, Mexicans, Chinese, or Blacks. Could USA be more like Canada? And if not, why is it so? I found this on Wikipedia about the explanation of the Seal of the United States motto "E Pluribus Unum": "Traditionally, the understood meaning of the phrase was that out of many states (or colonies) emerge a single nation. However, in recent years its meaning has come to suggest that out of many peoples, races, religions and ancestries has emerged a single people and nation—illustrating the concept of the melting pot."

And I have to apologize because I have turned this topic into a subject of multiculturalism instead of liberalism, but I have explained why it semed the same to me, because one can easily involve the other.

Canadians are very patriotic, but in a soft-spoken, apologetic kind of way.  Prior to the Olympics in Vancouver, the Prime Minister encouraged Canadians to display an "uncharacteristic outburst of patriotism" and apologize to the world later.

In general, though, the primary characteristic of Canadian culture is the pride of those insignificant areas in which we are distinct from Americans.

[Solar]

Canadians are very patriotic, but in a soft-spoken, apologetic kind of way.  Prior to the Olympics in Vancouver, the Prime Minister encouraged Canadians to display an "uncharacteristic outburst of patriotism" and apologize to the world later.

In general, though, the primary characteristic of Canadian culture is the pride of those insignificant areas in which we are distinct from Americans.

If it wasn't for your gun control laws, I'd probably become an expat, and move North, instead, I'm heading to Alaska.

[MFA]

If it wasn't for your gun control laws, I'd probably become an expat, and move North, instead, I'm heading to Alaska.

Are you?  Wayyy too cold for me.  I'd like the long summer days but hate the short winter days.  Where we lived in BC we had sunlight until 11:00pm in summer, which was great.  Also had kids in our church with their own guns.  Not a big issue there.  Nobody made it one.

[Solar]

Are you?  Wayyy too cold for me.  I'd like the long summer days but hate the short winter days.  Where we lived in BC we had sunlight until 11:00pm in summer, which was great.  Also had kids in our church with their own guns.  Not a big issue there.  Nobody made it one.

Yeah, the Winter says will be an issue, and I love the cold, though I am a bit spoiled living in Ca.
Yeah, I've heard they ignore the rural folks with guns, but that's until you use in self defense.

[milos]

Well said Milos.
Here in the US, liberals are using multiculturalism as a way of dividing America, removing Christianity from the public square, they have no interest in making immigrants become Americans, learn the language, our history.
To do so would give people an understanding of what truly being an American means, they don't want that because these new people would vote Conservative, it's the reason they are pushing this huge amnesty bill, they know it will destroy what little of it means to be a true American.

I understand what you mean, it already happened here in Europe. I was always proud of Europe, thinking the European way of life is far better than the American, or any other. But, now I have to admit United States are better, you have more freedom of speech and choice there. Here in Europe, all governments are now more or less communist. And if you are a patriot and support traditional religious and cultural and moral values, you will be immediately proclaimed a racist, a nazi, or a clero-fascist, and banned and persecuted and tried. In some American states you are even allowed to carry automated weapons, which is an amazing amount of freedom. Oh, I wish I could carry an AK-47 on the street, ha ha, that would make me a free man. Or a 44 Magnum, "the most powerful handgun in the world", lol. I served the army, I carried a loaded Kalashnikov with me, and I know very well it gave me the feeling I can say "no" to anyone. Here in Europe they tend to ban any firearms, in spite of the fact almost all crimes are being commited with illegally possesed weapons. And they push non-European immigrants in intentionally to divide the people and provoke the revolt of the native Europeans, so they can enforce more government repression. Because, for God's sake, we are all just humans, right? And there is no difference which race or religion or culture or language or historical background do you belong, right? True, but it depends in which way you are implementing it. The World is a mosaic of different kind of peoples, but you should not mix nor spoil nor dilute the native communities, because that way you will destroy what true diversity means. They are telling us a half-truth, which is more dangerous than a lie. They are just destroying our meaningfulness. And by "social justice", they mean native people should be forced to work to support both themselves and the immigrants who they didn't want there in the first place. The things are worse in the west of Europe for some reason, they got screwed before noticing it. Maybe if you become more "civilised", it means you become more weak? Did we forget what a civilisation truly means? A community of the people of the same kind, who share the same values? Please, don't let that happen to you in America, maybe you are our last hope.

[milos]

Obraz ("Образ" in cyrillic, The Cheek, meaning The Honour) is a Serb patriotic organization which supports the traditional Christian way of living. Their motto is: "Everything for the cheek, and the cheek for nothing." In 2005 Serbian police marked Obraz as a clero-fascist organization, and in 2012 the Constitutional Court banned Obraz as a ultra-right organization, for the reason of protecting the human and civil rights, and preventing violence and non-tolerance.

In 2010 Obraz organized a protest in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia, to interrupt the gay pride parade. The police provided a transportation to the gay activists, so they could reach the place of their meeting unharmed. After the event, the police also transported the gay activists back their homes. I wonder if all citizens are equal, why then the police doesn't provide free transportation to all of us? And how shitty the country which protects gays and forbids traditionalistic people should be?

In the first video, you may see the police arresting a girl for protesting. In the other one, people are carrying Christian icons, and shouting to the police: "Let us walk the streets of our own city!"

Razbijanje gej parade u Beogradu, 10. oktobar 2010

Razbijanje gej parade u Beogradu, 10. oktobar 2010 drugi deo

Mladen Obradović, Obraz leader, is facing a court trial for organizig the violent anti-gay protest in 2010.



An Obraz anti-gay pride parole on the street, saying: "We are waiting for you!"



Maybe John Lennon was a leftist, but he had a good point in organizing non-violent protests. Because, if you make a violent protest, you give your government an excuse to apply more violence on you.

[Mountainshield]

I am from Europe, so maybe my point of view could be different. We Europeans have built our nations on tribal and ethnic backgrounds, so we naturally see any idea of multiculturalism as a liberal threat to our communities.

The fall of Rome was a long process. The process of liberalisation went along with the process of multiculturalism. I don't know if that is a historical rule, but it happened in Rome that way. By gaining new teritorries and accepting different cultures and peoples, original Romans mixed with the newcomers. They forgot their original tradition and identity, but they didn't form any new identity nor tradition. They abandoned patriarchal values and became promiscuous. That was why they got weaker and disintegrated. At the end, they finished up with crazy emperors who had no relations to Rome nor its customs, Rome and other large cities became overcrowded with poor people, and very little people remained to cultivate the land and serve the army. That was when feudalism begun, when Romans were forced to free the slaves and accept barbarian tribes to colonize the emptied land. Christianity could save the Rome, it could unite Romans to become homogeneous community again, but they didn't adopt it on time, they persecuted Christians for centuries, and by the time Emperor Constantine finally allowed Christianity, it was already too late for them.

Sorry, multiculturalism is not equivalent to liberalism, liberalism can happen in any kind of society. But I think they are connected in a way that liberalism opens the doors for multiculturalism, and the opposite, multiculturalism opens the doors for liberalism. Because, for any liberalism more choices are required, you can hardly build liberalism in a homogenous conservative traditionalistic patriarchal society. Look at the Sweden, they had to become an open liberal socialist society before today's multicultural invasion could happen. Multiculturalism is alright when different cultures manage to preserve their original identity and don't mix with each other, but that kind of society is very hard to preserve. Look at the examples of Austro-Hungarian Empire, Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, or Yugoslavia. Different peoples could have been kept together in those countries only because there was a central power strong enough to keep them together by force. Otherwise, peoples always look to find their own path. Mixed peoples can form a new entity, but their new entity must unite over some strong gathering point, like religion and language. For example, today's Turkey is a mixed multicultural and multiracial society, but they are all strongly connected over Islam and Turkish language.

The people who built United States were all Europeans. They came from different countries: Great Britain, Ireland, Netherlands, Germany, Italy, etc; but they were all Europeans. And Native Americans, or Mexicans, or Chinese, or Blacks, had very poor rights. So I think United States were built on European culture, and not on multiculturalism. I am not fully aware of what is actually happening in the United States today. I know American states are very different, with different peoples, laws, customs, traditions, and religious beliefs. I am sure they can live good lives together in peace and prosperity if they have a strong central power, and if they accept each other as they are.

I agree with almost everything you have stated in this thread, one eastern european country that has turned to the right and is being punished by it now in Europe is Hungary. If you are still interested in the old world, I suggest reading about the success of Fidesz and how EU communist are trying to economically strangle Hungary. It is a strange twist of fate that China is today the country that is most open to right wing governments.

Rome became powerfull because they were multiethnic and embraced melting pot assimilation approach to immigrants. The first original Romans were subjects of the Etruscans Kings, the Etruscans were promiscous and liberal people whereas the romans were hardworking and conservative, when the Romans finally killed the Etruscans and conquered them as you said they embraced new immigrants but also assimilated them into Romans thereby aquiring their knowledge of seafearing, astronomy, architecture, but most importantly republican philisophy from the Greeks. Like you said, it wasn't until they abandoned their culture that they got weak.

The point I want to make is multiethnic immigration is a force of good and enchances the nation, aquiring both new ideas and more manpower. Assimilation is the key, as it was for the Romans. A society can be prosperous by staying ethnically pure with the examples of Japan and South Korea, but with the control variable of North Korea we see that prosperity is a tribute to Capitalism and not ethnocentrism. Ethnic pure native communities is not a necessary or even integral party of prosperous society.

With the Canada argument, I think is more an example more similar to Norway, with huge oil and mineral deposits allowing for a national healthcare and wellfare system to operate and give immigrants the means to not work or assimilate while at the same time be segrageted from the rest of canadian economical society. Whereas USA, GB and Sweden is more similar where people have to pull their own weight if not risking national debt, where USA is now and Sweden is able to stay clear of so far to a certain degree. You don't see canadian immigrants act like british immigrants.

As for being christian in Europe, when I state I'm a christian at work I have to defend my position and clarify my beliefs. It was 1018 years since the last time someone had to that in Norway.

[milos]

I agree with almost everything you have stated in this thread, one eastern european country that has turned to the right and is being punished by it now in Europe is Hungary. If you are still interested in the old world, I suggest reading about the success of Fidesz and how EU communist are trying to economically strangle Hungary.

I heard Hungary was forced to sell all their natural resources and national companies to foreigners, and now the country is being literally owned by them. Which is about to happen soon in my country, too. And people can do nothing, although this is allegedly supposed to be a democratic society. I dream of a new people's uprising, so we beat the shit out of those freaks on power, and gain our country for ourselves again. But not likely to happen.

Rome became powerfull because they were multiethnic and embraced melting pot assimilation approach to immigrants. The first original Romans were subjects of the Etruscans Kings, the Etruscans were promiscous and liberal people whereas the romans were hardworking and conservative, when the Romans finally killed the Etruscans and conquered them as you said they embraced new immigrants but also assimilated them into Romans thereby aquiring their knowledge of seafearing, astronomy, architecture, but most importantly republican philisophy from the Greeks. Like you said, it wasn't until they abandoned their culture that they got weak.

The Rome is a precious historical lesson of one country developed from a small tribe into a kingdom, then a republic, and then an empire, before it finally fell down. The republic period was probably the most prosperous, after they got rid of Etruscan kings, and before they were forced to implement empire to be able to hold such diversed country together with a strong central power. I think their melting pot assimilation politics were cuccessful up to a point when they became too much diversed until beyond recognition. They had a politics to adopt any foreign religion, cult, and culture, and in the end very little of truly Roman has remained. Popular belief is the Christianity destroyed the Rome, but I think it was quite the opposite - Rome destroyed itself because it didn't adopt Christianity on time. The problem Romans had with Christianity was the Christians opposed the Roman politics of adopting all religious beliefs as true and equal. What emperor Constantine did was to finally allow Christianity as equal to other religions, which was not right from the Christian point of view, but it ended the persecution of Christians, and marked the beginning of Rome as a Christian power. And the Eastern Roman Empire survived as a Christian state for 1000 years more, until the time they became decadent too, and so they fell into Ottoman Turk hands.

The point I want to make is multiethnic immigration is a force of good and enchances the nation, aquiring both new ideas and more manpower. Assimilation is the key, as it was for the Romans. A society can be prosperous by staying ethnically pure with the examples of Japan and South Korea, but with the control variable of North Korea we see that prosperity is a tribute to Capitalism and not ethnocentrism. Ethnic pure native communities is not a necessary or even integral party of prosperous society.

True, and I think it depends on the extent of assimilation. For example, my country of Serbia, during the Middle Ages, imported Saxon miners and smiths, because we didn't have the knowledge to develop mining and metal industry ourselves, so they were of a crucial help for developing our country. And our kings payed German cavalry and Spanish infantry mercenaries, from which we surely learnt some new war tactics. But, it was to extent we didn't become Germans nor Spanish nor a mixed nation, it was just a healthy exchange of knowledge and ideas between different peoples. Today, we have lots of Gypsies here, and some are Christian, the other are Muslim. Not much to learn from them in my opinion, but those Christian Gypsies have assimilated themselves into our society, they feel as Serbians, speak Serbian language, go to school, get a job, and have the same customs as we do, whether they live in a city or in a countryside. But, those Muslim Gypsies, some of them even don't speak Serbian at all, they live as nomads, don't go to school, never get a job, they dig into trash, and beg on streets, sometimes very rudely and offensively. Their women have a custom to use the babies for begging, they drunk or drug the babies so they sleep whole day, sometimes a baby dies this way, but it seems they don't matter at all. And when our government (read "our people") gifts them with houses or apartments, they just ruin them, for example burn the parquet for heating. So I find them to be a problem to our society.

[Mountainshield]

I heard Hungary was forced to sell all their natural resources and national companies to foreigners, and now the country is being literally owned by them. Which is about to happen soon in my country, too. And people can do nothing, although this is allegedly supposed to be a democratic society. I dream of a new people's uprising, so we beat the shit out of those freaks on power, and gain our country for ourselves again. But not likely to happen.
The Rome is a precious historical lesson of one country developed from a small tribe into a kingdom, then a republic, and then an empire, before it finally fell down. The republic period was probably the most prosperous, after they got rid of Etruscan kings, and before they were forced to implement empire to be able to hold such diversed country together with a strong central power. I think their melting pot assimilation politics were cuccessful up to a point when they became too much diversed until beyond recognition. They had a politics to adopt any foreign religion, cult, and culture, and in the end very little of truly Roman has remained. Popular belief is the Christianity destroyed the Rome, but I think it was quite the opposite - Rome destroyed itself because it didn't adopt Christianity on time. The problem Romans had with Christianity was the Christians opposed the Roman politics of adopting all religious beliefs as true and equal. What emperor Constantine did was to finally allow Christianity as equal to other religions, which was not right from the Christian point of view, but it ended the persecution of Christians, and marked the beginning of Rome as a Christian power. And the Eastern Roman Empire survived as a Christian state for 1000 years more, until the time they became decadent too, and so they fell into Ottoman Turk hands.
True, and I think it depends on the extent of assimilation. For example, my country of Serbia, during the Middle Ages, imported Saxon miners and smiths, because we didn't have the knowledge to develop mining and metal industry ourselves, so they were of a crucial help for developing our country. And our kings payed German cavalry and Spanish infantry mercenaries, from which we surely learnt some new war tactics. But, it was to extent we didn't become Germans nor Spanish nor a mixed nation, it was just a healthy exchange of knowledge and ideas between different peoples. Today, we have lots of Gypsies here, and some are Christian, the other are Muslim. Not much to learn from them in my opinion, but those Christian Gypsies have assimilated themselves into our society, they feel as Serbians, speak Serbian language, go to school, get a job, and have the same customs as we do, whether they live in a city or in a countryside. But, those Muslim Gypsies, some of them even don't speak Serbian at all, they live as nomads, don't go to school, never get a job, they dig into trash, and beg on streets, sometimes very rudely and offensively. Their women have a custom to use the babies for begging, they drunk or drug the babies so they sleep whole day, sometimes a baby dies this way, but it seems they don't matter at all. And when our government (read "our people") gifts them with houses or apartments, they just ruin them, for example burn the parquet for heating. So I find them to be a problem to our society.

Absolutely I agree, my stephmother is Romanian, and she hates gypsies for ruining her country, it is quite a tribute to leftism that my stephmother who come to Norway to work hard and pay taxes has to go through rigerous immigration customs to be allowed to stay and work, whereas gypsies who come here are allowed to stay and be on wellfare and get all the judicial and financial help they need. Gypsies even get pensions while my stephmother who pay taxes still hasn't qualified for pension under this semi communist system.

It is true, the communist in Hungary before they were voted out of power sold all the countries natural resources to EU governments and even sold their national central bank, thereby leaving the new right wing government with huge financial problem, the good thing is the Hungarian people revolted against the communist. The society is still divided though, by the parasitic communist and the new right wing citizens. This shows why democracy without laws does not work, when one government can sell their country's resources for personal profit and get away with it (thanks to the EU).

It is nice to meet a fellow European Christian, like you said Christianity strenghtened Rome and Constantinople for hundred of years and even after these two empire faded away the kingdoms of europe were bound by christianity to stop outside invaders and gave rise to one of the greatest empires this world has ever seen the Holy Roman Empire/Habsburg Empire, as a Serb I'm sure you have a good understanding of this empire. Even though it was not a perfect Empire it gave autonomy a good degree of freedom to the provinces while at the same keeping the Empire stable and together. As we saw with breakup of HRE the individual internal states turned to wage war against each other like happened with Yugoslavia where Albanian nationalists/racist committed ethnic cleansing against serbs in their quest for what they called "Greater Albania". Christianity was discarded and changed for ethnocentricism/pseudo-darwinism. This is based on what I know, I'm interested in hearing your knowledge and reflection on the Habsburg Empire.

[quiller]

Not quite true...almost all people born in Canada speak both English and French...or, more precisely, speak English and a bit of French or speak French with a bit of English.

Yes, and half are apologizing to the other half for not learning more! 

[MFA]

Yes, and half are apologizing to the other half for not learning more! 

[milos]

It is nice to meet a fellow European Christian, like you said Christianity strenghtened Rome and Constantinople for hundred of years and even after these two empire faded away the kingdoms of europe were bound by christianity to stop outside invaders and gave rise to one of the greatest empires this world has ever seen the Holy Roman Empire/Habsburg Empire, as a Serb I'm sure you have a good understanding of this empire. Even though it was not a perfect Empire it gave autonomy a good degree of freedom to the provinces while at the same keeping the Empire stable and together. As we saw with breakup of HRE the individual internal states turned to wage war against each other like happened with Yugoslavia where Albanian nationalists/racist committed ethnic cleansing against serbs in their quest for what they called "Greater Albania". Christianity was discarded and changed for ethnocentricism/pseudo-darwinism. This is based on what I know, I'm interested in hearing your knowledge and reflection on the Habsburg Empire.

Thank you. I feel kind of sorry for people who think Christianity destroyed European culture. To me, Christianity is a faith in one and only God, the Creator. Nothing more, and nothing less. And it allows any culture whatsoever, but what it does not allow is a faith in false gods. Why do I think pagan gods are false? Because I think there could be only one God the Creator, who created all of the Universe, the Earth, and the mankind, and Odin for example definitively could not create Chinese or Zulus. Simple as that. But I love all Europeans anyway. I think Christianity shall unite Europe, but it has been divided itself, which is a pity.

I don't know much about the Holy Roman Empire, but I am aware of what a concept of an empire means. I know there was some fight between the Emperor and the Pope, which one would prevail, the Church or the Empire. And one of the purposes of the Holy Roman Empire was to show the Empire is as holy as the Church.

I am more familiar with the Habsburg Empire. I will speak from a Serb perspective. To make a short intro firstly. After the Ottoman Turks occupied Serbia in 1459, huge Serb migrations to the north started, from Turkey to Hungary. Then Hungary also fell, and later the Austrian Habsburg Empire liberated Hungarian lands from Turks. By that time, Habsburg Empire held the territories in which many different peoples lived: Germans (Austrians), Hungarians, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Ukrainians, Italians, Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Romanians. Serbs were divided into two kind of position. One were serfs, like the rest of non-Austrian peoples. The other, who lived in the border zone with Turkey, were given freedom by the Emperor in Wien for a favor of serving as frontiersmen, to prevent Turkish attacks. Those Serbs were under direct protection of the court in Wien, and in much better position than all other non-Austrian peoples. So, we had enslaved Serbs in Turkey, and to say half free Serbs in Austria. Both were not satisfied with their position, because they wanted full freedom, but those Serbs in Turkey always looked at Austria as their ally against Turks, and they always cooperated with Austrians when they waged wars against Turkey. I myself think Habsburg Empire was not so bad, it allowed some kind of peace, although there were lots of social turmoils between the different classes. But, all peoples wanted their freedom, so the Empire could not stand as a permanent solution for them to fully accomplish their national identities. Ethnocentricism could not be avoided. The same happened later to Yugoslavia. Different peoples were put together by the force of the central power. It was a bomb to explode sooner or later.

The problem with Albanians in Yugoslavia was a pure illegal immigration problem. After the WWII, the new communist Yugoslav government allowed free immigration from Albania, some legal but mostly illegal. The border was practically kept opened. There were lots of Albanians in Yugoslavia already, who had migrated there during the Turkish period, and they were mostly peaceful. But those new Albanians, they came not to become the citizens of Yugoslavia and appreciate the values of Yugoslav society and the way of life, they have never had any interest to assimilate with other Yugoslav peoples. They started making troubles, demanding their separation from Yugoslavia. No country would allow a separation of a part of its territory by some national minority, of course. The government forces reacted, but the UN and EU and NATO decided to help Albanians to separate.

I see the same thing could happen to USA as it happened to Yugoslavia. There are lots of different peoples, and lots of new immigrants. If USA allow mass immigration, those new immigrants could demand to separate, and the rest of their kind would probably follow them. USA shall not allow this to happen.

[Mountainshield]

Thank you. I feel kind of sorry for people who think Christianity destroyed European culture. To me, Christianity is a faith in one and only God, the Creator. Nothing more, and nothing less. And it allows any culture whatsoever, but what it does not allow is a faith in false gods. Why do I think pagan gods are false? Because I think there could be only one God the Creator, who created all of the Universe, the Earth, and the mankind, and Odin for example definitively could not create Chinese or Zulus. Simple as that. But I love all Europeans anyway. I think Christianity shall unite Europe, but it has been divided itself, which is a pity.

I don't know much about the Holy Roman Empire, but I am aware of what a concept of an empire means. I know there was some fight between the Emperor and the Pope, which one would prevail, the Church or the Empire. And one of the purposes of the Holy Roman Empire was to show the Empire is as holy as the Church.

I am more familiar with the Habsburg Empire. I will speak from a Serb perspective. To make a short intro firstly. After the Ottoman Turks occupied Serbia in 1459, huge Serb migrations to the north started, from Turkey to Hungary. Then Hungary also fell, and later the Austrian Habsburg Empire liberated Hungarian lands from Turks. By that time, Habsburg Empire held the territories in which many different peoples lived: Germans (Austrians), Hungarians, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Ukrainians, Italians, Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Romanians. Serbs were divided into two kind of position. One were serfs, like the rest of non-Austrian peoples. The other, who lived in the border zone with Turkey, were given freedom by the Emperor in Wien for a favor of serving as frontiersmen, to prevent Turkish attacks. Those Serbs were under direct protection of the court in Wien, and in much better position than all other non-Austrian peoples. So, we had enslaved Serbs in Turkey, and to say half free Serbs in Austria. Both were not satisfied with their position, because they wanted full freedom, but those Serbs in Turkey always looked at Austria as their ally against Turks, and they always cooperated with Austrians when they waged wars against Turkey. I myself think Habsburg Empire was not so bad, it allowed some kind of peace, although there were lots of social turmoils between the different classes. But, all peoples wanted their freedom, so the Empire could not stand as a permanent solution for them to fully accomplish their national identities. Ethnocentricism could not be avoided. The same happened later to Yugoslavia. Different peoples were put together by the force of the central power. It was a bomb to explode sooner or later.

The problem with Albanians in Yugoslavia was a pure illegal immigration problem. After the WWII, the new communist Yugoslav government allowed free immigration from Albania, some legal but mostly illegal. The border was practically kept opened. There were lots of Albanians in Yugoslavia already, who had migrated there during the Turkish period, and they were mostly peaceful. But those new Albanians, they came not to become the citizens of Yugoslavia and appreciate the values of Yugoslav society and the way of life, they have never had any interest to assimilate with other Yugoslav peoples. They started making troubles, demanding their separation from Yugoslavia. No country would allow a separation of a part of its territory by some national minority, of course. The government forces reacted, but the UN and EU and NATO decided to help Albanians to separate.

I see the same thing could happen to USA as it happened to Yugoslavia. There are lots of different peoples, and lots of new immigrants. If USA allow mass immigration, those new immigrants could demand to separate, and the rest of their kind would probably follow them. USA shall not allow this to happen.

Thanks for reply,

It is a tribute to the strenght of christianity that politicians and media do everything in their power in futile attempt to crush christianity, they are so afraid of people's faith in God that they have to spend incredible amount of resources to ridicule christianity. The Norse religion in addition to being pagan and heretic was weak, it was a horrible blueprint for civil society. Odin and Thor pagans was crushed by the forces of Olav Tryggvason with the blessing of God, and society went from slavery based agriculture to yeoman agrarianism.

Christianity has the potential to unite Europe like it was before, not saying it was united politically but it was united culturally with the bible as foundation. Competition creates excellence, and it is something that is good with having many different nation states, even though war can break out, it was always limited compared to the ideological wars of the 20th century where communist/socialist created the concentration camps and gulags. Even the Thirty years war which is wrongfully assumed today to be about Catholics and Protestants was limited, and except for the germanic provinces that was raided and heavy taxation in warring countries had limited suffering when you compare it to communist and national socialists wars/civil war.

Thanks for the perspective and knowledge on Habsburg Empire.

Regarding the US/Nato led intervention I have always been pro intervention with regards to ending the conflict, however the terms imposed by the US/EU were detrimental to both the peace effort and in promoting stability. Serbians was blamed for a war that they did not start. And I apologize on behalf of my government in not granting Milošević amnesty. Even though not innocent, there were no innocent political leaders in that war and it was wrong to blame serbia for the war just as it was wrong to blame germany for ww1. We might disagree on the likes of Arkan however, but this is not important.

I was under the impression however that the Serbian populace at large wants to become a full EU member, how is Serbian society today with regards to Christianity and the EU?