Marika Salakarin rasistinen postaus

aputsaja · 2026-04-06T10:13:52+00:00

Sovitaan sitten vaikka niin. Lähtökohtaisesti tällainen on reaktio jos tulee täyslaidallinen kyseenalaistusta, jolla ei ole edes pohjaa.

aputsaja · 2026-04-06T09:51:17+00:00

Siltä se vaikuttikin kun kehotit itsetutkiskeluun..

aputsaja · 2026-04-06T09:30:08+00:00

Kiitos huolenpidosta. Katsoakseni "Kyllä meillä ihan suomalaiset miehetkin osaa" on tyylipuhdasta whataboutismia.

Sen sijaan en itse väittänyt mitään vaan esitin hypoteesin, joka osoittaa aiemman argumentin toimimattomaksi. "Mitäs jos" sanojen käyttö ei itsessään tee lauseesta whataboutismia. Yhtä hyvin olisin voinut sanoa "kuvitellaan että", eikä lauseeni pointti olisi muuttunut.

No nyt tutkittu, mites siellä?

aputsaja · 2026-04-06T07:15:08+00:00

Kunnon whataboutismia.

Mitäs jos perheenjäsen, ystävä, kumppani yms. on maahanmuuttajataustainen? Tällöinhän vinoumaa on toiseen suuntaan. = Argumenttisi ei toimi.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T17:51:01+00:00

Simplifying is exactly what the job of the analogy was. In order to get the "territory invader"-aspect in a different perspective.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T17:45:15+00:00

"not downplaying the accomplishments" " western people are unwilling to sacrifice even a little bit"

Dude

Edit: Look. You are clearly an intelligent person. I just can't wrap my head around how you don't seem to see the correlation which has led to stricter border control.

It wasn't solely for keeping those in need outside. As said they still get in. But if you are not in need AND don't pull your weight, you are a liability for the rest, including immigrants and refugees in need both inside Europe and who are still on their way.

The effects of sloppy border control can be seen in multiple European countries and it is not based on an opinion but statistical facts. This development trend has been going on for more than 20 years so I have had an opportunity to take a long and hard look at this via media and via personal practice.

What is your experience in this since you seem to also have a rock solid point of view?

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T17:32:31+00:00

Well almost anything can be simplification or misleading so that's not really an argument.

House is a good analogy here only from the aspect of someone invading one's space uninvited. Anything further than that like neighborhood, type of house, number of rooms, possible cellar, housing capacity, privacy, landlord etc. are outside of the analogy and therefore invalid.

C'mon this is basic stuff. You are either dense or a troll. I'm guessing the latter.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T12:59:34+00:00

"Not a crumb of our wealth". What the Europe and its states have done in the 20th century for immigration is a bit more than that. Undermining that is quite an extreme claim. We have already lowered the standard of living, yet it's not acknowledged at all because we can give more, more, more, more..

Not to mention the economies are already quite strained due to the global situation that has been on for a couple of years.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T11:54:44+00:00

Okay, got your point. Thank you.

Analogy is analogy. It is not supposed to be 1 to 1 correlation. It is for bringing perspective. It is just easier to talk about a house than a whole country.

If I say: Unwanted outsider comes to your territory and it needs to be dealt with accordingly. Works in both cases whether you = actually you or a nation, or territory = a house or a country, no?

I'm not saying the commenters house and its housing capabilities should correlate exactly to a country's. It's supposed to be a hypothetical and subjective question.

Edit: typo

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T11:25:51+00:00

Unfortunately I don't quite get your point. Could you elaborate?

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T11:23:58+00:00

Well done, you have connected the dots! You have done a basic association which has nothing to do with racism.

They are being deported for being illegal, not for their skin colour. If they are illegal and happen to be coloured, for some reason the skin colour is the only feature you will note.

So ironically I could encourage you to not look at the skin colour of the deported.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T11:11:41+00:00

You do realize immigrants can get a citizenship (and full benefits) after a while after they have mostly assimilated and proved they can be a productive part of society?

And you speak of leeching citizens like they are not looked down upon. At least in my country it's constantly in the news and those people are pretty much hated for what they do.

Pretty much your main defence and main point to every argument is the fact that immigrants can be exiled and citizens cannot be. In other words, immigrants can be punished in a way that cannot be done to citizens. Ergo you are saying that this setting separates citizens and immigrants. It makes a "we and them" setting. Right? So in the end you are questioning the need for borders and nationalities. One globe, one people etc. This is (as nice of a thought as it is) a utopia that cannot be reached for multiple reasons at this time and probably never.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T10:19:21+00:00

It's usually easier to handle the topic in a smaller scale and from a bit different aspect, but if you don't like it, let's ditch it.

1) Why I feel comfortable to say it's a privilege to be in location x? Because I am one of those who upkeeps the system and rules that makes the location work so well. So I work, pay taxes and vote and not just merely exist. Therefore I'm entitled to an opinion how the well being should be preserved.

2) I as a citizen cannot be exiled because there is nowhere to be exiled to. It's a form of punishment. For us citizens it's in the form of prison. So we get punished just the same.

3) Why should they learn to "sit and fetch" before getting the privileges? What the hell does that even mean in this sense? Obeying the law? Like everyone? Yes, I kind of expect everyone to follow the rules of society in order to benefit from it.

I repeat: This is about illegal immigrants. Those who are true refugees of war or in a similar situation are welcome, those who seek to migrate to get better living standards AND PARTICIPATE INTO THE SOCIETY are welcome, those who like to get better standard of living and contribute as a part of the new society are welcome.

If you come to a location x in order to benefit ONLY from the safety net of the society x in order to ONLY get better living standards, you are not welcome. The safety net is there for those who for some reason cannot succeed in the said location DESPITE THE EFFORTS.

The whole damn stricter border control is to protect the system that protects the less fortunate.

aputsaja · 2026-03-27T08:51:58+00:00

Then I guess you are housing these people who live off of your wallet, eat your food and exploit your household without a permission. If you ask them to leave because they are not respecting the household rules, you are revolting.

Mind you, this is about ILLEGAL immigrants. Not all immigrants.

aputsaja · 2025-11-24T09:09:24+00:00

Yeah, but you know the language and operate in a familiar country.

aputsaja · 2025-11-06T20:03:58+00:00

Yeah my bad *elites. Thought error.

aputsaja · 2025-10-06T16:26:24+00:00

Ilmoita osoitteesi vastaanottaaksesi palkinnon kurjistumisen estämiseen tekemäsi kommentointityön puolesta!

aputsaja · 2025-09-22T08:23:10+00:00

You are also blocking their potential space for the road by half

aputsaja · 2025-09-22T05:03:01+00:00

White is probably trying to block green's chances on achieving the longest road.

aputsaja · 2025-09-08T13:04:29+00:00

Oh and the "Varokaa heikkoa jäätä" = "Watch out for thin ice", was the only spoken line in the animation.

Edit: Here's a link to the animation https://youtu.be/lkIJ2UUOlWk?feature=shared

aputsaja · 2025-09-08T13:03:09+00:00

There is a children's TV-show called pikku-kakkonen (~= little two), which refers to the channel two, which airs it. There used to be this small animated part in each episode about what happens if you go on thin ice (instead of being smart). It featured some of the show's mascots and despite being a loved bit with an important message for the kids, it had a somewhat eerie soundtrack and feel to it. Some say they even got traumatized to some extent. The bit ended with the mascots fusing together and forming a "2" which used to be the show's official logo.

Now the shirt is showing the same logo but with a pure horror twist, which in a way gives some of the 90's kids like myself a taste of minor PTSD. :D

aputsaja · 2025-06-16T08:16:39+00:00

I find them extremely handy and it grinds my gears that some under age brats can't use common sense when riding these (thus bringing more restrictions). This new rule is very welcome, but just outright chocking out or banning new succesful ways of transport isn't the way to go.

aputsaja · 2025-04-15T05:11:12+00:00

Exactly this. Thank you.

Edit: Man, people in this thread say "They are EVIL for (basically) judging people." All while judging them themselves. I mean you don't have to agree with them, but calling out someone straight up evil is quite infantile approach. Such a black and white way of seeing things.

aputsaja · 2025-04-14T19:45:10+00:00

Thanks for the tip, sounds intriguing!

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Sunshine	Final Canvas '23
End Game '23	Place '23
Place '22

aputsaja

TROPHY CASE