IMMIGRATION thread

[Husar]

Multiculturalism is a fundamentally contradictory policy - on the one hand incomers are not required to integrate, on the other the host culture is expected to adapt to the immigrants.

I feel like I've hardly ever seen anyone who wanted this type of multiculture and yet everybody here says we have it.
The lack of integration seems more like a long-standing political failure that was apparently never important enough for the public to make politicians do anything about it.
Even the most liberal people I know seem to think that immigrants should learn the language, not become criminals etc., they just embrace multiculturalism as a form of cultural exchange where you don't force all immigrants to dance the waltz but also learn the dances from their homeland instead or exchange painting techniques and other artsy stuff.

As for immigration policy, now that is obviously screwed up but that is not new, it's just that too few people cared about it until rape became more important than the new iPhone. You get what you (repeatedly) vote for.
By the way, saving everyone's internet data did apparently not prevent it or maybe it was because noone mentioned a bomb when they coordinated this. Some already say the answer is more surveillance.

There was also a talk on TV where they mentioned that most of them were north africans (especially from Morocco). Their asylum papers had them down as Syrians but by now it seems clear they were pseudo-syrians. The theory that France has more muslim problems because they have more Moroccans and we have more Turks and Kurds was thrown around as well as the one that ISIS is mostly joined by people from Saudi Arabia and Morocco and other North African countries, Egypt and another one notably excluded as hotspots. So it appears that for some reason some countries that we use as tourists and that are safe because they are police states (let me guess, supported by us?) export the most violent migrants. Not to forget that we already have a whole lot of criminals from that area who probably gladly offer the newcomers to "show them around"... Couple that with completely inadequate laws where they can easily exploit our judicial system and it seems obvious that we slept for too long and now have to run behind them to catch up. I guess now we need to become police states, too.

[Beskar]

I feel like I've hardly ever seen anyone who wanted this type of multiculture and yet everybody here says we have it.

It is a strawman as it is easier to defeat the concept if you say that is the intention of it. I agree that failures in implementing the policy correctly has seen that result.

[Montmorency]

Do people still not realize that "multiculturalism" is a political football used from the 1950's on to convince native Europeans that 'you don't need to worry about all those foreigners we're importing, we don't have to include them in our society, they'll just be here to work and make us rich and then they'll return whence they came'?

It's much more a union of nativism and free market lobbying than any sort of leftist cosmopolitan impulse.

[Fragony]

You never respond to me anyway so I will just say that you are wrong

[Greyblades]

Do people still not realize that "multiculturalism" is a political football used from the 1950's on to convince native Europeans that 'you don't need to worry about all those foreigners we're importing, we don't have to include them in our society, they'll just be here to work and make us rich and then they'll return whence they came'?

It's much more a union of nativism and free market lobbying than any sort of leftist cosmopolitan impulse.

You never respond to me anyway so I will just say that you are wrong

No, because one is a government policy and the other is a personal wardrobe choice.

Multiculturalism is a fundamentally contradictory policy - on the one hand incomers are not required to integrate, on the other the host culture is expected to adapt to the immigrants.

This breads resentment, which breeds Fascists.

Considering this forum's standard of evidence and the nebulous-ness of the term are such that as far as we are concerned all of these statments may as well be simultaneously correct.

[Montmorency]

all of these statments may as well be simultaneously correct.

Fragony's statement has nothing to do with the other two quoted. PVC's quote does not impinge on mine, and the reasoning in mine clearly acknowledges and expands on some of the reasoning in PVC's.

I think most of your trouble comes from difficulty following along.

[Gilrandir]

What you said has nothing to do with apposition as you have cited it. Moreover, what you said is invalid. Titles and honorifics (indeed, any noun phrase) denote something in themselves, and their usage is not predicated on the existence of similar-but-distinct phrases.

They do have their own meaning, but being used appositively they perfrom the function(s) I mentioned. If you deny that Chancellor in Chancellor Merkel is an apposition, I'm afraid it is you who run contrary to long-established grammatical traditions. Well, it is your call.

In the context of juveniles there's no reason to use "Ms" because you know they can't be married.

Maybe we should dig deeper and remember that it was used referring to a 14 year old MUSLIM girl - and in that culture females of this age are eligible for marriage. With that in mind the journalists may have been quite aware and indeed intentional of the word they used.

[Fragony]

Fragony's statement has nothing to do with the other two quoted. PVC's quote does not impinge on mine, and the reasoning in mine clearly acknowledges and expands on some of the reasoning in PVC's.

I think most of your trouble comes from difficulty following along.

Yeah it has everything to do with not being able to keep up, but maybe your orghan is broken

[Greyblades]

You know a conversatioon has gone stale when they start debating grammar.

Fragony's statement has nothing to do with the other two quoted. PVC's quote does not impinge on mine, and the reasoning in mine clearly acknowledges and expands on some of the reasoning in PVC's.

I mean that the word multicultural's meaning is so vague and subjective that your statment can be said to be simultaniously right and wrong.

I think most of your trouble comes from difficulty following along.

Hello kettle, I'm pot, have we met?

I think your trouble is that you write like a university student attempting to gain extra credit through rarely used words and long-winded writing patterns. Combined with a habit of failing to connect your rebuttle with the post you are responding to and you have freqently become outright incomprehensable.

[Viking]

The lack of integration seems more like a long-standing political failure that was apparently never important enough for the public to make politicians to do anything about it.

[...]

As for immigration policy, now that is obviously screwed up but that is not new, it's just that too few people cared about it until rape became more important than the new iPhone.

I'm not so sure such a (non-authoritarian) policy exists.

I can't help but think of a dude jumping of a tall building, swearing that with the right policy, he'll be able to fly with the power of his own bare arms the next time..

You'd think it was important to find evidence for the existence of such policies before we accepted more massive immigration, but nah.

I guess now we need to become police states, too.

It wouldn't surprise me if this kind of thinking actually was at work in the back of the minds of many of those who are pro-mass immigration. There can never be too many immigrants, then - the state will handle everything. There's a legal measure for every problem, you know.

"If this goes really bad, we can just introduce more "pro-tolerance" (read: authoritarian) legal measures. I heard Yugoslavia was a peaceful, authoritarian multiethnic country. We'll be fine."

[Husar]

I'm not so sure such a (non-authoritarian) policy exists.

I can't help but think of a dude jumping of a tall building, swearing that with the right policy, he'll be able to fly with the power of his own bare arms the next time..

You'd think it was important to find evidence for the existence of such policies before we accepted more massive immigration, but nah.

Yes it was, but it was also important not to let half a million Syrians freeze to death in front of a barbed wire fence.
It is not their fault that we failed for decades to weed out the criminals among the immigrants or is it?

It wouldn't surprise me if this kind of thinking actually was at work in the back of the minds of many of those politicians who are pro-mass immigration. There can never be too many immigrants, then - the state will handle everything. There's a legal measure for every problem, you know.

Fixed it. Unless you want to convince me that the far left aka antifa is in favor of being spied upon all the time.

[Fragony]

Why would they freeze to death in the first save country they enter?

[Husar]

Why would they freeze to death in the first save country they enter?

Because it is already full?

If we are full with a million, surely Turkey is already overfilled with three or how many they took already.

Apparently they have so many that they already try to illegally send them back, hardly a country you could stay in even if you wanted to...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35135810

Amnesty International says its research has found that scores - possibly hundreds - of refugees and asylum-seekers have been sent back to Syria and Iraq.
"This is absolutely illegal, both under Turkish and international law, because you cannot forcibly return someone to a place where their lives and rights are in danger," said Andrew Gardner, the head of Amnesty in Turkey.

[Viking]

Yes it was, but it was also important not to let half a million Syrians freeze to death in front of a barbed wire fence.

Then we could just place them in warm camps while we sign deals with different Muslim countries where the refugees could be granted permanent citizenship in return for money and/or services from us; or we just keep them there until the return conditions are met in their home countries.

It is not their fault that we failed for decades to weed out the criminals among the immigrants or is it?

In terms of integration, weeding out criminals is not going to help that much.

Though I think it should be pointed out that part of the problem is that some things that are both criminal and considered unacceptable here might not be criminal, or at least not socially unacceptable, in the places where some immigrants come from. Even without this, we'd often (most of the time?) try to weed out those who might break the law in the future (or rather: the ones who are at least this likely to break the law in the future). Good luck with this.

Fixed it. Unless you want to convince me that the far left aka antifa is in favor of being spied upon all the time.

I wasn't talking about those guys (I haven't accused them of rationality at this point). Rather, I was thinking of more...shall we say, ordinary, people - of whom plenty are in favour of mass immigration.

[Husar]

Then we could just place them in warm camps while we sign deals with different Muslim countries where the refugees could be granted permanent citizenship in return for money and/or services from us; or we just keep them there until the return conditions are met in their home countries.

That might be feasible if the conflict in their home countries could be reasonably said to be over soon. Keeping people in "temporary" camps for 5+ years may not be the best idea however.

In terms of integration, weeding out criminals is not going to help that much.

Though I think it should be pointed out that part of the problem is that some things that are both criminal and considered unacceptable here might not be criminal, or at least not socially unacceptable, in the places where some immigrants come from. Even without this, we'd often (most of the time?) try to weed out those who might break the law in the future (or rather: the ones who are at least this likely to break the law in the future). Good luck with this.

Well, with proper integration, fewer of them may turn into criminals in the first place. At the moment they're not allowed to do anything for several months after arrival, unemployment etc. can drive people crazy, especially if it made them go on a crazy journey in the first place in the hopes of getting a job. One idea I liked was that they will be instructed upon arrival that the German courses are mandatory, that they have to take care of their homes here, including cleaning the toilets etc. and are required to do certain community work in return for the shelter etc. they receive here. Failure to comply would lead to a swift deportation.

Deportation is difficult because deportation to a war zone is illegal, but then again if you actually did deport them to Syria, maybe fewer north africans would claim to be from there and then misbehave...

As for weeding out future misbehavers, you usually do most of that by integrating them properly as said above.

And yes, this is hard to do because we already create more poor of our own every year whom we slowly disintegrate from our own society, that doesn't make it easier to integrate new poor people as there are no jobs etc. to be taken.
Then again, if the world were a fair place, maybe they'd see no need to migrate here in the first place.

[Viking]

That might be feasible if the conflict in their home countries could be reasonably said to be over soon. Keeping people in "temporary" camps for 5+ years may not be the best idea however.

That's why we could also buy citizenship for the migrants in other countries and deport them there. That way, the camps could be depleted gradually.

If that doesn't work out, we can make the peace in their home country instead of waiting for it, and then deport. Repeat as necessary, until they realise they shouldn't be fighting each other.

Well, with proper integration, fewer of them may turn into criminals in the first place.

That "proper integration" may itself be impossible was my initial point.

At the moment they're not allowed to do anything for several months after arrival, unemployment etc. can drive people crazy, especially if it made them go on a crazy journey in the first place in the hopes of getting a job. One idea I liked was that they will be instructed upon arrival that the German courses are mandatory, that they have to take care of their homes here, including cleaning the toilets etc. and are required to do certain community work in return for the shelter etc. they receive here. Failure to comply would lead to a swift deportation.

Many or most jihadists and terrorists from the West were born with Western citizenship, they didn't have to wait for anything.

[Montmorency]

we can make the peace in their home country instead of waiting for it

UN occupation is a pleasing idea in theory. While we're at it, can we please exchange Eastern Ukraine for Neo-Prussia? We shouldn't tolerate that sore thumb on the Baltic anymore.