IMMIGRATION thread

[Pannonian]

Eastern Europeans don't really have to adapt at all, that's the difference. The biggest issue would be figuring out the rules of cricket. That is worth blowing something up.

They also wouldn't suffer from a bias (ok, they would, but to a much lesser extent). If some start voting Labour, it would be assumed that it is their choice. There wouldn't be an outcry of those dirty eastern commies coming to ruin our precious capitalist UK, aside from maybe a few right wing nut jobs no one would take seriously.

But, answer me this, please. Let's say I apply for job in UK and get it. I spend 10 years in UK, figure out I like it there and apply for citizenship and get it. A year from that there's a referendum on the monarchy. I would have the legal right, but would I have the moral right to vote on that referendum?

If they don't really have to adapt at all, then isn't it all the better? It solves the problem you pose of an ageing population, and the intake doesn't need to adapt. Of all those I've met, I've also not met one who's talked lovingly of their previous homes, and wanting to bring their previous life into this present one. Quite the contrary. And if they want to vote Labour or any other mainstream political party, that's their choice too (when they eventually gain the right to vote). I'd be happy too if UK Muslims debate the health service and means of funding it. That's standard British political discourse. I'm not happy when they raise a racket about bringing in Sharia, or other elements of a foreign state. If their loyalty is to another state, they can go to it.

On the last bit, you sound like you have higher standards than me. Anyone who is eligible to vote can vote. I care not what they do with the vote. If you're loyal to the idea of Britain, then that's as much Britishness as I can demand of you.

[Sarmatian]

What do you think yourselve on that

You need to start debunking those points. We haven't moved passed the first, yet.

If they don't really have to adapt at all, then isn't it all the better? It solves the problem you pose of an ageing population, and the intake doesn't need to adapt.

Does it? What happens with those eastern European countries? There's no youth bulge there, they have the same problem as the rest of Europe. It only intensifies the problem there, and what happens in one part of Europe affects the entire continent.

Of all those I've met, I've also not met one who's talked lovingly of their previous homes, and wanting to bring their previous life into this present one. Quite the contrary. And if they want to vote Labour or any other mainstream political party, that's their choice too (when they eventually gain the right to vote). I'd be happy too if UK Muslims debate the health service and means of funding it. That's standard British political discourse. I'm not happy when they raise a racket about bringing in Sharia, or other elements of a foreign state. If their loyalty is to another state, they can go to it.

On the last bit, you sound like you have higher standards than me. Anyone who is eligible to vote can vote. I care not what they do with the vote. If you're loyal to the idea of Britain, then that's as much Britishness as I can demand of you.

But what is the idea of Britain? To some, the idea of Britain is tied to the idea of monarchy. After I gain the citizenship, how much can I "change" Britain before I cross the line? Is that line at the same place for me and for the Duke of Norfolk?

[Pannonian]

You need to start debunking those points. We haven't moved passed the first, yet.

Does it? What happens with those eastern European countries? There's no youth bulge there, they have the same problem as the rest of Europe. It only intensifies the problem there, and what happens in one part of Europe affects the entire continent.

But what is the idea of Britain? To some, the idea of Britain is tied to the idea of monarchy. After I gain the citizenship, how much can I "change" Britain before I cross the line? Is that line at the same place for me and for the Duke of Norfolk?

You seek to fudge a line where the line is bloody clear for Islamists. Britain doesn't ask much of its people to be considered satisfactorily British. There is quite some degree of latitude in political disagreement that the identity allow. What Islamists do is distance themselves as much from this identity as they can. There are those who actively fight against Britain. In previous times, they would have been hanged or shot for treason. Then there are those who cheer them on. In previous times they would have been interned as a threat to the country's security.

This is what I'm talking about when I refer to bleeding heart liberals and the ingrainment of liberal values in our society. The latter is good, within reason. But not when it's done by the former, who lay the blame for everything on the majority culture, and who will excuse each and every infringement by the minority, using legalistic arguments to fuzz what should be abundantly clear to anyone who takes a step back to see the whole picture.

[Fragony]

You need to start debunking those points. We haven't moved passed the first, yet.



Does it? What happens with those eastern European countries? There's no youth bulge there, they have the same problem as the rest of Europe. It only intensifies the problem there, and what happens in one part of Europe affects the entire continent.



But what is the idea of Britain? To some, the idea of Britain is tied to the idea of monarchy. After I gain the citizenship, how much can I "change" Britain before I cross the line? Is that line at the same place for me and for the Duke of Norfolk?

Ask directly and I will deliver, not dancing any tango on staccato

[Pannonian]

As a marker of how distinct the line is that Sarmatian is trying to legalistically fuzz, ISIS told a son to execute his own mother for urging him to leave the state. Anyone who supports such a state is in no way satisfactorily British, no matter how anyone tries to fudge the line and equate them with us.

[Fragony]

As a marker of how distinct the line is that Sarmatian is trying to legalistically fuzz, ISIS told a son to execute his own mother for urging him to leave the state. Anyone who supports such a state is in no way satisfactorily British, no matter how anyone tries to fudge the line and equate them with us.

Kinda rediculous to assume Samartarian supports or excuses that

I don't like rap but kinda reminds me of this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8yKTuvRmPE

[Gilrandir]

It wasn't safe before either, but noone cared. There were hand grenade attacks between rivalling biker gangs, mass gatherings of said biker gangs with huge police protection, human trafficking at a huge scale, mafia executions in cities, professional eastern european burglar gangs that would rob homes during broad daylight, mafia families from the balkans and levant that owned entire streets, engaged in drug trafficking and had feuds with each other openly on the streets and yet we kept electing Merkel and friends over and over who saved us so much money by reducing police budgets...

WHY DO YOU KEEP LIVING IN SUCH A HORRIBLE PLACE????

But one can hardly deny that such an unsafe country turned into yet unsafer.

No, because once he's settled in and legally allowed to live and work in Germany, he can arrange for his family to come the normal way, a boat or a plane and he will have the financial means to accomplish it.

Most of them seem to intend to live on social payments which rules out the financial means to bring the family in. And if they do it would be another strain for the country's budgets.

Some of them do. The rest is seeing what those who do know choose as their destination and follow suit.

Sounds like a mindless herd following an ill-informed guide. There should be some informational campaign to divert the stream elsewhere.

- Europe has an aging, dwindling population. If it weren't for immigration, that would've been a very, very serious problem by now.

- Immigration is a necessity for economies in Europe to be stable.

It seems like Europe must choose between what it MIGHT have economy-wise and what it IS HAVING security-wise.

-
- A million refugees isn't overwhelming number for Europe and won't disrupt the overall balance of religions while it would impact positively the demographics of almost all European countries

It is not about religion, it is about security and value gap.

Kinda rediculous to assume Samartarian supports or excuses that

I suggest holding a contest on the most ridiculous distortion of Sarmatian's name. So far we have Sarmation and Samartarian. Any more ideas?

[Husar]

WHY DO YOU KEEP LIVING IN SUCH A HORRIBLE PLACE????

THE BRITISH AND UKRAINIANS CALL IT A SAFE COUNTRY AND SAY I MUST STAY!!!