Support NeoGAF

[Drazgul]

it's about wealthy parts of the city, it's about not hunkering all of them down into ONE building complex.

that is a proven failure.... = France

And yet there's financial realities to consider when you allocate "free" housing (that someone still needs to pay for) to people. Plus everything that BrassDragon said.

 

[patapuf]

People aren't pawns you can just move around the board - these are fully fledged citizens in free societies who can live where they please.

The combination of higher birth rates, the effect of family reunions, the tendency to import spouses from the country of origin and white flight means a mixed neighbourhood quickly becomes ethnic despite the efforts of policy makers to fight this trend.

In the Netherlands, we have huge struggles to prevent exactly this problem and all policy instruments seem inadequate to the task or too slow to combat demographic trends.

It's easy to post on GAF saying we shouldn't have ghettos - reality doesn't care about good intentions.

The huge complexes for social housing, all in the same place, were also well meant but contributed to the problem of ghettoisation. It's not an easy problem to solve and it doesn't help places where they already exist, but i don't think it's too controversial to point out that that approach isn't optimal.

 

[BrassDragon]

Well, that's the issue. It's a bit of a cycle by now. Yes, part of it is discrimination, there is no denying that. But to break that cycle you need effort from all sides and you can't blame it all on racism and discrimination, considering other groups are more successful with this (for example the earlier mentioned Iranians in this thread). How you break that cycle is the big question, but if you can't honestly talk about the problem without getting into a debate about racism, then the solution is not getting any closer.

Anecdotal but... I've been involved with a few programs to get Moroccan youths out of the crime spiral by providing vocational training and a guaranteed job prospect.

The weird thing is that their fathers and grandfathers were extremely hard workers who came over as labourers and built comfortable pensions but hadn't been able to offer their sons enough of a headstart to move up in the world. The families were convinced that racism on the job market held their sons back and there was evidence of that when they applied for jobs (although let's be honest, the criminal record and poor school performance weren't endearing either.)

However, when we basically greased the wheels all the way to a full-time job, a large percentage rejected the offer because of, well, pride is the best word for it I guess - it was genuinely insulting to them that we tried to help them.

I'm not an expert so I have no idea how to tackle this but the cultural aspect, their notion of honour and manhood, has been a major stumbling block when we tried to do right by them.

Anyway there are success stories, of course there are. But a lot of smart people are genuinely baffled how to reach out to the failures.

 

[victreeb3l]

Because people from those western countries can see how objectively shit an Islamic culture is in comparison, so I think refusing to adopt those values is warranted in this scenario. Their culture is basically what's ruined the place they're fleeing from in the first place.

The fuck?

 

[Kite]

And according to the Islamic Community in Germany, 90% of prison inmates in Berlin are Muslim. (http://www.trendings.de/trending-topics/berliner-haftanstalten-90-prozent-moslems-422)

Why are German police racially profiling Muslims? Inmate populations have to be proportional to the general population.

 

[BrassDragon]

The huge complexes for social housing, all in the same place, were also well meant but contributed to the problem of ghettoisation. It's not an easy problem to solve and it doesn't help places where they already exist, but i don't think it's too controversial to point out that that approach isn't optimal.

Ahh, gotcha... but I think this way of housing development went the way of the dodo in the early 80s. Those projects weren't appealing to anyone and a nightmare for community building and security.

Still, the legacy continues.

 

[mnz]

And according to the Islamic Community in Germany, 90% of prison inmates in Berlin are Muslim. (http://www.trendings.de/trending-topics/berliner-haftanstalten-90-prozent-moslems-422)

I tried to look this up and it only leads to conspiracy websites.
The original source is apparently this: http://www.islamischereligionsgemeinschaft.org/index.php/IRG/IRG-Pressemitteilung-2010-02-07
Which doesn't exist anymore.

I call BS.

 

[moondoggerr]

They are one of the original groups of American immigration that built that country .... part of what American society is was influenced by the Irish, the same as the Italians, Jews etc.

Your comparison is flawed.

This comment is flawed.

They were NOT one of the original groups of American immigration. This is one of the most opposite statements ever put forward. When the Irish and Italians began turning up in New York City, the Northern European Protestants, who WERE the original white immigrants, were by and large disgusted. This is well documented. Italians and Irish were seen as being almost sub human and were frequently depicted as apes.

Ever wonder why the upper Midwest is so white? It's the first case of American White Flight - but they're running from the Irish and the Italians. Germans and Scandinavians were all, we can handle thirty below- but we can't handle the Irish.

Get out of here with your "original groups." Read a book.

 

[freeofgreed]

Categorization is more of an administrative matter, it defines whether they're allowed in or not, and what kind of legal status they have. It doesn't really change the expectations on social behaviour : once you're in, you're part of the local society. Even if you didn't really want to be there (still better be Danish than dead, right ?).

Yes it is which is why it doesn't make sense to categories refugees as immigrants as you have completetly different expectations of the two. A migrant is expected to assimilate completetly, and eventually be a net benefit economically. The same expectation aren't (shouldn't) be placed on refugees.

Europe has dealt with (some) previous immigration waves with success. France and Germany received mass amounts of immigrats from Italy and Spain after WW2 and Yugoslavia during the 90's. Those families are now fully integrated, not unlike many Polish people in the UK and a large amount of Romanians in Spain. It should be noted that both Spanish and Italian immigrants also faced significant discrimination at the time.

One of the chief differences is that while immigrants tend to be insular as it's easier to find support within a community, some Muslim immigrants are specially insular. Many French and Spanish citizens immigrating to Germany and France during the 50's and the 60's quickly married outside of their group and opened business catering the main population. One generation in their descendants considered themselves citizens of their parents' host country instead of Spanish or Italian. The same is also true for many Latinamerican immigrants today. Mixed couples are plentiful.

Meanwhile, Muslims, and particularly those from certain, less socially developed countries (Lebanese and Iranian Muslims have traditionally integrated themselves very well in their host countries, so did pre-civil war Syrian nationals) are much more socially conservative than your average immigrant. It's not that they don't talk the local language, which most of them understand to a decent degree, but that a sizeable amount of them don't venture outside their communities. It doesn't help that they are much more socially conservative -if not regressive- than their host countries, creating friction with their neighbours.

This is not something that hasn't been examined before. The social dynamics are a complete mess and not very comparable to any other group. A study from the University of Barcelona (IIRC) focusing on the immigrant population of Spain found that most young Muslim women want to marry a man outside of their group, and that those who do so not only become more religiously relaxed, but their children enjoy better academic success. Meanwhile, Muslim men vastly prefer to marry Muslim women. If they marry a local, they largely expect her to convert. Also, their offspring doesn't fare as well as that from Muslim women married to non-Muslim locals.

While there's a core of racists dead set in preventing proper integration, one of the biggest problems with the way we've been handling immigration for the past decades is the idiotic belief that throwing people into low income neighbourhoods and forgetting about them would be enough. After all, it worked during the 50's and the 60's, right? Nevermind the fact that jobs were plentiful back then and those low skilled immigrants were dead set in making their host countries their home instead of replicating the conditions from their homelands or simply fleeing away.

Different immigrant groups carry different attitudes and social conventions that need to be individually addressed. A Lebanese or Jordanian immigrant is probably vastly different from a Syrian, a Libyan or an Afghan refugee like the ones currently rushing towards Europe, and none of them can be expected to thrive like other immigrants did in the 60's.

The part about the gender preferences was very interesting didn't know that. I am curious as to what extent you mean they don't venture out of their communities? Surely they're going to school, shopping, eating out etc.. right? In the US many of our migrant/minority communities are very insular as well.

Turkish people in Germany have not been able to integrate particularly well.

Why do you think Pakistanis have been well integrated in the uk? As a group they are very poorly integrated, living in separate communities, importing spouses from the motherland and generally have values which strongly conflict with those of the mainstream population of the uk. They also have levels of educational attainment and financial attainment far below that of other immigrant groups (eg Indians/Chinese, Africans).

Fair enough but I brought up those comparison in relation to the statement that immigrants and minorities in the US were better integrated even though they face many of the same issues you posted.

 

[Alx]

Yes it is which is why it doesn't make sense to categories refugees as immigrants as you have completetly different expectations of the two. A migrant is expected to assimilate completetly, and eventually be a net benefit economically. The same expectation aren't (shouldn't) be placed on refugees.

Certainly not expectations of being a net benefit economically, but why not expectations of fitting in the society ? As I said, no matter the reason why you're in a country, if you live here you're following the local rules the best you can, even cultural ones. That's common curtesy, and especially towards a country with which you're in debt for saving your life.

 

[Pusherman]

Well, that's the issue. It's a bit of a cycle by now. Yes, part of it is discrimination, there is no denying that. But to break that cycle you need effort from all sides and you can't blame it all on racism and discrimination, considering other groups are more successful with this (for example the earlier mentioned Iranians in this thread). How you break that cycle is the big question, but if you can't honestly talk about the problem without getting into a debate about racism, then the solution is not getting any closer.

To give some of the stats: people with Dutch origins are suspect of a crime at a rate of 83 out of 10.000 people in 2015. For Moroccans that would be 464, while Turks are at 253. Other large groups would be from the Dutch Antilles (506) and Suriname (343), so it is not an exclusive thing towards just those groups.

In 2008, 52% of Moroccan youth between 15 and 25 have been suspect of a crime. Note that I am talking suspects, since in the Netherlands ethnicity of convicted criminals is not public as far as I know, so these are the numbers the media and research has to do with.

It's a tough issue, but the current public debate going on talks mostly in extremes (either you are racist wanting to throw anyone out, or a left wing nut wanting to give everyone free money and looking away). It's not a healthy debate anymore, so I don't see much coming out of politics in terms of solutions to fix these things.

Do keep in mind that social services in the US and Europe are a bit different. Over here in Holland you seriously don't need to do any crime if you are unemployed. The social systems are there to keep a roof over your head and food on the table.

I'm sorry if my posts are hard to read but I'm used to writing these on a PC and formatting on my ipad is a nightmare. Anyway, I never denied that Muslim minority groups are overrepresented in criminal and economical statistics. But what I did take issue with is the common reaction of putting the blame of such disproportional numbers on the minority groups themselves, especially with regard to Islamic communities. It is often implicitly, sometimes explicitly, suggested that the problems are largely to do with Islam or Arab/Middle-Eastern culture. But that's just not a reasonable conclusion to reach. In the Netherlands, Antillians are in many cases even more overrepresented than (muslim) Moroccans. The Turks, also muslim, are often the least represented of non-western minorities. And that doesn't even take into consideration the differences between refugees from Eritrea, Somalia and Iran and the Turkish and Moroccan guest-workers. So why is Islam often seen as the common denominator whenever the problems around integration are discussed? Segregated neighborhoods, higher rates of poverty, higher crime rates, higher unemployment, problems all non-western communities struggle with regardless of religion, all point towards failed government policy. Blaming what are in essence the primary victims of these problems is completely unfair and, as I said before, it's not something we do whenever we see similar problems in the US with regards to African Americans.

I don't know if I agree with you that the debate over here in the Netherlands is very polarized. I think the migration debate and politics in general have seen a significant move towards the right. As a part of the discussed minority I can honestly say that it almost always feel like people are discussing about us instead of with us. Too often the debate seems to be about whether 'we' (I feel stupid saying we because I'm basically an atheist speaking on behalf of all Dutch muslims) should even be here, instead of a debate about how best to improve the opportunities of all Dutch minorities.

 

[Nervous Sausage]

The fuck?

What's so wrong about what I said? Perhaps you wouldn't mind living in Iran for example if you were a female then, where taking off your headscarf in public will get you beat or arrested. Perhaps you'd like to be openly gay so that they can hang you from a crane in public while a crowd of people cheers on at your death. Maybe you'd enjoy living in Afghanistan or Pakistan where the raping of boys is commonplace and practically ingrained in their culture. We should be able to admit that some cultures are just plain terrible and have no place in the 21st century.

 

[Miles X]

immigrants don't defer to their new country's culture. They bring their culture with them because that is who they are. They are looking for a better life. They aren't looking to be Danish. This goes for all immigrants.

Assimilation will happen, but it will take a few generations and it will never be perfect assimilation because of religion.

The only sensible option for nations with immigrants is to accept that immigrants mean a multicultural society, that those cultures will have some influence on the dominant culture, but the dominant culture will always remain dominant.

Unless their 'culture' is progressive, fair and modern thinking, then they should fuck off.

Not good enough to say "Oh it's your culture to be homophobic/sexist, we'll just adjust/get used to that".

If you're moving to another country you should respect/follow the culture IMO.

 

[Necromanti]

We should be able to admit that some cultures are just plain terrible and have no place in the 21st century.

While it's reprehensible that a few Western cultures birthed foreign policies that involved destabilizing several regions and strongly contributing to some of the political and cultural climates that you mentioned, I don't know how I'd feel about wiping them out wholesale.

 

[Nervous Sausage]

While it's reprehensible that a few Western cultures birthed foreign policies that involved destabilizing several regions and strongly contributing to some of the political and cultural climates that you mentioned, I don't know how I'd feel about wiping them out wholesale.

Please, most of the middle east would be a theocratic basket case regardless of Western intervention.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

Unless their 'culture' is progressive, fair and modern thinking, then they should fuck off.

Not good enough to say "Oh it's your culture to be homophobic/sexist, we'll just adjust/get used to that".

If you're moving to another country you should respect/follow the culture IMO.

I'm just gonna leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4Zdx97A63s

So much for standing against homophobic/sexist huh?

 

[Funky Papa]

The part about the gender preferences was very interesting didn't know that. I am curious as to what extent you mean they don't venture out of their communities? Surely they're going to school, shopping, eating out etc.. right? In the US many of our migrant/minority communities are very insular as well.

Conservative ones (which are not a tiny, Amish-like amount of people) dislike public education as it teaches Western values, which can turn into an issue when schools these days are making an effort to teach small kids respect towards women and gay people. They prefer to teach their kids at the mosque, which are usually the social centre of the community.

Regarding mixed marriages I think it's interesting to note that another Spanish study shows that Moroccans and Romanians are the less amenable towards the notion of exogenous marriage. Romanians are a peculiar group in the sense that most of them integrate fairly well, yet they are shockingly conservative, very religious and tend to marry other Romanian immigrants. Unlike so many North African and Middle Eastern immigrants, however, their children tend to identify themselves as Spaniards and are much, much more socially liberal than their parents. Although European, they share quite a bit with many Latin American immigrants in that regard.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I'm sorry if my posts are hard to read but I'm used to writing these on a PC and formatting on my ipad is a nightmare. Anyway, I never denied that Muslim minority groups are overrepresented in criminal and economical statistics. But what I did take issue with is the common reaction of putting the blame of such disproportional numbers on the minority groups themselves, especially with regard to Islamic communities. It is often implicitly, sometimes explicitly, suggested that the problems are largely to do with Islam or Arab/Middle-Eastern culture. But that's just not a reasonable conclusion to reach. In the Netherlands, Antillians are in many cases even more overrepresented than (muslim) Moroccans. The Turks, also muslim, are often the least represented of non-western minorities. And that doesn't even take into consideration the differences between refugees from Eritrea, Somalia and Iran and the Turkish and Moroccan guest-workers. So why is Islam often seen as the common denominator whenever the problems around integration are discussed? Segregated neighborhoods, higher rates of poverty, higher crime rates, higher unemployment, problems all non-western communities struggle with regardless of religion, all point towards failed government policy. Blaming what are in essence the primary victims of these problems is completely unfair and, as I said before, it's not something we do whenever we see similar problems in the US with regards to African Americans.

I don't know if I agree with you that the debate over here in the Netherlands is very polarized. I think the migration debate and politics in general have seen a significant move towards the right. As a part of the discussed minority I can honestly say that it almost always feel like people are discussing about us instead of with us. Too often the debate seems to be about whether 'we' (I feel stupid saying we because I'm basically an atheist speaking on behalf of all Dutch muslims) should even be here, instead of a debate about how best to improve the opportunities of all Dutch minorities.

I don't think Islam leads directly towards more crime or anything. It is just that fundamentalist interpretations of Islam have some pretty problematic views which we should not tolerate (as do other religions, but in Western Europe that has mostly been dealt with and no longer causes large problems). So when that influences people, they will be even more separate from the rest of society, resulting in more unemployment, poverty, etc.

I don't believe Muslims themselves are a problem, as people like Wilders stupidly proclaim. But the influence of very conservative and fundamentalist branches is certainly something we should not want, and is something I have heard Muslims in politics and media warn about also (for example Marcouch about Salafism in Amsterdam earlier this year at http://www.at5.nl/artikelen/152731/marcouch_amsterdam_onderschat_gevaar_salafisme). Those things are preached behind closed doors, while parents of the youth might not even be aware of it.

It's a complex puzzle influenced by a lot of things, including racism, discrimination, poverty, government policy, but also in part peoples background, culture and religion. The debate certainly has shifted towards the right. But it is still a polarizing debate. Only look at some of the protests that went on about the asylum centers last year.

As for media discussions, you are right that there are very little actual Muslims sitting at the table sharing their views. I do appreciate Rotterdam mayor Aboutaleb speaking out a lot. But he is one of the few getting the spotlight.

I'm just gonna leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4Zdx97A63s

So much for standing against homophobic/sexist huh?

What does Trump and his supporters have to do with a debate about the integration of Muslims in Europe?

 

[Piecake]

This is nonsense. I immigrated to my current country because I feel their values match mine a lot more than my previous country. I want the freedom of sexuality, speech, and media.

Then that was part of your culture, ideology and core identity. That is my point. People aren't going to change, or change all that much when they migrant to a new place. Expecting that they do is a fantasy.

 

[eot]

This' true?

Here in Sweden I know it isn't frowned upon to cross the street if you don't see any cars coming from any direction. You can't however just start walking anyway during a rush hour as people seem to do in the middle east and expect people be okay with you weaving between cars, that I know at least will stress people the fuck out here.

I think it is very expected though that when you move to a country, you're supposed to try and adapt to the culture of that country when it comes to behavioural norms and social rules.

I've always heard that it's actually legal in Sweden as long as you're not hindering traffic. I know it is in Norway too. I'm in Austria right now and waiting for a green light with no cars around sucks.

 

[Dalibor68]

Then that was part of your culture, ideology and core identity. That is my point. People aren't going to change, or change all that much when they migrant to a new place. Expecting that they do is a fantasy.

If that was the case then many migrants would have no place in a western society.

 

[patapuf]

Then that was part of your culture, ideology and core identity. That is my point. People aren't going to change, or change all that much when they migrant to a new place. Expecting that they do is a fantasy.

That's not true, individually and on a macro scale. People and cultures change all the time.

We can't make every immigrant a progressive, it's not like every western European is one btw., but there's approaches that facilitate integration and approaches that foster segregation. We obviously want to avoid segregation, and if immigrants don't feel segregated, it's also easier to crack down on the nutjobs that give them a bad name.

Obviously, scale, money ect. are limiting factors, and it's ok to expect immigrants to do their part. But the discussions is way too focused on "are they bad people?", as if that would give any meaningful answer.

 

[RoadHazard]

I've always heard that it's actually legal in Sweden as long as you're not hindering traffic. I know it is in Norway too. I'm in Austria right now and waiting for a green light with no cars around sucks.

Walking a red light is technically prohibited here in Sweden, but there's no fine or anything for doing it. You can be fined for being reckless in traffic if you do it in a dangerous way, but as long as there are no cars around I don't think anything can happen.

 

[Don'tBeWeird]

What's so wrong about what I said? Perhaps you wouldn't mind living in Iran for example if you were a female then, where taking off your headscarf in public will get you beat or arrested. Perhaps you'd like to be openly gay so that they can hang you from a crane in public while a crowd of people cheers on at your death. Maybe you'd enjoy living in Afghanistan or Pakistan where the raping of boys is commonplace and practically ingrained in their culture. We should be able to admit that some cultures are just plain terrible and have no place in the 21st century.

"Islamic culture" is where you went wrong.

Muslims live in various countries and societies. There is no monolithic cultural continuity between countries that are predominantly Islamic. The traditions and lifestyle of Indonesians will differ from people living Pakistan, or people living in Turkey. You're suggesting that "raping of boys" is somehow part of Islamic culture? Come on, son.

Also, can I get a source on the statistics where it shows raping of boys is "commonplace" in Pakistan?

 

[Darth Ghandi]

I don't think Islam leads directly towards more crime or anything. It is just that fundamentalist interpretations of Islam have some pretty problematic views which we should not tolerate (as do other religions, but in Western Europe that has mostly been dealt with and no longer causes large problems). So when that influences people, they will be even more separate from the rest of society, resulting in more unemployment, poverty, etc.

I don't believe Muslims themselves are a problem, as people like Wilders stupidly proclaim. But the influence of very conservative and fundamentalist branches is certainly something we should not want, and is something I have heard Muslims in politics and media warn about also (for example Marcouch about Salafism in Amsterdam earlier this year at http://www.at5.nl/artikelen/152731/marcouch_amsterdam_onderschat_gevaar_salafisme). Those things are preached behind closed doors, while parents of the youth might not even be aware of it.

It's a complex puzzle influenced by a lot of things, including racism, discrimination, poverty, government policy, but also in part peoples background, culture and religion. The debate certainly has shifted towards the right. But it is still a polarizing debate. Only look at some of the protests that went on about the asylum centers last year.

As for media discussions, you are right that there are very little actual Muslims sitting at the table sharing their views. I do appreciate Rotterdam mayor Aboutaleb speaking out a lot. But he is one of the few getting the spotlight.


What does Drumpf and his supporters have to do with a debate about the integration of Muslims in Europe?

Regarding the Drumpf part is me saying that the people who vote for xonophobic parties are mostly the ones who staunchly oppose things like feminism and LGBTQ rights.

Well first of equating all Islam as problematic is strange since there are as many types of Islam.
Granted I'm no fan of Saudi wahhabism (or Saudi Arabia for that cause) but I don't think all forms of Islam are like wahhabism.
Granted many POC are from a lower socioeconomic background but that doesn't mean that they aren't allowed to flee from war and oppression.
We have spoken about this before and you are adamant that the Muslims or POC are the ones who need education about progressive issues but you always leave out the white cis gendered people who spout the exact same shit (see Drumph video, and I'm sure I can find something similar with rightwing EU parties).
I've seen you here before using the cultural and religious circumstances as a bat and I'm sick of it.
I have tried to communicate that you should try and make some contact with said people who do real work with said oppressed groups, but you are never interested.
I'm mostly sick of is in fact you don't present a solution past looking at "background, culture and religion."

I'm starting to think you aren't arguing in good faith.

 

[kcp12304]

What's so wrong about what I said? Perhaps you wouldn't mind living in Iran for example if you were a female then, where taking off your headscarf in public will get you beat or arrested. Perhaps you'd like to be openly gay so that they can hang you from a crane in public while a crowd of people cheers on at your death. Maybe you'd enjoy living in Afghanistan or Pakistan where the raping of boys is commonplace and practically ingrained in their culture. We should be able to admit that some cultures are just plain terrible and have no place in the 21st century.

It's important not to just generalize entire cultures and countries as one monolith. The culture of Lebanon is different than the culture of Iran which is different from the culture of Indonesia which is different from the culture of Oman. Even the culture within a country is not a monolith. A women could wear a bikini at a Cairo beach but would feel out of place in a rural Egyptian village. Countries and cultures are complicated and things change for good or bad. Afghanistan, for example, was much more liberal place for women in the pre-Taliban days.

The religious & political beliefs aren't the same between and within countries either. I've seen Iranian women complain about the headscarf mandate, Saudi gays talk about their struggles, Saudi feminists fighting for the right to drive, and young party goers dance the night away in a Damascus nightclub. There are of course bad beliefs in various cultures, religious ideologies, and political beliefs but these folks and others are part of the culture too and are trying to change it. Are these all part of the dirty savages we don't want pouring into our countries?

 

[Lime]

In Denmark it has become acceptable in the last 15 years or so to be racist and hypocritical. The hateful shit I see being spouted in public discourse and in the media as legitimate and acceptable points of view are just frightening and I have no idea how anyone can be so hateful against brown people.

“Freedom of speech is now interpreted as freedom to say anything hateful,” said Julie Jeeg, a law student who volunteers with an antiracism group. “Denmark is closing in on itself. People are retreating inward

This is so true.

 

[Jumeira]

If that was the case then many migrants would have no place in a western society.

In the eyes of xenophobes youd be right, in the eyes of people that believe in western values and freedoms Id disagree.

 

[Dalibor68]

In the eyes of xenophobes youd be right, in the eyes of people that believe in western values and freedoms Id disagree.

How does that make any sense? If those (how many or little they may be) hardcore conversative muslims (or for the sake of this argument, whichever religion you like) coming here are not going to change and we should not expect them to, how does that strengthen western values and freedom? That's illogical.

 

[Piecake]

If that was the case then many migrants would have no place in a western society.

That's not true, individually and on a macro scale. People and cultures change all the time.

We can't make every immigrant a progressive, it's not like every western European is one btw., but there's approaches that facilitate integration and approaches that foster segregation. We obviously want to avoid segregation, and if immigrants don't feel segregated, it's also easier to crack down on the nutjobs that give them a bad name.

Obviously, scale, money ect. are limiting factors, and it's ok to expect immigrants to do their part. But the discussions is way too focused on "are they bad people?", as if that would give any meaningful answer.

You just need to have a society that is accepting of cultural differences. Assimilation doesn't happen in the first generation. It happens in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th.

 

[Dalibor68]

You just need to have a society that is accepting of cultural differences. Assimilation doesn't happen in the first generation. It happens in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th.

Reality in many european countries begs to differ. People here view themselves as turks, bosnians, chechens and what not, not as austrians. Being an austrian is "lame", showing your origin country is "cool"/a sign of status. And those(except for maybe in the case of chechens because most of them haven't been here that long) are not first generation kids.

 

[Pancake Mix]

So those damn Irish should stop celebrating that pagan St. Patrick holiday and convert away from their false Romanism and embrace the true divine grace of God, right?

Not comparable at all. To this day there's also a sizable minority of English Catholics as well. To compare the difference between Irish and English culture to the differences between the indigenous Danish and various devout Muslim cultures that will never assimilate as such is absolutely absurd.

 

[Piecake]

Reality in many european countries begs to differ.

Then many European countries must suck at accepting cultural differences. While not perfect, that is basically how things work in Canada and the United States.

 

[Dalibor68]

Then many European countries must suck at accepting cultural differences. While not perfect, that is basically how things work in Canada and the United States.

When these "cultural differences" show record unemployment especcially of women, higher crime rates etc then it's not just "accepting cultural difference". And again, this is not comparable to North America. I'm not sure if it was this thread of the one about the local german elections, but FunkyPapa explained the difference very well.

 

[Pancake Mix]

Then many European countries must suck at accepting cultural differences. While not perfect, that is basically how things work in Canada and the United States.

You really think those Middle Eastern countries would be remotely accepting in reverse?

Also, women being told not to work (for example) is not a cultural difference that should happen....

 

[mnz]

Then many European countries must suck at accepting cultural differences. While not perfect, that is basically how things work in Canada and the United States.

Completely different immigration policies and origins of migration. But America Fuck Yeah, of course.

 

[Jumeira]

How does that make any sense? If those (how many or little they may be) hardcore conversative muslims (or for the sake of this argument, whichever religion you like) coming here are not going to change and we should not expect them to, how does that strengthen western values and freedom? That's illogical.

It's quite simple, your mistake is that your focusing on extreme examples as the main representation for migrants. Most will not change but adopt practices, we, in the West allow them the freedom to do what they choose as long as it's within the limits of our laws.

 

[Piecake]

When these "cultural differences" show record unemployment especcially of women, higher crime rates etc then it's not just "accepting cultural difference". And again, this is not comparable to North America. I'm not sure if it was this thread of the one about the local german elections, but FunkyPapa explained the difference very well.

No, that is usually a sign of discrimination and/or low levels of education. As for your example about non-ethnic Austrians identifying with their ancestor's homeland, do Austrians think of non-ethnic Austrians as Austrians? If most people you meet don't consider you Austrian then it is a natural defense mechanism to say 'fuck these people' and take up another identity. They likely aren't doing it because its 'cool'. They are likely doing it because society doesn't accept them as actually Austrian.

You really think those Middle Eastern countries would be remotely accepting in reverse?

Also, women being told not to work is not a cultural difference that should happen....

No, of course not.

Good luck changing that. Forcing people to change isn't going to happen. Western society was basically like that before 1970 as well. Western society changed. Immigrants can change, but again, it is going to take a generation or two. And those generations need to feel that they are a part of their nation's society. They need to feel like they belong. If they feel like they belong then they are likely to adopt the values and ideals of their nation. If they don't, they are going to look elsewhere.

 

[kirblar]

"Projects" don't work, whether it's your own citizens or refugees, not past a temporary initial setup- you need to get a subsidized housing voucher setup in the long term.

 

[Pancake Mix]

No, of course not.

Good luck changing that. Forcing people to change isn't going to happen. Western society was basically like that before 1970 as well. Western society changed. Immigrants can change, but again, it is going to take a generation or two. And those generations need to feel that they are a part of their nation's society. They need to feel like they belong. If they feel like they belong then they are likely to adopt the values and ideals of their nation. If they don't, they are going to look elsewhere.

So in other words it's not going to happen and we're stuck in this vicious cycle.

 

[Piecake]

Completely different immigration policies and origins of migration. But America Fuck Yeah, of course.

He said that was reality and I provided examples where it isnt. But yes, dismiss that as simple America fuck yea thinking.

 

[kcp12304]

So in other words it's not going to happen and we're stuck in this vicious cycle.

It can and there are examples of it working. It just takes time. We need good and proactive policy to face these difficult problems. Being a pessimistic or angry isn't going to help. If all someone cares about is venting then they don't care about genuinely addressing the problem. There are people working on solutions and actively trying to help.

 

[Piecake]

So in other words it's not going to happen and we're stuck in this vicious cycle.

If you think making immigrants feel that they are a part of your society is an arduous and impossible task, then yes, you are fucked.

 

[Jumeira]

When these "cultural differences" show record unemployment especcially of women, higher crime rates etc then it's not just "accepting cultural difference". And again, this is not comparable to North America. I'm not sure if it was this thread of the one about the local german elections, but FunkyPapa explained the difference very well.

That's not cultural, communities don't embed low achievement and crime into a cultural norm, that's almost always down to poor education and failed programs to help these communities. Low unemployment of women? Again is this what youve been led to believe with internet articles or government figures?

 

[Dalibor68]

That's not cultural, communities don't embed low achievement and crime into a cultural norm, that's almost always down to poor education and failed programs to help these communities. Low unemployment of women? Again is this what youve been led to believe with internet articles or government figures?

The latter.

75% of refugees looking for work are men:
http://www.ams.at/_docs/001_spezialthema_0716.pdf (Page 2, second red sentence and text below)

Occupation rates (2015):

Women without migration background - 70%
Women with EU migration background - 68% (average)
Women with turkish migration background - 42%

http://www.integrationsfonds.at/fileadmin/content/migrationintegration-2016.pdf (Page 55 upper right graphic)

 

[Rest]

I really don't understand this refusal to have mutual cultural integration. Maybe that's just my Americanness, but culture only advances when new ideas are introduced and shared. A culture that refuses outside ideas and influences stagnates.

 

[Dalibor68]

Maybe that's just my Americanness, but culture only advances when new ideas are introduced and shared.

Which new ideas does the culture of Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Somalia for example introduce and share that is compatible with western society? Honestly curious.

 

[Darth Ghandi]

The latter.

75% of refugees looking for work are men:
http://www.ams.at/_docs/001_spezialthema_0716.pdf (Page 2, second red sentence and text below)

Occupation rates (2015):

Women without migration background - 70%
Women with EU migration background - 68% (average)
Women with turkish migration background - 42%

http://www.integrationsfonds.at/fileadmin/content/migrationintegration-2016.pdf (Page 55 upper right graphic)

Wow, who would have thought that the people the furthest down on the socioeconomic ladder would be less employed.

 

[Dalibor68]

Wow, who would have thought that the people the furthest down on the socioeconomic ladder would be less employed.

Good job with the shitposting, completely ignoring the points made.

The occupation difference between men/women are 7% on austrians without migration background(77% vs 70%), 11% with EU-intern migration(79% vs 68%). Between men/women of turkish origin it is 23% (65% vs 42%).

 

[kruis]

building enclaves is a mistake, putting all migrants in one part of the city only is a mistake.

the best way to integrate is to NOT place them in housing apartment projects of just migrants

you got to mix them up with general population to get integration to work

the European model is a failure when they repeat the French mistake of suburb apartment complexes away from the city center

No country is building enclaves just for immigrants. What happens is that most immigrants from non western countries have low paying jobs or they live on welfare, so they live where housing is cheap. So they all move to the cheapest neighborhoods in a city and once they become entrenched there, you'll find islamic schools and halal butcher, which attracts even more of their countrymen. Ghetto forming is a natural process that city planners are unable to stop.