Europe-Middle East-Africa Refugee Crisis General Thread

[ingemann]

Xenophobia isn't inherent to "human nature", as Politicus disturbingly seems to believe. Societies can be educated to accept, and even actively promote, multiculturalism, if thier political and cultural leaders make the effort to endorse it, instead of pandering to irrational fears.

They should first explain what multiculturalism is though. Different cultures living side by side or the incorporation of non-native cultures into the dominant one? I.e. forcing people from different cultural backgrounds to accep the basic tenets of our western culture: freedom of speech and religion, gender equality... If it's the latter, I can most certainly sign up to that. The former - not exactly.

I think it's also perfectly acceptable for Danes to feel that their homeland should be the "Land of Danes" rather than the "Land of people who happen to live in Denmark." We tend to bemoan the disappearance of cultures and languages but when it comes to European cultures, efforts to preserve it are somehow frowned upon. Go figure.

How is this any different than saying "Europe for the Europeans" or "Diversity = White Genocide"?

While I suspect you're hopeless cause (based on your post below the one I quotes) I'm going to answer anyway. Saying that a national state should be the home of the nation/people which it's based on, are like saying that children in American school should be taught English, they're free to have classes in other languages, but English should be taught. While saying " "Europe for the Europeans" or "Diversity = White Genocide" " are like saying it should be illegal to have classes in other languages at all.

I know this distinction are likely lost on you, but hope shines eternal.

[ingemann]

Xenophobia isn't inherent to "human nature", as Politicus disturbingly seems to believe. Societies can be educated to accept, and even actively promote, multiculturalism, if thier political and cultural leaders make the effort to endorse it, instead of pandering to irrational fears.

They should first explain what multiculturalism is though. Different cultures living side by side or the incorporation of non-native cultures into the dominant one? I.e. forcing people from different cultural backgrounds to accep the basic tenets of our western culture: freedom of speech and religion, gender equality... If it's the latter, I can most certainly sign up to that. The former - not exactly.

I think it's also perfectly acceptable for Danes to feel that their homeland should be the "Land of Danes" rather than the "Land of people who happen to live in Denmark." We tend to bemoan the disappearance of cultures and languages but when it comes to European cultures, efforts to preserve it are somehow frowned upon. Go figure.

How is this any different than saying "Europe for the Europeans" or "Diversity = White Genocide"?

While I suspect you're hopeless cause (based on your post below the one I quotes) I'm going to answer anyway. Saying that a national state should be the home of the nation/people which it's based on, are like saying that children in American school should be taught English, they're free to have classes in other languages, but English should be taught. While saying " "Europe for the Europeans" or "Diversity = White Genocide" " are like saying it should be illegal to have classes in other languages at all.

I know this distinction are likely lost on you, but hope shines eternal.

It was the case in French until a few decades ago.

I don't think that French immigration policies or treatment of minorities are something anybody think should be adopted. As for Denmark we had never had similar policies, exceptt for on the Faroe in the early 19th century, while we still thought that it was a dialect of Danish.

[ingemann]

ITT: Middle class White people living in liberal democracies lecturing poor nonwhite people living in authoritarian regimes on what they should do.

They're free to live like they want... Elsewhere.

[ingemann]

Again it comes to this issue being treated as one glob. When each situation is triggered by different things, the people are leaving for different reasons. This is part of the reason why I'm finding the conflation of all people fleeing into one mass so grating.

This is hilarious, one side have generalised these people into one large unified faceless mass, and it's not the one side which you blame for it.

[ingemann]

If we make a quota for how the refugees are split, it means that if someone try to leave one EU country for another, they can be deported back to the first country. Deportations between different EU countries are fully legal, if people are non-EU citizens and only have a residence permits in one country, and they can't seek asylum as any EU country is seen as safe.

[ingemann]

Okay people take a deep breath and relax. We're not on the way to turn Europe into Syria, CAR or another wartorn hell hole. There's not enough of these refugees, not even if all of them fled to Europe tomorrow.

That doesn't mean that I think this is good news, the influx of these people are bad for our way of life, but that because this influx may force major cuts in our welfare states and we have to deal with increased criminality, poverty and violence, but at no time have I feared for the European states as national states, just because of the influx of less than a million people annual. Of course it's really bad news if you're a Jew living in a major European city, but for the rest of us we're not under any kind of existential threat, the worst case are just that our future will be a little sh**ttier.

[ingemann]

I am amazed by how David generally seems to be pretty good and objective in his analysis of events, even being able to put his own views aside, until Jews are brought up and he turns into a crazy person.

Well I personal get why David is worried. This kind of immigration will likely have relative little effect on me, I have my own pension savings, and the opportunity to move away from the capital to a rural area when I get old. So many of the worst aspect of this immigration will not hit me. But European Jews, their communities mostly lies in the major cities, if they want to take daily part in their communities, they needto some degree to live in the major cities, often in areas where some of the least integrated Muslims also live. They're among the people who are hit the hardest by this, also the majority begin to not take claim about antisemitism serious anymore, because all of them are now blamed on Muslims. So Jews both have to deal with living among a very anti-Jewish minority group, while at the same time antisemitism among the majority have become hidden, because the majority can no longer see it.

[ingemann]

Except that the Hungarian government has made it pretty clear that refugees are not welcome. And while its true that a refugee does not have an inherent right to pick where they end up, its entirely understandable that there's an overwhelming towards trying to get to somewhere where they assume they will be safest/most welcome/etc.

Of course it's understandable, but it doesn't change the fact that the refugees reaching Greece, Hungary, Germany etc. are already safe before. This is not Volkdeutsches fleeing ahead of pillaging army, it's not Jews fleeing a genocidal regime. It's people seeking a better way of life and there's nothing wrong with that, just as there's nothing wrong with saying no to them.

[ingemann]

Well, as long as they're in an asylum seeker procedure in one country, they cannot just go to another country if they're EU-assigned to a country - at least theoretically. But yeah, once they have been given residency, they will obviously all move to the preferred countries. They're not really going to stay in Hungary, Croatia, or Slovakia.

The free movement of labour is only for EU citizens.

[ingemann]

Politicus let's ignore Mr. Larson comment and discuss the number, 500 000 are fewer people than you think. By Danish standards it would be around 30-35 000. It's a high number of people, but less than it sounds like at first.

[ingemann]

Politicus let's ignore Mr. Larson comment and discuss the number, 500 000 are fewer people than you think. By Danish standards it would be around 30-35 000. It's a high number of people, but less than it sounds like at first.

How do you know what I think?

figure of speech

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's no doubt this will provoke a political reaction, it already does (just listen to CSU). But in the short term I doubt we will see a new party spring up, while AfD have potential to take this position, I think it will hard for them to make the transformation. I think a counterreaction further down the line is more likely. When we look as Sweden as example it easier to see the reaction there, because SD already exist and have taken the position (I don't find it entirely unlikely that SD will hit 30% next election), while in Germany a new party have to be build up from the bottom and need to convince (enough) people that they're not crazies.

[ingemann]

Meanwhile, Denmark being Denmark - meaning Denmark being awesome and sane as usual:

https://euobserver.com/beyond-brussels/130224

I personally find it foolish, the quota system would benefit Denmark, we take more refugees than Germany per capita (slightly lower per GDP), so we're unlikely to be forced to take more, with a relative competent negotiation (of course with the existing government competence, I can see why they won't want to negotiate). While the quota system would making it more of a gamble to go to Europe for refugees, because you risk ending up in Poland or Romania instead of north western Europe. This would remove some of the economic emigrants, because they would risk a fortune to end up in a Hungarian refugee camp permanent.

[ingemann]

In the future people are going to look back on these events and wonder why everyone was burying their heads in the sand.  There is no doubt radicalized jihadists are crossing the border with the migrants, and the terrorist attacks that will come with it will have been so preventable.

Well, it's not really everyone but just the Germans. I really don't know what's happened with Merkel these past few weeks. Respect for the rule of law and concerns about safety have been thrown overboard. I mean what is the point in keeping tabs on potential terrorists if you now just allow everyone from Syria to come in with no questions asked. How the hell a head of government can act in such a reckless manner is beyond me.

I think that it was cynical decision for Merkel to force the discussion about quota through, it had more or less been in a deadlock the last two years, and doing this forced everyone to find a decision. But I also think she miscalculated the scale of the wave. 

[ingemann]

The Salzburg Red Cross is to build a couple state-of-the-art Scandinavian-style wooden houses for hundreds of asylum seekers in the next 2 months, for the price of 1 million €:

http://www.salzburg24.at/fluechtlinge-rotes-kreuz-errichtet-holzhaeuser-in-salzburg/4464122

State of the art wooden houses?

Heat isolated for low energy use.

[ingemann]

3) Labour market participation among Swedes of working age is about 85%. For immigrants from countries outside Europe, the figure is 52%, and it has been the past fifteen years. Without work, it is very difficult to integrate and impossible to contribute financially to society.

To make it even worse, if Sweden follow the Danish statistics for immigrants/refugees, the labour market participation are significant lower for Middle Eastern immigrants, while sub-Saharan Africans, Americans (both Anglo and Latin) and east and south east Asians pull the statistics up.

[ingemann]

Also "Danish police officer stabbed at asylum centre"

http://www.thelocal.dk/20150930/danish-police-officer-stabbed-at-asylum-centre

[ingemann]

Of course by that time, it might look like one big Malmo demographically and socially.

The Horror!!

Well, yes. A Swedish friend of mine from Malmö told me that quite some people he knew (illegally) possessed handguns in order not to get carjacked by thugs. Something tells me that these thugs don't have names like Andersson or Nilsson.

Malmö (or parts of it at least) is a hell hole, but it's a hell hole by Scandinavian standards (which mean that Rosengård (the worst area in Malmö) is less crime ridden than the average western city), so I personally think that the guys your friend knew was full of it.

[ingemann]

It's a good description of most Swedish ghettho's but Rosengård is a little different because it lies in Malmö, which are more compact than most Swedish cities. So Rosengård are more like Vollmose or Blågårds Plads in how it's part of the greater city than Rinkeby, which is like you describes.

[ingemann]

^ This is basically the debate between the old European left-winger and the new European left-winger.

The old European left-winger worked for the well-being of his people, attempted to uplift the working class, and introduced a welfare system based on solidarity in a homogeneous society.

The new European left-winger has given up on the white working class and instead belittles them and their lifestyle, either doesn't really care about maintaining the welfare state or simply believes things about the productivity of non-Western immigrants that are not true, and thinks solidarity based on traditional nation-state patterns is racist and should be eradicated, just as the nation-state itself should be eradicated.

I disagree Tender is not a traditional left winger, he's a communitarian with a green focus. As for Antonio his kind have existed forever, he's at best just another student that never really think his own ideology through, but close his eyes and ignore the problems it creates, and people who disagree with him is simply morons, racists and plain evil.

Of course he doesn't belong to the liberal (as in the market sense) parasites who pretend they're on the left, while they do their best to break the national state and the social security net down. He's just a useful idiot for them.

[ingemann]

They are entitled to these privileges because they worked hard to establish these welfare systems, contrary to the millions who are now lining up at the border and want to enjoy these goodies too.

Or maybe they get these privileges because the weather is better: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature15725.html

Really

Netherlands, Denmark and north Germany are from nature's side one giant swamp, where wheat have a hard time growing, so that we had use a weed like rye and animal feeder like barley and oat as the main crop until the potato arrived. Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Finland are even worse off. The Middle East on the other hand was one of the most fertile agricultural areas in the world. Of course that stopped after the areas conquest by Arab conquers. Egypt and Mahgreb, which feed the Roman Empire, was left to decay into poverty.

[ingemann]

Guess the age of this unaccompanied minor:

If you said..."in his early 30s," you may have been right but his official age is 16. Wonder how many other minors are actually in their 30s, considering that it is next to impossible to deport a minor.

In Denmark they don't get away with it, doctors can see on their bones if they're still teenagers.

[ingemann]

I'm sceptical of the idea that a large migration would undermine the welfare state. The welfare states of Europe subsidise the elderly, for the most part, not the sort of twenty-somethings that apparat to make up the bulk of this wave.

It's okay to be highly critical of it, that's a ideological choice you can make. Especially when you use the word migration. Because a Polish plumber give a surplus, a Indian IT worker also give one, a Nigerian doctor is a surplus too. A unskilled or semi-skilled don't give any surplus to any state with a functional welfare state, especially not if they're refugees. The Danish office of statistics keep an eye on both crime and employment rate of immigrant groups, and there the Muslim group with the highest employment rate (age 30-60) are Turks with 53,1 (versus a ethnic Danish rate of 82,3) refugees have a much lower employment rate with Somalians having a employment rate of 27,6 and Syrians the lowest one at 22,8 (and in these numbers new refugees are not counted).
Non-Muslim immigrants all have a higher employment rate.

Second generation have a significant under employment too, with Turks again scoring best with only 16,5 percent points under employement (age 20-39), while Libanese (Palestinians) score the worst with 41,2 under employment. As comparison Poles lies the lowest with 2,4 while among European immigrants British descendent score the worst with 11,3 under employement.

As criminality (all types from speeding to murder) Muslims overrepresented (even if we look at social economic status). From Bosniaks who score best at 118 (111) to Lebanese who score the worst at 308 (254). Of course a interesting aspect here is that among Muslims immigrants are more criminal than refugees (with the Lebanese and Somalians as the exceptions). It can best be seen at Pakistanian 202 (179) vs. Afghans 145 (123) or Yugoslavs 217 (192) vs. Bosniaks 118 (111).

As for EU immigrants they all score lower than native Danes 95 (98), which seem weird when East Europeans are overrepresented in Danish prisons, but this is because crime by these groups are mostly commited by visiting criminal not immigrants.

Phillipines, Indians and Chinese have the lowest rates of all at around 50 for all three groups.

[ingemann]

You seem to be under the impression that people have just randomly decided not to like immigrants and so they are using these numbers as justification.

It's the opposite. These numbers are the reason people are hesitant about allowing mass immigration.

If immigrants in general didn't commit so much crime, if they didn't use up so many benefits, people would not mind immigration as much.

[ingemann]

You seem to be under the impression that people have just randomly decided not to like immigrants and so they are using these numbers as justification.

It's the opposite. These numbers are the reason people are hesitant about allowing mass immigration.

If immigrants in general didn't commit so much crime, if they didn't use up so many benefits, people would not mind immigration as much.

The innate criminality of immigrants, along with their innate tendency to vagrancy, has been a standard trope in arguments in favor of immigration restriction since the 19th century.

...and?

Immigrants was more criminal on average than the average native in the 19th century (again depending on group), so I should somehow change my opinion on the issue of immigration because in 3 generations they end up at the national average?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes and I have done so, if they stay in EU, they're a economic loss for European countries. That have nothing to do with "moral quality" of the Syrians, that's hard facts. That some of the loss is caused by bahaviour you of low "moral quality" is not a problem with my argument. 

[ingemann]

Purely accidental Kristeligt Dagblad today (28 oktober 2015) have a article today about what immigrants cost, it's based on analyses from "Rockwool Fondens Forskningsenhed" (a independent research institute). It show that a non-western immigrants (both immigrants and refugees) give the Danish state a deficit of 17000 kr. (around 2500$) annual per immigrants, while western immigrants give a surplus of 19000 kr. (around 2800$).

BTW to anybody able to read Danish here's the rapport
http://www.rockwoolfonden.dk/files/RFF-site/Publikations%20upload/Arbejdspapirer/Arbejdspapir_30_Final.pdf