Denmark plans to limit 'non-western' residents in disadvantaged areas to avoid parallel societies

[Tender Branson]

Denmark has announced plans to crack down further on disadvantaged neighbourhoods by reducing the number of “non-western” residents, scrapping the controversial term “ghetto” in its proposed legislation.

In the bill – a review of existing legislation on combatting “parallel societies” – the interior ministry proposed that the share of residents of “non-western” origin in each neighbourhood be limited to a maximum of 30% within 10 years.

Denmark has for years had one of Europe’s most restrictive immigration policies, which the Social Democratic prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, has continued since coming to power in June 2019.

The interior minister, Kaare Dybvad Bek, said in a statement that too many non-western foreigners in one area “increases the risk of an emergence of religious and cultural parallel societies”.

He said, however, that the term “ghetto”, used to designate disadvantaged neighbourhoods, would be removed from the new legislation.

“The term ghetto is misleading ... I think it contributes to eclipsing the large amount of work that needs doing in these neighbourhoods,” he said.

Until now, the term was used legally to designate any neighbourhood of more than 1,000 people where more than half were of “non-western” origin, and which met at least two of four other criteria.

The four criteria are: more than 40% of residents unemployed; more than 60% of 39-50 year-olds with no upper secondary education; crime rates three times higher than the national average; residents having a gross income 55% lower than the regional average.

Fifteen Danish neighbourhoods currently fall into this category, and 25 others are considered “at risk”. The list is updated each December.

In these neighbourhoods, misdemeanours carry double the legal penalties in place elsewhere, and daycare is mandatory for all children over the age of one, or family allowances are withdrawn.

The existing legislation also calls for council homes in these areas to be reduced to 40% of available housing by 2030.

Danish political parties will discuss the bill and it is expected to pass, though no date has been set for the vote.

According to Statistics Denmark, 11% of Denmark’s 5.8 million inhabitants are of foreign origin, of whom 58% are from a country considered “non-western”.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/17/denmark-plans-to-limit-non-western-residents-in-disadvantaged-areas

Beautiful.

That’s a Social Democratic government that you can vote for.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Beautiful.

ok ecofascist

That’s a Social Democratic government that you can vote for.

No it isn't.

[afleitch]

Are parallel societies within white Danes (or even not Danes) okay or...?

I mean, given the direction of European populism, Russian psyops and capitalisms end point where performative democracy has ceased to be useful to them, I think I'd be more concerned about the natives.

[Former President tack50]

Apparently some in Atlas support segregation now? Who knew!

Now seriously, I would not support say, evicting people from their houses for those purposes as it is very cruel, but making sure that native Danes and non-natives in Denmark regularly interact and mix with each other is, at least on principle, a sound idea? This sounds like a lofty goal with very poor and/or misguided implementation

I will say also that immigrants do tend to flock together whether in Denmark or anywhere else, so this is going to be very hard if not impossible to fully enforce.

Are parallel societies within white Danes (or even not Danes) okay or...?

I mean, given the direction of European populism, Russian psyops and capitalisms end point where performative democracy has ceased to be useful to them, I think I'd be more concerned about the natives.

I know this is a rethorical question but the answer you are looking for is "yes".

 Or to be more precise, that  by definition there can't be a "parallel society" comprised of Danes.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Apparently some in Atlas support segregation now? Who knew!

I don't trust governments that have flirted with overtly racist policies in the past, which Frederiksen's indisputably has, to implement desegregation policies based on quotas about who can live where.

Or to be more precise, that  by definition there can't be a "parallel society" comprised of Danes.

Can't there? There are other cleavages than race or nationality for a society to fracture along.

[Tender Branson]

Beautiful.

ok ecofascist

That’s a Social Democratic government that you can vote for.

No it isn't.

Ok naive open-border loon.

[Former President tack50]

Apparently some in Atlas support segregation now? Who knew!

I don't trust governments that have flirted with overtly racist policies in the past, which Frederiksen's indisputably has, to implement desegregation policies based on quotas about who can live where.

Or to be more precise, that  by definition there can't be a "parallel society" comprised of Danes.

Can't there? There are other cleavages than race or nationality for a society to fracture along.

Yeah, fair enough; I can understand being afraid of the actual implementation because of who is in charge (like I say I myself am skeptical of how it could actually be done without being ineffective, racist and cruel or most likely both). And the "non-Western immigrant" criteria is iffy at best and overtly racist at worst.

To be honest the turn to the right on immigration of the Danish social democrats has allowed them to keep the working class vote unlike other social democratic countries in Europe so I guess it is a tradeoff to have. Plus, while Frederiksen is certainly quite conservative in immigration; I am sure a right wing government in Denmark would definitely not be an upgrade and probably would be even worse (indeed this bill repeaks the "ghetto" designation, considered stigmatizing)

I guess you could argue Denmark as a whole is a racist country for better or worse.

As for the latter question while there are other cleavages aside from race or nationality (or religion) for society to fracture along; they rarely cause the kind of segregation and lack of interaction that ethnicity based cleavages create I think?

Only one I can think of that could be comparable is perhaps class/income; which is very prominent in very unequal societies like say, Latin America; but Denmark if anything is the polar opposite or that; being one of the best performing countries on social mobility.

[Battista Minola 1616]

As for the latter question while there are other cleavages aside from race or nationality (or religion) for society to fracture along; they rarely cause the kind of segregation and lack of interaction that ethnicity based cleavages create I think?

Only one I can think of that could be comparable is perhaps class/income; which is very prominent in very unequal societies like say, Latin America; but Denmark if anything is the polar opposite or that; being one of the best performing countries on social mobility.

I don't know why you are handwaving religion like that when often it has little to do with race/nationality and it can create its fair share of segregation. Have you ever heard of Dutch pillarisation?

[Former President tack50]

As for the latter question while there are other cleavages aside from race or nationality (or religion) for society to fracture along; they rarely cause the kind of segregation and lack of interaction that ethnicity based cleavages create I think?

Only one I can think of that could be comparable is perhaps class/income; which is very prominent in very unequal societies like say, Latin America; but Denmark if anything is the polar opposite or that; being one of the best performing countries on social mobility.

I don't know why you are handwaving religion like that when often it has little to do with race/nationality and it can create its fair share of segregation. Have you ever heard of Dutch pillarisation?

Good counterpoint though perhaps the Netherlands isn't the best example as I think it is fairly integrated and pillarization is in its way out? My mind immediately jumped to Lebanon for what is worth which has some huge problems in that area. Bosnia also could qualify though I guess it is a case of ethnicity and religion being very tied there (bosniaks=muslims, croats=catholics, Serbs=orthodox)

Then again it is not like people of different religions being segregated is much better

[If my soul was made of stone]

Being a stooge for nativists is exactly what got Frederiksen this far to begin with as the leader of a party representing everything that's been collapsing in European politics for fifteen years, so this isn't surprising, but it's still objectionable. Of course, the most plausible replacements aren't remotely any better.

[Battista Minola 1616]

As for the latter question while there are other cleavages aside from race or nationality (or religion) for society to fracture along; they rarely cause the kind of segregation and lack of interaction that ethnicity based cleavages create I think?

Only one I can think of that could be comparable is perhaps class/income; which is very prominent in very unequal societies like say, Latin America; but Denmark if anything is the polar opposite or that; being one of the best performing countries on social mobility.

I don't know why you are handwaving religion like that when often it has little to do with race/nationality and it can create its fair share of segregation. Have you ever heard of Dutch pillarisation?

Good counterpoint though perhaps the Netherlands isn't the best example as I think it is fairly integrated and pillarization is in its way out? My mind immediately jumped to Lebanon for what is worth which has some huge problems in that area. Bosnia also could qualify though I guess it is a case of ethnicity and religion being very tied there (bosniaks=muslims, croats=catholics, Serbs=orthodox)

Then again it is not like people of different religions being segregated is much better

Well yes, pillarisation is pretty much a thing of the past, but that is beside the point.

And of course I don't think religious segregation is good, what I (and Nathan, evidently) meant is to push back on your original statement where you grossly jumped the gun by arguing that immigrants or in general ethnic minorities are the only subgroups that can form ghettos/parallel societies/such forms of social segregation.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

This is what happens when westerners start admiring Lee Kuan Yew too much.

[Oryxslayer]

As for the latter question while there are other cleavages aside from race or nationality (or religion) for society to fracture along; they rarely cause the kind of segregation and lack of interaction that ethnicity based cleavages create I think?

Only one I can think of that could be comparable is perhaps class/income; which is very prominent in very unequal societies like say, Latin America; but Denmark if anything is the polar opposite or that; being one of the best performing countries on social mobility.

I don't know why you are handwaving religion like that when often it has little to do with race/nationality and it can create its fair share of segregation. Have you ever heard of Dutch pillarisation?

Dutch Pillarization is at least 60 years dead socially, 30 years politically, but the general point is true that religion is a identity one identifies with and can connect through similar to race/gender/city/etc.

On the surface this proposal has the noble intention of integration and breaking up the 'poverty traps' that tend to form within certain communities. However, there is a reason why migrant groups always settle near other migrant groups - preferably ones from the same location - and blocking more from settling in those areas has disadvantageous effects. This has occurred since migration between civilizations was a thing in antiquity, and occurs even when moving within a country. When you relocate you enter into a new society and you have no idea how to get employment or make social connections, and everything else follows from those two. Failure to obtain one or the other leads to either financial deprivation, which leads to hunger and poverty, or depression which leads isolation and radicalization. Living within a community of established individuals who once walked the same path, even if it is rather dangerous, offers those connections to jobs, housing, social communities, schools, and anything else. Sometimes there is no choice thanks to redlining-style policies. Residents leave these immigrant communities when the negatives, often related to crime or a poor environment, outweigh the positives - though this usually  requires a second generation among migrants. Denying present and future minorities access to the community resources will require other organizations, to pick up the slack and they usually fail - meaning the situation over time probably gets worse rather than better.

[ingemann]

Let me explain this in Americanese. This is like busing (you know the great progressive policy, which the progresssive left criticise Biden for being against in the primaries) just with housing. The main difference is that instead of letting WWC people enjoy the benefit of this increased diversity, they focus on letting privilege white upper and upper middle class get to enjoy the benefits of living in a diverse and multicultural society. Of course as those people are so incredible racist, they try to start a international campaign against it in the Far Right English "newspaper" the Guardian. I think we can celebrate Mette Frederiksen fight against White Privilege and Institutional Whiteness.

[urutzizu]

One of the interesting things I read is that is that Denmark doesn't actually really have an official definition of "non-western" countries. Basically it is reverse defined so every country of origin that isn't "western", which is a very narrow list of the basically EU+Switzerland+the five anglo countries. So Serbs, Turks, Koreans, Russians, Japanese, Chinese, Brazilians, Mexicans etc.are all "non-western".

While I think that it is understandable that one would want to avoid creating Neighborhoods (or Apartment blocks) with 90%+ Somalis or equivalent, and as far as I understand many European countries actually already unofficially try to do that through Social Housing Policies etc (a main reason why much of the Dutch Somalis moved to the UK for instance), this can take things completely absurd. To pretend like Chinatown/Koreatown is a parallel society with a threat to western values or something is a bit of a stretch, and even with most multiethnic neighborhoods you can very easily start making combinations that despite very low percentages of each individual culture rooms are being seen as "parallel societies", despite being the complete opposite.

[ingemann]

One of the interesting things I read is that is that Denmark doesn't actually really have an official definition of "non-western" countries. Basically it is reverse defined so every country of origin that isn't "western", which is a very narrow list of the basically EU+Switzerland+the five anglo countries. So Serbs, Turks, Koreans, Russians, Japanese, Chinese, Brazilians, Mexicans etc.are all "non-western".

While I think that it is understandable that one would want to avoid creating Neighborhoods (or Apartment blocks) with 90%+ Somalis or equivalent, and as far as I understand many European countries actually already unofficially try to do that through Social Housing Policies etc (a main reason why much of the Dutch Somalis moved to the UK for instance), this can take things completely absurd. To pretend like Chinatown/Koreatown is a parallel society with a threat to western values or something is a bit of a stretch, and even with most multiethnic neighborhoods you can very easily start making combinations that despite very low percentages of each individual culture rooms are being seen as "parallel societies", despite being the complete opposite.

I think if Denmark had meaningful Chinatowns I think this discussion would be different. But pretty much the only people living in this manner are MENAP and Yugoslav immigrants, and in case of the Yugoslav immigrant their children doesn't follow this pattern. East Asian immigrants live spread out and while we see obvious pattern of them having some degree of a parallel society, this doesn't translate into high crime rates and high unemployment, so we don't really care. In fact that's the defining point of the Danish policies toward minorities, if you don't make trouble you can do what you want and we're going to stay out your business. OTOH if you do make trouble, we're going to dissect every aspect of your culture and way of life to find out what's wrong with you. People keep talking about Denmark and other some European countries as these incredible homogene societies, but it's only surface level you just don't discover the diversity if people doesn't act like a-holes.

[Cassius]

It would be good to see a Danish/English language Danish source on this, given that the Guardian (sometimes seemingly on purpose) has a habit of getting the wrong end of the stick about things that occur outside of the English speaking world.

[Tintrlvr]

Let me explain this in Americanese. This is like busing (you know the great progressive policy, which the progresssive left criticise Biden for being against in the primaries) just with housing. The main difference is that instead of letting WWC people enjoy the benefit of this increased diversity, they focus on letting privilege white upper and upper middle class get to enjoy the benefits of living in a diverse and multicultural society. Of course as those people are so incredible racist, they try to start a international campaign against it in the Far Right English "newspaper" the Guardian. I think we can celebrate Mette Frederiksen fight against White Privilege and Institutional Whiteness.

It's unclear what the policy is. Is the policy to build more public housing in upper income areas and try to reduce the concentration of public housing in lower income neighborhoods thereby? If so, this is a great policy, although I'm not sure everyone on the American left would see it that way (mainly, anti-gentrification activists would see it negatively).

[ingemann]

It would be good to see a Danish/English language Danish source on this, given that the Guardian (sometimes seemingly on purpose) has a habit of getting the wrong end of the stick about things that occur outside of the English speaking world.

No sarcasm here, this bill have been attacked by the Liberals (Venstre) for being communism, that should tell how badly the Guardian have failed to understand this bill.

It's fundamental a bill to work toward no public housing having more than 30% people of non-Western origin and the state having the right to select tenant in 10% of the leases in large private rental housing, which tend to be rented to people who are better off. As such this is more a example of class warfare and this specific hurt the Danish version of the Guardian readers, as they suddenly risk living beside people of non-Western origin or as it was saracstic described on r/Denmark "fighting the high house prices in Copenhagen by spreading the "criminal elements" to better off areas".

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Hey guys remember, the Democrats are the equivalent of a far-right party in any Nordic country and even Bernie Sanders is to the right of almost every party there!

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

This is what happens when westerners start admiring Lee Kuan Yew too much.

Singapore has quota applies to all races, so if they were to copy him there would also be a limit to how western an area could be.

[darklordoftech]

Twitter has been using this to demonize “Europe” and American progressives by extension.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This is what happens when westerners start admiring Lee Kuan Yew too much.

Singapore has quota applies to all races, so if they were to copy him there would also be a limit to how western an area could be.

True.

[Zinneke]

https://twitter.com/phl43/status/1318115587424505856?s=20

This is a great thread about France that someone more sober than I am right now should translate.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The general approach of the present Danish government on these issues is basically the social democratic state multiculturalism that the Blair government was very fond of, but on steroids. If you adhere to a liberal multiculturalism of some form then you aren't going to like that much and will find a lot to criticise (as was the case here!), but the depictions in the international liberal press are... not honest.