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

[It’s so Joever]

I’m sorry?
Wasn’t the problem of domestic terrorism being a result of extremely concentrated poverty, echo chambers, and poor job opportunities in certain areas leading to disillusionment and radicalization?
While I don’t agree with the “Western” part of the policy, I do believe we should be encouraging more economically and culturally diverse neighborhoods. This should be set in place for any impoverished neighborhood regardless of race (plus that would help avoid any issues with the EU)

As for the Americans who want to criticize this...how has our society been? Look at the poorest parts of rural Appalachia and look at the inner city neighborhoods in Detroit. We could benefit from more diverse neighborhoods.

[ingemann]

I’m sorry?
Wasn’t the problem of domestic terrorism being a result of extremely concentrated poverty, echo chambers, and poor job opportunities in certain areas leading to disillusionment and radicalization?
While I don’t agree with the “Western” part of the policy, I do believe we should be encouraging more economically and culturally diverse neighborhoods. This should be set in place for any impoverished neighborhood regardless of race (plus that would help avoid any issues with the EU)

As for the Americans who want to criticize this...how has our society been? Look at the poorest parts of rural Appalachia and look at the inner city neighborhoods in Detroit. We could benefit from more diverse neighborhoods.

I think we shouldn't underestimate the spite factor, Social Democratic voters are heavily overrepresented in municipalities with these disadvantaged areas and this plan would ensure greater diversification of upper and upper middle class areas, which tend to be dominated by the Social Liberal, Liberal Alliance, the Conservative and the woke left. The Liberal and DPP stronghold goes mostly free, the former because rural areas have few of these kind of properties and DPP stronghold because they're spread out over Social Democratic and Liberal stronghold. There's a aspect of class warfare (and I mean that in the most positive way possible) in the Social Democratic plan.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I just want to bump this thread because I think that the framing of liberal press adopted when discussing this plan is fascinating. In practice, the Danish government is trying to aggressively reduce ethnic segregation in Danish society using radical methods. Because these methods place the onus on immigrant communities, they seem rather cruel but the ultimate objective is basically praiseworthy: how could it possibly be good for there to be concentrated, racialized poverty in Denmark? How does that benefit the children of immigrants?

If this story was framed different, no one would be outraged. In fact, if it the media was sympathetic to Mette Frederiksen, it would be portrayed in glowing terms, as a historic campaign to end segregation and discrimination in Denmark. If there was less prejudice against immigrants in Denmark, I'm sure that some of the more questionable parts of these plans would be erased but considering that this bill will ultimately shift lots of Muslims to different parts of Denmark, including wealthier neighborhoods, it can't be framed as being for the benefit of these people, who are widely loathed. It has to be portrayed as a coercive act that will force integration through "tough love". If it was framed as being for the benefit of immigrant communities, it would be seen differently, in ways that would make integration politically impossible to force through.

Here is a more honest quote from a different article in the Guardian:

“The objective is to give every child in Denmark the same life opportunities regardless of the neighbourhood they grow up in or of their parents’ background,” said the Danish ministry of transport and housing in a statement. “This means that they have to be exposed to the cultural norms of society as such and not grow up in closed and isolated communities.”

Overall, I am very uncomfortable with this kind of social engineering. I think governments aiming to radically alter lives of some group should take their wishes into account and this strikes me as a heavy-handed top-down proposal that is totally unconcerned with what immigrants want. I also get the sense that the government might short council housing investment for displaced people. At the same time, a truly radical, anti-racist government would ultimately aim to end residential segregation using means that would be overall similar - the big proposal is reducing council homes in these neighborhoods, with some suggestion that there will be investment elsewhere, this is how you'd bust up segregation in practice.

So, in the end, I am supportive because I think any "good society" would try to use any and all means to eliminate class and ethnic segregation. Insofar as these policies successfully force wealthy neighborhoods to include immigrants of a lower class background, I think working class people will benefit massively!