European Politics

[Magnus]

Let's have a beer.

 

[Black Wizard]

Let's have a beer.

 

[Magnus]

 

[The Flash]

There are plenty of white traditionalists, maybe even the average conservative, who don't exactly celebrate LGBT rights, think women's rights have gone too far, consider marijuana a gateway drug to heroin, and think Saturday night pub culture, revealing clothes, and sleeping around, are common and dirty. In fact, along with the public expressions of race hate and opposition to immigrants, homophobia, mysogymy and calls for a return to traditional morals and gender roles is often expressed

The difference is, the people you've mentioned are already there. They're born and raised there, therefore entitled to being a member of the community. Changing the minds of those people is enough of a challenge for progressives as it is. Taking in migrants is a different story, because by taking them in, you're providing them an opportunity. They are not entitled to being a member of the community, you're bestowing that right upon them.

Also, as I've pointed out, it's about percentages. There's a difference between "plenty of" and "almost all". It took decades of work to get those societies to accept such social change to the degree it's at right now. Unless you're viewing this as some sort of challenge, I don't see what upside bringing in new religious ultraconservatives has to offer.

Would you say there's a certain amount of snobbery among hardline Muslims @The Flash?

Of course there is. That's my point. Not just fundamentalist Muslims, but devout Muslims as well see the Ummah as the righteous ones, inherently superior by the virtue of having accepted the correct religion. This causes massive problems even within Islamic communities, as there's no single understanding of Islam. Christianity may have moved away from Catholic vs. Orthodox and Catholic vs. Protestant violence, but Islam has not yet moved away from its Sunni vs. Shia violence. Even now there's an ongoing war in Yemen that is largely influenced by secterian conflict, Iran supporting the Shia rebels and Saudi Arabia supporting the Sunni government. Iraqi insurgency was very strongly influenced by secterian conflict, with Shia people feeling alienated under the rule of Saddam Hussein, and then Sunni people feeling alienated under the post-Saddam rule. ISIS was able to gain the support of many Iraqi Sunnis who felt alienated.

First of all, your numbers are incorrect. Canada has 3.2% Islam; according to Pew Research, Sweden has 8.1%. The official Swedish census puts a much lower percentage on the amount of people who practice Islam, to be fair, and I do wonder if the real number isn't somewhere in the middle (or if it isn't conflating people who have immigrated from Muslim-majority nations/people who are descended from those who immigrated from Muslim-majority nations with those who are open worshippers of Islam). So not quite 10%, potentially lower than 10%.

I stand corrected on the numbers but the discrepancy isn't large enough to discredit my argument, the gap is still quite large. Not 7% maybe, but 5%.

The biggest difference we have between nations is Canada's superior ability to control who arrives on our shores. By and large the situation you describe here:
already exists in Canada. The vast majority of immigrants are educated people, with multiple degrees, and we have less refugees. We also keep far better track of them where Sweden doesn't - see this article for more on Sweden's inability to track crimes by country of origin.

This makes sense and probably does indeed have a bigger impact. It's what I'm arguing for though, being more strict on immigration clearly has worked in favor of Canada. That to me should be the norm. It also explains why I feel like you're a bit out of touch with the reality of the Islamic world. Canada has more educated, liberal Muslims. Anybody who has spent a little bit of time living in a Muslim country will tell you that that's not the norm. This is even true for a secular nation like Turkey, who knows how it's like in the likes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq and so on.

Sweden's inability to track crimes by country of origin. That means that it's not actual data that's causing the attitudes Swedes are proclaiming - specifically the stated positions of the SD that immigrants bring a much greater percentage of crime - but an assumption based on anecdote, the same sort of spurious argument being used by Mr. Trump in the States. The data to prove the veracity of this does not exist.

The point that's made about this issue is that Sweden doesn't have an inability to track crimes by country of origin, but an unwillingness to do so. As of last few years, Sweden actively does not record the criminal's ethnicity. That has rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, thinking that it's an attempt to cover the glaring issue of crime by immigrants. If the data is actively covered up by the government, you have no option but to listen to anectodal evidence.

In Canada, we track this data, so I can tell you that certain immigrant groups (IE Somali immigrants) have a higher level of violent crime than others, but in general, immigrants here are far less likely to commit crimes. The situation is different, I will grant, but with data you can make actual arguments. The SD is not truly interested in making those arguments, and the ones they have done are made of bad faith with a conclusion pre-supposed.

I didn't say a word about SD, I thought we had moved on from that already. As I've said before, my concerns aren't about alt-right being alt-right, it's about moderates not addressing issues clearly and not taking action, with which they push moderate people who aren't pleased with the immigrant situation to extremes. People are looking for voices that make their concerns be heard, if the moderates bury their heads in the sand, they'll go to other alternatives.

With the previous argument about Canada's strict immigration policy, it's no surprise that immigrants in Canada are far less likely to commit crimes. If education is emphasized in admissions, obviously crime rates are going to be lower than the average native Canadian for which no such criterion applies.

Non-integration is only a problem when the people who move to the country do so in bad faith, but I also don't believe that non-integration is a long term issue. I think integration issues are generally solved via generational shifts. That's certainly been the historic trend in high-immigration nations such as Canada, the UK, and the USA. There's areas where that hasn't been true - France's Algerian population comes to mind - but social research indicates that is due to the rejection of the immigrants by the migrating population, creating non-integrating cabals.

Bad faith, to me, is an empty argument. Nobody migrates to another country to commit crimes, unless they're some sort of headpin on a mission. They're either after opportunities or are the children of people who were after opportunities. The social research you've mentioned actually points to the thing I'm mentioning. There are differences between Muslim populations. Cultural Muslims are not fond of devout Muslims and they vehemently dislike fundamentalist Muslims. The more liberal Muslims quickly distance themselves from more conservative Muslims and try to be disassociated.

Here, many migrants send their children to the same schools, to the same parks, and to the same social programs and their children end up being significantly more integrated than the parents ever could be. I would suggest that a strong positive attitude towards acceptance helps groups to integrate long term.

Again, with the previous argument about Canada's strict immigration policy, this is no surprise. Educated migrants are far more willing to integrate than uneducated, poor ones. Many of those people migrate to developed Western countries with the very intention of integrating their children to that country's culture. This is not the case in places where immigration policy is not strict.

The difficulty for me is that many Western persons are choosing to lump all Muslim migrants in the same fundamentalist bag, and as a result, marginalize the community to a much greater (and far more dangerous) extent than necessary.

Don't think you have any opponents regarding that view here. Yes, prejudice and generalization isn't a good idea. But it's not a one-sided affair. There's a strong tendency among Western progressives to "come to the rescue" of Muslims every time there's a criticism of the Islamic world, Muslim populations or Islam itself. This tendency applies to most progressive causes that aims to protect groups of people that are subjected to discrimination. It's a classic case of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". It ultimately starts to cause damage to its own causes, the rise of far-right in the West being a clear example of this.

And honestly, I don't particularly care if there's a core of migrants who think a lot of what is done in our society is sinful. We need to look at this over a long period of time and force those people - and specifically, those people's children and grandchildren - to question their restrictive values.

Well I just disagree with that line of thinking. I absolutely do care, and I think you should care, too. This is like treating your country as a societal training ground, in which people are allowed not to learn anything. That, to me, is not a great idea. It may work with more moderate migrants, but the possibility of it working with more conservative migrants is immensely low.

Spoiler

Well there goes an hour of my life.

 

[Night Prowler]

Serbia puts military on high alert over incident involving ‘Kosovo special forces’ – local media

 

[Forostar]

Apparently there is more going on. A border correction / territory swap?
Serbia and Kosovo moot map redraw in historic land swap
https://www.dw.com/en/serbia-and-kosovo-moot-map-redraw-in-historic-land-swap/a-45389705

[...] Pristina could be given the Presovo Valley, a predominantly Albanian area in southern Serbia. In return, Serbia would claim northern Kosovo, home to almost 45,000 Serbs. [...]

And:

The Latest on ongoing efforts to stabilize relations between Kosovo and Serbia (all times local):

3:20 p.m.

A Serbian government official says security forces have been put on alert after Kosovo's special police were deployed in the country's Serb-dominated north.

Office for Kosovo and Metohija Director Marko Djuric said Serbia reacted after Kosovo's special police moved into an area around the Kosovo side of Gazivode Lake. Kosovar President Hashim Thaci visited the area on Saturday.

There was no immediate reaction from Kosovo.

https://abcnews.go.com/Internationa...-alerts-forces-kosovar-police-deploy-58169624

 

[Night Prowler]

Kosovar forces aren't allowed to enter that area so NATO should react IMO.

 

[Black Wizard]

You want NATO to bomb Pristina?

 

[Night Prowler]

Nah.

 

[Black Wizard]

Macedonia is hilarious.

 

[Perun]

Macedonia: Why don't you like us, the greatest nation on Earth which bestowed humanity with its most glorious gifts?
World: We'd like you if you stopped calling yourself the greatest nation on Earth which bestowed humanity with its most glorious gifts.
Macedonia: The Albanians are really hard on us. We need some help. Can we, like, join NATO and EU?
World: Will you stop being a dick?
Macedonia: Sure.
World: Will you decide not to be a dick?
Macedonia: Sure, whatever. Just let us join.
World: Will you give us a legally binding declaration that you stopped being a dick?
Macedonia: We will totally do that. We'll get started right away! Just help us out with the Albanians! And our poverty!
World: Let's see that declaration.
Macedonia: We'll give it to you on Sunday! Pinky promise!
World: So, where's your declaration?
Macedonia: We really wanted to, we mean it. It just wasn't the right time, and we had so much other stuff to do, and then granny came to visit...

 

[Magnus]

A few things that tend to get overlooked apparently: Macedonia's current population, no matter what official numbers say, seems to be a little more than 1.5 million; referendum was non-binding anyway; Greek objections to the name are ridiculous to the extreme to start with. Is Luxembourg changing its name to East Luxembourg any time soon because of Belgium btw?

 

[mihai]

The Romanian government is spending tens of millions of Euros for a referendum which will take place this weekend. The matter in discussion is the insertion of an express provision in the Constitution stating that the family is based on the marriage between a man and a woman. This is in the context in which the Civil Code already expressly provides that "the marriage is the free union between a man and a woman", so even if the referendum is validated, the potential amendment of the Constitution is somehow without effect. However, it will block any future attempt to change the legal framework for a union between two men or two women.

In my opinion the LGBT support trend is given too much attention and sometimes it is too advertised. However, I think that everyone should live their life based on their own beliefs and the state should create the legal framework to ensure certain rights for sexual minorities (for example, the right to inherit the person you are spending your life with), so even the attempt to insert that provision in the Romanian Constitution represents a step back from the perspective of a modern legislation.

 

[Forostar]

I wonder how much that sits with EU law. Not well, I suppose.

In my opinion the LGBT support trend is given too much attention.

Apparently it needs more attention.

 

[Brigantium]

That comes across as all part of the same phenomenon we were discussing earlier. People bang in the middle of mainstream culture feel shat upon, and feel minorities are getting an unfair amount of care and attention, as opposed to efforts being made to stop certain groups of people being doubly shat upon. Surely the way to tackle that is to push for everyone to be treated better?

 

[GhostofCain]

I wonder how much that sits with EU law. Not well, I suppose.

Considering how lacklustre the EU's response to reactionary behaviour from the governments of Poland and Hungary has been, I guess their priorities lie elsewhere than in dealing with things that do not sit well with the EU goals and values.

 

[Cat Milk Supreme]

EU E-shmu, I live in Northern Ireland and we have no equal marriage and restrictive abortion laws. The UN has called the latter "an abuse of womens human rights."
We are also subject to draconian laws in terms of the sale of alcohol on Sundays and Christian holidays (don't come to Belfast for an Easter break if you like a drink).
Although maybe what Romania is doing will be viewed differently considering it is an 'active' change whereas Northern Ireland merely 'passively' does fuck all to change the law.

 

[mihai]

The referendum will most likely not pass because it will not meet the quorum requirements. Even if it will pass and the constitution is amended, this would not represent a breach of EU legislation, as each state has certain freedom to regulate several domains in respect of which the EU legal framework did not impose restrictions (same in case of the restrictions in Northern Ireland).

 

[Cat Milk Supreme]

How does that fit with human rights abuse? I assume that results in EU fines and whatnot and eventually expulsion. Although I believe a court of some sort decided that the UN was wrong in the case of NI.

 

[Forostar]

Considering how lacklustre the EU's response to reactionary behaviour from the governments of Poland and Hungary has been, I guess their priorities lie elsewhere than in dealing with things that do not sit well with the EU goals and values.

The EU is trapped in some of their own rules. To punish a state (severely) needs support from all other states. That is tough when bastard nations stick and support each other. Reforming these rules could be pretty important, but it is probably not easy and it needs to be done carefully I suppose.