|
|
EnergyZ
Legendary Hero
President of MM Wiki
|
posted September 17, 2015 03:04 PM |
|
|
kiryu133 said:
EnergyZ said:
It is possible that some of them are extremists. Simply put, if they don't meet expectations, they may start blowing things up.
truly there is no easy answer to this. Check-ups and snow is too extreme. But clearly we need some sort of control over this. That said, there are extremists everywhere. Remember Breivik? They're not exclusively immigrants/muslims.
Yes. But these are the times when you have to stay alert at such things.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 12:30 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 00:36, 18 Sep 2015.
|
I have done my best to clean the thread of all the off-topic posts, many of which were against the Code of Conduct. I apologize if I created any continuity issues. But the topic seems worth discussing so I felt it was better to preserve the thread than send it to the VW.
Please do keep in mind the rules here, as this topic has the potential to inflame passions. Insults against individuals or groups will not be tolerated.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 12:39 AM |
|
Edited by kiryu133 at 00:47, 18 Sep 2015.
|
Salamandre said:
Kiryu, our EU nations have a great history behind, their greatness does not depend on their capacity to integrate billions of muslims, which for the most, are intolerant, homophobes and extremely resistant to any other values different from theirs, just to let you know whats about as you seem to deliberately ignore this aspect.
Geez, I wonder who the Intolerant and prejudiced one is here 
Yeah, you're just beeing islamophobic 
Effectively integrating new people into a society includes making sure these conflicts don't happen. And you deffinetely sound more intolerant than any muslim I've ever met and I've met a lot of them. I grew up in a immigrant-heavy area (still live here) in a very immigrant-heavy city in one of Europe's most immigrant-heavy countries. Some clashes were present (integration has been far from flawless) but most of the hatred, racism and general intolerance didn't come from Muslims.
EDIT:
Good timing 
____________
It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that the cis are at it again.
|
|
Kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 12:53 AM |
|
|
Well, to be honest, I'd do the same if I were in their shoes, and I wouldn't want them in my country. They're just too rowdy, generally speaking. I am not profiling based on race, but rather on the war-like and poor background they come from.
There's something I hate in this world, and it's people that sides with the strong all the time, rather than justice. Ethnic people are often like that ; they don't have any real ties to the country they just arrived in, they want to succeed, and they want to avoid trouble. It's why they fled in the first place, yes? A rebel would try to change his country rather than flee it. And so that said ethnic person will often side with the strong. The government, the cops. The corporations. Sir, yes sir! It's either that or the welfare.
Look at them. Most aren't settling down; they're aiming for Germany, the richest country around. Exactly my point. Not that I'm not sympathetic either ; they need help and should receive it.
I believe the best solution would be to have them assigned and distributed to all countries in the world with good enough living conditions. Without breaking families apart of course. That way they won't form one heck of a huge gettho, will properly be assimilated in their respective, new countries, and it would also be a message to the ultimate boot lickers that the chance of you ending up in the richest country around isn't 100 % bro.
Of course, that wont happen, so there's no way to solve this correctly. I'd ask my neighbors for help, and if they do not help, I'd let the refugees in, let them cross my country, then stand behind these refugees banging on my neighbor's country with my middle finger up. You didn't want to help me out? Take that snow!
On a side note, I wonder if some US decision taker anticipated this. That refugees would start pouring north, in Europe. A political wink, as in "didn't want to help us against the evil Muslims, now take that in the face!". Evil muslim as in interpreting their point of view, of course.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 03:17 AM |
|
|
Kayna said:
A rebel would try to change his country rather than flee it.
why the more prosperous countries didn't take up arms against isis and all their murderous killing sprees is beyond me. how they get to be big enough to threaten whole countries, or a whole region, and NOT be a target for airborne attacks, is beyond me. they're operating in the open. nobody who really has the power are trying to stop them. it only makes sense for the people of that country to get the snow out. i think, whoever sat on their hands while all this was happening, should be directly accountable.
things like isis happening, are exactly WHEN other countries should be getting involved. it's like everyone has their priorities backwards. that, or there's no profit to be made from it.
well, now they're seeing the results of them not doing anything. they have no one but themselves to blame. the u.s. already has it's hands full with immigrants from everywhere south of us, so now europe will have it's turn.
of course, that could be exactly what the u.s. powers-that-be were planning in the first place when they decided to invade iraq instead of afghanistan after 9/11; look for a region that is barely stable, and completely destablize it and sit back, while all hell breaks loose. then, give the innocent people there the idea that "hey, europe is safe. go there, they will help."
the question is, will all of this movement further destabilize europe, anymore than it has been, however gradually? europe has the chance to either grow stronger as a whole with this, or to possibly collapse into anarchy because of it. that's a lot of mouths to feed/people to house/resources to acquire/jobs to find.
we'll all just have to wait and see.
|
|
Kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 03:35 AM |
|
Edited by Kayna at 03:36, 18 Sep 2015.
|
Rich people needs poor people to work for them. Our governments can't let everyone evolve equally ; It's a mix of multiple reasons, or should I say excuses. Those on top of my head are : We don't like religious extremes and let's trash these poor people and turn their countries in a war like state to keep them poor while we hunt down Hussein that dared to sell his oil for Euro instead of US dollars.
Find a victim, paint a mark on it and trash them. If they want to get out of their poor, after war status, they can grow crops for us for a snowty price.
Still, the control is never perfect. I actually have no real idea on what's going on in Europe or Syria, but usually, people in the government fluctuates between two ideology ; patriotism and greed. Patriotism can either be "lets allow some of us in and show the world we're good guys" or "Don't let them in they're not like us in many ways and they will corrupt us" while greed is more like "I like desperate ethnics willing to work twice as hard as the rest in my company".
Judging from Germany's offer to take in so many refugees, I'd bet whoever holds their government right now focus on money. The corporations must have a strong influence there at the moment. And I wonder if someone in there, somewhere, smirks to himself because he had anticipated the whole exodus on foot going on and all the trouble it's causing to countries in the way? Being in power isn't fun if you can't do something ironic once in a while, and I wonder if there isn't some ironic revenge going on right now that I don't understand.
|
|
TDL
Honorable
Supreme Hero
The weak suffer. I endure.
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 03:36 AM |
|
Edited by TDL at 03:38, 18 Sep 2015.
|
To me the crisis only seems to spur the growth of the new wave of tolerasts everywhere. I sincerely love the satire South Park creators bring about on over-tolerance in this era. There are legitimate reasons why most prejudices exist because of how traditions evolve in various countries, and while they do not conform to modern standards most of the time, the sole notion that your opinion is being demeaned based on your negative views on certain issues seems blasphemous.
I've been having some very heated arguments about bringing in refugees from various regions who follow a markedly distinct lifestyle (ie, islamic countries, african countries) and espouse a different culture, which I stand against. In countries, where there is a legitimate multi-cultural society, it's a possibility. However, in countries with smaller tight-knit communities, introducing people following a certain unfamiliar culture/lifestyle, it is a no-no. While there may not be issues with the people themselves, the problems may arise from the clash of cultures, which may inadvertently lead to rise in crime.
I had attended multiple self-defence/self-awareness training sessions, which mostly focused on how to behave in dangerous countries, ie, South Africa. People there experience so many issues from gangs/tribal warfare, which spreads into the society and corrodes city life in comparison to our country that it seems insane. Now, if some of the refugees came in from those trouble-mongering communities, under false pretense, who's to say we won't experience that now? The "I-want-I-take" view on the world is so vastly different to ours, even to that of our bad guys, that we'd be averse to the issue and open ourselves to victimisation.
It's like in Norway, when I was walking in Oslo, I was always with my mouth wide open, how people would "reserve" an open table at an outdoors juice bar/coffee shop by leaving their belongings on the table (car keys, wallets, etc.). While it may seem casual, it would be easy pickings for people outside of their cultured upbringing. We even had a laugh that the Norwegians only started locking their doors after lithuanians started to emigrate.
Of course, the tolerasts would claim that it is our own fault that we did not prepare and ready ourselves for the potential of such issues (cause, of course, they happen in under <0.01% of the total population of the refugees, which is unsubstantiated) and the other refugees aren't at fault... But the current notion of relative security in our closed-minded world would undoubtedly wane and it'd trigger a calamitous chain effect, spreading fear, dissent and stuff like that.
Hope this rant made sense. Tried to make it as short as possible without spilling any beans.
____________
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 03:52 AM |
|
|
@Kip
The kid and the photo is real, our president personally called the father for condolences, who is by the way, the only family member who survived from that sinking boat. (Erdogan's call is a PR move, of course, since the opposition parties are at his neck all the time about this in all sorts of ways.)
We have around 2 million refugees at the moment, you can see the figures in the video linked on the post above (kiryu's). Back in Istanbul, I live in a very central neighborhood and I have never heard so much Arabic in my life. (I almost feel like I'm in Paris, Sal  ) Although the culture clash is much softer here for obvious reasons, there is naturally some amount of annoyance from the public, mostly from some of the middle/upper middle-class people who complain that jobless, filthy beggars are filling the streets. Imagine you are doing your morning yoga and, oops, "the third world" comes out of the sea:
(Btw, this photo is from the city of Bodrum, the same place where the kid's body was dragged to the shore)
Some of the objections are based on double standards. For example, any Turkish citizen should score a certain point on an official test to be accepted as a student to a university but the refugees dont have to take that test. But then again, how can they fairly take the test when they come from a different education system and speak a different language?
Although I hate this government with all my heart and soul, I support their politics on this one. These people flee from the worst kind of war, imagine the possibility of ISIS invading the area you live in, that means you can be killed/raped/imprisoned for almost a million reasons, meaning for no reason at all. Laying your head low is not an option. Any country which is able to, should help them. (Btw, there's an enormous, bitter reaction here to the oil-rich Arab emirates who dont move a finger for their "muslim fellows"). Of course, the helping hand should be organized and planned well, with assimilation policies that are thought through with careful strategy. Yet, you cant perfectly organize things during a war of this sort, everything happens so fast.
About the EU aspect of the issue, I think like almost any solidarity problem about the union, this is basically about the enormous economical power gap between the many members of the union. A single decision would affect each member very differently, it's not easy to form a union that functions organically when there are major sociological, economical and historical differences between the members. It will take time but I dont see it as a lost cause, because that's what the future forces Europe into. Back in the 1870's, city states of Italy and the many princedoms of Germany had to unite as nations because they had to compete with other nations, it's the same thing on a bigger scale, Europe can't remain in smaller units for another century.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 06:27 AM |
|
|
The EU refugee crisis will only grow worse I fear. This is because in order for the problem to be solved the fledgling Islamic califate must be destroyed. But Obama is unwilling to put troops on the ground to get it done and no one else will do so unless the US is leading the way. So hope that in a year and a half a Republican president will be in the white house or Obama has an epiphany. Or that the EU members decide to stand up to ISIS.
Obama's stalling tactic of occasional bombing runs that occasionally drop bombs has failed, predictably. Obama's plan to train and equip "rebels" as boots on the ground in liue of American boots on the ground has failed. In a year's time for half a billion dollars the US graduated around 55 rebel soldiers and they were all promptly destroyed or fled as soon as they were inserted into Syria. But the administration insists Obama's plan is sound and merely needs tweaking.
So unless Obama or the EU decides to really do something against ISIS prepare for a Tsunami of people fleeing ISIS with a smattering of terorists hidding amoungst the refugees. Europe will forever be changed.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 08:18 AM |
|
|
artu said:
About the EU aspect of the issue, I think like almost any solidarity problem about the union, this is basically about the enormous economical power gap between the many members of the union. A single decision would affect each member very differently, it's not easy to form a union that functions organically when there are major sociological, economical and historical differences between the members. It will take time but I dont see it as a lost cause, because that's what the future forces Europe into. Back in the 1870's, city states of Italy and the many princedoms of Germany had to unite as nations because they had to compete with other nations, it's the same thing on a bigger scale, Europe can't remain in smaller units for another century.
Yes, the main problem is the huge economic difference between the countries but this is like that since day one. The "eastern flank" of the EU is inside the union for geopolitical reasons much more than for economic reasons where the roots of this supernational entity are purely economical with future plans to evolve into some political cooperation of - simply put - unknown scale. Even today there are major differences between the "old" members regarding how the political structure should look like while at the same time the "new" members just got dropped into a cauldron where other countries hold the ladle and are pretty used to that role. The Balkans in particular are a financial black hole in short- and mid-term, some countries even in long term, everyone in Brussels knows that and what happened and keeps happening in Greece in particular was and is the obvious outcome of the oldest and most repetitive capitalistic mistake which has seen multiple occurrences throughout the history - to think that growth is eternal and crises are manageable in the worst cases. Greece, just like Bulgaria and Romania, are important for NATO, not so much for the EU. Same applies to other eastern members, although maybe not all of them (and certainly applies 1000% to the bankrupt, super-corrupt, propaganda-driven wannabe member Ukraine). For situations like this one however, NATO is out of the picture and the EU is left with its poor periphery and literally has no idea what to do with it.
Then there are the issues of the "old" members. Germany first said "keep coming, you're welcome" to the refugees, then closed its borders. This shows that the German government itself doesn't have a clear idea what it wants to do with these people or whether it can handle them. France will probably close its borders if it feels that part of the wave is redirected to it. The (re-elected!) UK government has anti-immigration sentiments for years, there are no reasons to expect that it will suddenly welcome thousands of Syrians to its territory. The Nordic members don't seem to be very fond of accepting many people. Pretty much all countries where the refugees (or emigrants) want to settle are unwilling to accept big masses of people on national level. In other words, the countries which actually run the EU are currently applying nationalistic emigrant policies while in parallel their representatives in the institutions mutter about "solidarity" and blame Orban's government for not being very hospitable. That's not leading anywhere of course and that's exactly where the EU currently is in terms of taking a common decision, let alone an acceptable one.
The biggest problem however is that the EU currently seems unable to handle major international challenges as a single entity - because it lacks its own military, common border policy, emigrant policy and so on as union, rather it acts as a very loose confederacy which tries to give central instructions to decentralized entities which are neither obliged, nor willing to follow them. It also reintroduced the internal borders, something which will unavoidably have future repercussions, even if it is only temporary. All in all it's fairly obvious that the existing EU can't handle issues like that persistently, hopefully we won't get some daft workaround to "buy time" and only make matters worse later.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 09:48 AM |
|
|
I think the problem with the conflicting logistic and decisions in EU came from the clash between emotional and real. At least from what I've seen here, there were some people really excited that they could finally give a sense to their life, help someone, get involved and participate in some historical event, change the history. So they went with full food trucks and clothes, then as videos showed, refugees throw away the food because not halal, attacked people coming to help them and vandalized their cars. Sure, it is a local issue and probably not overall generalized but it still erodes the little public support a government receives from people, the support it needs in order to take unpopular decisions.
Then they realized that in order to be effective, give them where to stay, electricity and all the minimal comfort was still way above the funds they could raise. Here in France there is a worrying moaning growing when people heard the amount of money is "unblocked" for refugees. And don't understand me wrong, nobody would react to this money usage if we were not in the very middle of an austerity politic, where all social actors budgets were bloody amputated and where even our secular right to healthcare -which is considered one of the France principal grandeurs- is today challenged.
|
|
Ebonheart
Famous Hero
Rush the rush
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 09:51 AM |
|
|
artu said:
The kid and the photo is real, our president personally called the father for condolences.
I did not feel touched by the picture of the dead child. What I was touched by however was the fact that the father was a human-smuggler who endangered his whole family for his own selfish greedy reasons.
Disgusting, is the only word I have for his actions.
|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 11:03 AM |
|
Edited by kiryu133 at 11:48, 18 Sep 2015.
|
So the question being asked is roughly "should EU be a single country"?
I don't know. It think it something that we could strive for, sure. But we're not quite there yet and it doesn't stop the fact that drastic measures to help these people need to be taken.
I wasn't moved by that picture either (Asberger will do that to you) but there is no denying it helped bring a lot of people together for a common goal. It's a shame that can't be said for the countries themselves. At the end of the day we're all one people. It's time we started acting like it, as cliche as that sounds.
Ebonheart said:
What I was touched by however was the fact that the father was a human-smuggler who endangered his whole family for his own selfish greedy reasons.
Disgusting, is the only word I have for his actions.
suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure...
____________
It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that the cis are at it again.
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 11:29 AM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 11:48, 18 Sep 2015.
|
The EU should just be dissolved, it brought more harm than good, this whole mess is the EU's fault.
You now are talking about the immigrants, you are trying to control the damage that has been done without appearing intolerant.
Let me ask you a question, where was the EU when Lampedusa started being filled with immigrants, where was the EU when Sicily was being invaded by hordes of Africans, what did the EU say when Italy pleaded help with our refugee crisis?
They said: "Deal with it", they threatened us that shouldn't we recognize the immigrants and keep them in Italy they would have san tioned us for being "inhumane", the only support they gave us was operation Triton, an operation that compared to the previous Mare Nostrum, an all Italian operation, was unsuitable.
The EU could have acted before this, they could have prepared a plan for any immigrants, but they stalled, comfortable in their glass palaces, leaving us alone against the tide of Africa.
The EU is preparing laws to further impoverish us, with their mad laws on agricultural products.
The EU is a group of crooks that is only concerned with money and the interests of America and Germany, uncaring for the situations of southern europe.
The EU forced us to stall on procedures of recognition, since it meant taking all who came here and maintaining them without hope of relocating them, the result? An Ivorian immigrant came into a town, broke into an house and brutally murdered an elderly couple, to steal something; countless immigrants travel in the territory of Catania to get some charity.
If the EU acted earlier on this issue maybe this wouldn't be his huge problem, now separate those who come from war ridden countries and leechers, now spend your money on their care.
Hungary did the only thing possible, by closing the borders they ensured that they wouldn't have to keep these waves of immigrants and pay for them.
The EU is a failure, they made this mess with the treaty of Dublin, and only now that we're at the brink of disaster are they reconsidering it.
This isn't a terrible situations only for the natives, it is also for immigrants, either Germany follows up with their promises or we kick the refugees back because we can't help them.
Edited to correct some errors and remove the initial phrase
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
gatecrasher
Famous Hero
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 12:48 PM |
|
|
OK, I haven't read much of what has been written here.
But I've come across the wording economic immigrants again.
So what is wrong with being one?
"Western lifestyle" only for those with citizenship of 1st world countries? 1st world - crap world division forever?
I don't know of anybody telling me how he got to choose where to be born.
I think the label economic immigrants is nothing short of racism.
|
|
fuChris
Promising
Supreme Hero
Master to the Speed of Light
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 01:01 PM |
|
Edited by fuChris at 13:06, 18 Sep 2015.
|
The problem with the EU is that is basically an economic union of the financially powerful "western" countries that expanded beyond themselves for geopolitical reasons but it was never meant to be a real political union and will most certainly never be a single country like the USA. Nationalism is for european countries is what bacon and guns are for the USA, unthinkable without it.
The bottom line is that as much as the liberal media is spouting that nonsense about ageing population the truth is that outside the rich nations there is simply no need for immigrants in an economic sense. And I'm talking about countries like Spain and Denmark here and not just the eastern block of former communist countries. As long as the EU functions as it should all it's human resource needs will be met by people from newly recruited member states. If any other well educated people from outside the EU want to have a better life then there are legal ways for them to enter and they will be able to cherrypick which country they want to settle in.
Speaking about cherrypicking, there is no way to force imigrants to actually stay where they were ordered to stay if any binding quotas were to be enacted and eventually all of them would end up back there where they originally wanted to go. After that countries like germany can cherrypick which individuals it will want to keep and can leave the rest to be dealt with by countries that originally didn't want any to begin with. Hungarian grandmas won't want to be treated by Syrian doctors when their grandchildren who are also doctors can't get a job and must emigrate themselvs and the syrian doctors won't want to stay either because the are being paid sh*t compared to wages in Germany. Not to mention that Easter eurorope still has problems with different ethnic groups not willing to integrate properly into the society. Hungarian romas for example arrived here in several waves the first one circa 600 years ago. These are the ones that are are more or less well integrated and lead a proper life. Then there came another wave around 400 years ago. Seems like a lot of time but from this group still hasn't managed to be properly integrated and are a menace to civil society. They rob, steal, live like pigs in sh*t, multiply like crazy and are a general burden to the social welfare system. Several hundred years of this kind of experiance will leave a mark on a society totally different then what Germany has experienced with it's Turkish population or what the UK with it's Indian population.
All of this would not be a problem if these were actual refugees and and not migrants. Refugees could be kept safe and taken care of for years and then they could go back to their county of origin when the dust has settled. This would be acceptable for all countries I think but it is all too clear that these people intend to stay.
Such things btw could have been done in Turkey if the EU and US had allocated proper funds to make it possible but the lingering economic stagnation and basic human greed has kept them from this. Not to mention that no incentive was offered to push Turkey into accepting Syrians as refugees and not just "guests" since guests are not allowed to officially work there. In a situation like that where only the most basic conditions were met(not always) and there is no outlook for a better stable life accepted by a state the obvious choice was ofcourse migration. And Germays pussyfooted approach was just what they needed to strengthen the already big stream of people.
gatecrasher said:
But I've come across the wording economic immigrants again.
So what is wrong with being one?
Having a good life in not a basic human need. If people want to lead a better life then what they have involves sacrifice and hard work other then looking at a phones GPS and saying I want to go to that one. A better life could be achieved in their home country under different circumstances but no country is needed to provide any of it freely to anyone.
____________
"Now I am become Chris, the destroyer of worlds." - Robert Oppenheimer.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 01:10 PM |
|
|
I agree with you, but I don't think many will. I never understood the entire deal with closing your borders and keep people out. It's just land, and if we live better, we should try to share our methods so other regions can live just as well.
One of the main issues I think is that of terrain, so it's more difficult if you live in e.g. a northern African country to establish the same livelihood we've in e.g. coastal Europe.
In any case, I don't think the issue of this topic should be confused with that of immigration. In northern Europe many of the largest political parties have now focused on limiting immigrants access to our country, what I think is typically called a more xenophobic agenda. With huge success, second largest party in DK, largest in Norway I think, also very large in Sweden and Finland, etc. In my country, all the 3 largest parties had promotion of xenophobia as their main political agenda in the latest election, this year.
However some politicians seems to have confused refugees with immigrants as they tried the same rhetoric with a huge backslash. I am glad the voters, while I don't agree with any kind of xenophobia, at least can tell the difference, and in general the population have been willing to circumvent the law in order to help these people.
@fuCrhis
I think it's too simplistic to say everyone has his faith in his own hands independent of where or how he's born..
|
|
Kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 01:31 PM |
|
|
The problem isn't accepting or refusing them. The problem is their sheer number. Two millions? That's twice the town of Montreal. Holy crap! If such a -throng-, to put it in HoMM terms, was knocking at my country's door, I'd freak out.
Two million Muslims can seriously destroy the human ecology of a region. If they all settle at the same place, they will forever change it. It's why a proper immigration tries not to accept too many people of the same origin, race, religion, etc; because if you do, they won't mix in with the rest. They will form their own gettho.
Two million people? Half of them wouldn't even need to bother learning the main language of the country they settle in. Cops would stop patrolling the area, because their presence would create more problems than they would solve. One generation later, some of them would become cops, lawyers and land owners themselves. Then they will apply their own set of laws in their own land and solve disputes "legally" based on their strange Koran.
Steyn said:
phe said:
Refugees are in difficult situation...they should have right to stay if they are not criminals or homosexualists as long as there is no peace and prosperity in countries of origin.
What do you have against homosexuals? I would say gay immigrants are even better, as they are far less likely to have children. Therefore you won't have the problem with immigrant children who grew up in your country when you want to send them back again.
I agree with him though, secretly homosexual Muslims applying their anti gay religious laws on other gay people should be deported back to their country of origin!
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 01:33 PM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 13:43, 18 Sep 2015.
|
gatecrasher said:
OK, I haven't read much of what has been written here.
But I've come across the wording economic immigrants again.
So what is wrong with being one?
"Western lifestyle" only for those with citizenship of 1st world countries? 1st world - crap world division forever?
I don't know of anybody telling me how he got to choose where to be born.
I think the label economic immigrants is nothing short of racism.
Then they should do as the old migrants did back then, stock up on money and pursue ways to legally migrate instead of being clandestines.
Or collaborate to improve their country's situation so as to get them out of the third world.
The distinction is made because we can't possibly sustain such a wave of migrants so we have to distinguish those who need to enter because they would be killed otherwise and those who just want to get money.
EDIT:
Kayna said:
Two million Muslims can seriously destroy the human ecology of a region. If they all settle at the same place, they will forever change it. It's why a proper immigration tries not to accept too many people of the same origin, race, religion, etc; because if you do, they won't mix in with the rest. They will form their own gettho.
This. Integration doesn't work that way, you need to encourage and even force interaction between natives and strangers, you have to allow both groups to acclimatise and not make laws either against that group or against hate speech.
Don't ever try to force people to accept others, else they will radicalise and you will have both Shari'a zones in various towns and have racist groups running amok.
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted September 18, 2015 01:41 PM |
|
|
Neraus said:
Or collaborate to improve their country's situation so as to get them out of the third world.
But that's pretty easy to say.. consider that:
1) This country has no free market forces.
2) The country is not democratically led.
3) The government does not ensure your safety.
4) The land itself is mostly barren.
5) Little educational possibilities.
Many companies won't set food there, and if they do, they won't pay their workers much, and the money they'll pay the government will mainly go to those in power and not for the benefit of the people.
I don't think it's much different from here, that you find a job and make money, and that is only if you're fit, but you can hardly expand from there, because most of the little you earn or produce has to go to you and your family.
I think one way to distinguish if a country is at a bloom or wither is whether it's advantageous to get many or few children. In rich countries people don't have to rely on large families to ensure that you can get by, but in poor countries it's more of a necessity than a choice.
Edit:
Regarding the numbers, our politicans have been yelling about that we're already taking in too many, when we took ~15 people last year iIRC, which is pretty ridiculous. Meanwhile neighboring countries to Syria have to deal with the real numbers, they're the ones who're pressed, not European countries who with a total population of ~800 millions should easily be able to deal with the streams of thousands that are travelling through Europe and not millions. But it doesn't stop us from limiting our support to the neighboring countries even further..
Neraus said:
Don't ever try to force people to accept others, else they will radicalise and you will have both Shari'a zones in various towns and have racist groups running amok.
Well you shouldn't separate them either or you'll end up with ghetto environments and radicalization, like we've experienced. We'd a lot of extremely expensive apartments made in the 70's, that where so expensive only the very rich or people who got government help (reduced prices, extra income) could live there. I don't think if they were immigrants or refugees, but they came to the country without education or the ability to speak the language (which is normal), the problem was many got to live together in these complexes, without much interaction with people of my country and they never really got integrated..
In my opinion the smartest course of action is to let the integration happen in steps and be prepared for that first generation people will never fully accept our way of life.
Think about it like this, when you move from a totally different country to this country, you still have the upbringing (from parents and from the country) from your past, but your children will be as much influenced by the country as their parents as long as there is no isolation.. their children will have your children's 50/50 upbringing as only 50%, and 50% from the country for at total of 25/75, etc.
Now the number are arbitrary, but it's to point out that it's not something that just happens from one day to the next, but it does happen over time.
Also I think it'd probably be best to let people have contacts with more integrated people who can build bridges with the new country's society they're to take part of, so no one isolates themselves, to avoid the ghetto environments.
____________
Living time backwards
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
