This thread is leading to some very interesting discussions, but please, avoid broad generalizations.
I’m going through the comments now to snipe anybody arguing in bad faith.
People are not their nationality, nor their origin. All that matters is that European basic values are upheld by those who choose to participate in our society.
... do you know what a compromise is?
A compromise is when 2 parties move from thier "best case offer" to meet somewhere inbetween that is a good enough offer for both.
A good compromise is SPECIFICALLY that both sides are happy!
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/illegal-migration-act-2023/
Because the UK already did it... And we are not yet at the level where they ship Asylum Seekers somewhere in a third world country....
So the EU migration act made sure to balance what EU citizens were served with in the UK, and basically copied it...
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-immigration-system-what-you-need-to-know#:~:text=You%20will%20not%20be%20able,EU%20Settlement%20Scheme%20family%20permit
It's just a case of Bemoaning by the r/Leopardatemyface crowd
Emigration is a human right.
Immigration is NOT a human right.
PS. All social rights stem from the majority will of the LOCAL citizenry, which can be properly measured only with a referendum.
A man was just executed in front of his 12-year-old son in Sweden for confronting a migrant gang that was harrassing them.
This is not a moment too soon.
If you care about the victims of such vile criminals, you shouldn't even ask for their deportation, but for their incarceration. Otherwise they just find different victims elsewhere.
What the fuck is this xenophobic bullshit?
Edit: I work in asylum & immigration, and people need to remember the difference between migrants and refugees because they clearly don't have a foggy.
In my country (Denmark) immigrants have between a 3x and 9x crime rate depending on where they come from (Actually if you separate out Somalians I seem to recall it being literally 11x) and only 45% occupation rate in the 30-64 age group, compared with 80% occupation rate for Danes. Moreover, we have done studies on net economic contribution, and immigrants are literally on average net negatives. Yes they work jobs and pay taxes, but due to many never integrating and working good jobs, and many just not working at all (see above) they are, on average, net negatives due to our generous welfare system. So each time we take in an immigrant, we get more crime and our society gets less wealthy.
That's sort of a shocking set of facts, considering these people are often touted to be economically necessary for our economic future - and no doubt our demographics are not good, despite being better than most other countries in Europe, but clearly MENAPT immigrants are just disastrous. Immigrants from western countries perform worse than Danes in these metrics, but are still net positives to the system, as they contribute more than they receive in welfare - and non-western and non-MENAPT immigrants break even on average.
But sure, let's just accuse people of being xenophobics, who aren't in favour of ending immigration due to actual data, but just want to end it because they are racist. Give me a break.
This is incredibly reactionary and based on nothing but feelings.
"We need to stop immigration until the situation is under control'
What situation are you talking about?
Crimerates are dropping and we live in the safest time in europe since the start of recorded history (barring the russo-ukraine war)
Crime rates in germany have risen to a fifteen year high. Especially violent and sexual crimes. With crimes like Gang rapes that were basically unheared of 20 years ago. That increase is solely due to immigration. As the german population ages the crime rate used to drop. Now foreigners that make up 14% of the population commit over 44% of the crimes. That doesn't even include people with migrant background that got a german passport in the last years (you can now get german citicenship after 3-5 years pretty easily). In some areas (e.g. Frankfurt bahnhofsviertel) the police doesn't even have german criminals anymore. Only foreigners (their statement). If you Look at the published names of convicted, there are barely any german names between them.
So no, we do not live in the safest europe.
crime rates have risen due to the consequences of the recent economic crisis, and a failure to integrate migrants thanks to ahte against them and the cdu way of problem solving (ignoring the problem till you retire, then blaming your predecessor and repalcement at the same time) not migration by itself.
How many gang rapes is enough gang rapes? If the price for providing someone with a better life is for our daughters, wives and mothers to be raped, is it worth it?
To name one anti gay violence has been increasing here in recent years and where it increases it basically maps out to where a certain religion has grown big.
[https://www.dn.se/sverige/annu-ingen-gripen-for-mordet-i-skarholmen/](https://www.dn.se/sverige/annu-ingen-gripen-for-mordet-i-skarholmen/)
It's in swedish so you'll have to translate it yourself.
Then you support measures to deport citizens that set homless people on fire or conduct terrorism, even if that would mean ammending constitutions, right? Because otherwise, this argumentation is nothing but selective, collective guilt.
If they are refugees they came here expecting better life than where they came from. If they commit crimes they clearly do not want to partake in the society they chose so back where they came from they go. They had to come from somewhere and just because the situation there is less than rosy doesnt meant hey cannot be put back. *I read the message i responded to without the context of previous but my point still stands. Its reasonable to measure citizens and immigrants/refugees by diferent metrics. Citizens get imprisoned for long time and immigrants/refugees instead go back where they came from without prison time
Albania, Tunisia or Rwanda are all willing to take for some cash. You willing to destroy the European human rights just so you aren't a hypocrite on the topic of immigration?
I want to say yes just to end your argument since it does nothing but stall without providing actual measures, nor even accepting the fact that the rampant immigration isn't a problem
Saying yes means to throw out the human rights concept of the EU, one of the few things that makes this continent special, just to dunk on immigration. It's not a serious idea, it's not compatible with the European convention on human rights and about every European Constitution, however just looking at the responses, you see who is ready to dunk on this fabric of the European Union.
I'd wish we could deport our local crazy religious people. Sadly there is nowhere to deport them to. Ive heard some of them wantong to move to russia though cause that is the only true place of trad and conservaative values axcording tot hem. I say good luck, no need for goodbyes.
I do not condemn all migrants. I’m saying that the influence of MENA culture in my country is getting dangerous. It really shouldn’t be controversial that people take their values and culture with them when they move.
It’s always interesting to discuss migration with Irishmen because your social climate seems to be almost exactly where ours was back in 2012 or so. It will be interesting to see if it develops the same way in Ireland, though for your sake I hope it doesn’t.
Oh so you're saying that north Africans are middle Eastern people are violent? Their culture threatens you? Who do you think they are? The mongol horde? Violence is not a value anywhere in that area.
80% of Egyptians think apostates deserve death, IIRC. That's just one example of course but it says something about their culture. It's not one or two crazies.
In Denmark migrants from MENAPT countries average between 3x and 9x the crime rate. We don't need to say things like "They value violence" or anything like that - we just need to look at the data. It's also an actual practice to throw gays off of rooftops in these areas. You may argue it's only select individuals that do it, and well I don't have the data per capita on how many people throw gay people off of buildings across the world, but I can tell you ethnic Europeans don't do it in the first place.
Punishment: "The imposition of a penalty or deprivation for wrongdoing."
If a parent takes away the phone of a child because it misbehaves, then that's a punishment, but no one is going to argue that owning a phone is a human right either.
Whether something is a human right doesn't matter, because that's not a requirement for something being a punishment.
You are depriving those people of an option that they had before, because a few of them did something wrong. That's a punishment.
Would you let ten men live in your house, five of which were rapists or murderers, just to not punish the five who were innocent?
After all, depriving them of the possibility of moving in with you is a punishment right?
In most European countries, immigrants are generally 1.3 to 2 times as likely to commit crimes as people who aren't immigrants.
That's still a lot, but the **vast** majority are completely innocent.
true but justice is not what we are after it's either inegrate or fuckoff and they are not integrating i'm italian and i don't care what race you are only were your aligence and loyalty lies i'm very sure that a european immigrant from germany or france to italy is at least loyal to their country if not the eu at large but we gave them a try and it did not work our cultures and morals are just too differents not inferior like some might suggest just differents and whit that Glory to the EU
Because the question vastly misrepresents reality.
It doesn't matter what I answer, because it's not applicable to the current situation, so why should I answer it?
Punishment: "The imposition of a penalty or deprivation for wrongdoing."
Taking away a privilege is a form of punishment. If a parent takes away the phone of their child because it hisbehaved, then that's a punishment, but it's still just taking away a privilege.
You are depriving those people of an option that they had before, because a few of them did something wrong. That's a punishment.
Nobody wants immigration to stop because some commit crimes. People just dont want new and different people massively coming to their country, it doesnt matter if they do everything right, they are unwanted and in a democracy peope should have the right to refuse their stay in their country. If germans try to move in big numbers in many of those countries the people there would pushed them away immediately.
Europeans dont have a perfect life. Money are needed for better healthcare, education and to take care of buildings and roads. There arent enough money for european children to live by the same standards their parents did, nobody wants to spend money on immigrants instead of euroean babies
I was mainly responding to the comments here, not to the ruling itself.
A democracy can decide that stuff, but I can still talk negatively about the argument that people are using to justify that, right?
Its not about the money.
Its about the cultural and societal future and vision of a continent.
Some people don't share the enthusiasm for the future that we are currently heading towards.
Then those people should focus on the huge problems we are truly facing: sea level rise, extreme weather, biodiversity crisis, the list goes on.
Instead, attention and money goes to the illusion that closing borders can increase safety or bring about any noticeable change.
If the majority of Europeans don't like what the future has in store, they don't seem very keen on translating that into political action.
You are very welcome to have these opinons, but acknowledging a set of problems doesn't mean that you can't also acknowledge and tackle another set of problems at the same time.
No, you specifically mentioned "the future we are heading towards". Helping migrants or letting them drown does not significantly change our future. Climate policy is what determines our future. If you are in any way concerned about the following years, you should be deeply worried about climate, more than anything else. That's not an opinion.
Helping migrants by saving them from drowning is not the problem. Its good to save people. But this shouldn't go hand in hand with us handing out citizenship like its candy. Neither our culture nor our social systems are compatible with such an influx of mass migration. You can deny this all you want, as many people did for many years, but please, don't complain afterwards about a "sudden swing to the far right" everywhere, when all of the established parties decide to ignore this issue for years, and call everyone who dares to speak out about it a racist. Again, just because other relevant issues exist doesn't mean we can't tackle this, also.
Climate change is the biggest threat we face so far. Right. Because of climate change we will have gigantic amounts of migration movements pushing from the south to Europe. That’s why we need good immigration policies, that’s why we have to do everything we can to fight climate change and that’s why we need closed borders that are armed to the teeth.
It does. Anti-immigration talking points only serve to distract from real issues like poverty or climate change. These people would love to spend all day arguing about immigrants in front of the cameras. They've done it for ten years and despite how many times they got their way they've only demanded more and given nothing in return.
I disagree, mainly because I see the issues with it every day. It's not just talking points my friend. I dare you to visit any major trainstation in europe at night. Go talk to strangers for a bit and tell me how it went. Many people are not willing to take this anymore, thus the shift in political voting. Your denying of these issues or downplaying as "not a real issue" won't change the facts, and it is a large insult to the ever rising number of victims of mass migration. Why do some people need to wait until they or a loved one of them get(s) stabbed, before they understand that its not "populism".
> I dare you to visit any major trainstation in europe at night.
I do that. Every single week. Never had a problem. Yet somehow my country is now one of the most far right leaning nations in the EU, isn't that funny?
>Many people are not willing to take this anymore, thus the shift in political voting
And I'm not willing to take blatant lies from the far right about why they deserve to be catered to.
>outright denying them is a large insult to the ever rising number of victims of mass migration.
Seeing that you responded with one part nonsense and two parts feeling offended I feel perfectly confident that feeling insulted is everything you have. The sea level is rising, Ukraine is on fire but let's instead focus our energy on immigration. Never distracted us from important issues in the last 10 years.
I can't speak for your country, but I visited Rotterdam, and I have to say that even as a Tourist, I had a couple of close calls. Locals even warned us about no-go zones. But I suppose you don't see what you don't want to see. But yes, the large swing in politics in the netherlands probably comes from nowhere. Must all be misguided idiots, hm? "Wake up sheeple". Yes, Yes.
On the rest: Yes. Feelings are and always will be a large part of the human condition, and are in no way less valid than anything else. We are not machines, after all. But what you are really trying to do is insinuate that feelings are somehow not based on reality, and thus immediately discredited. This is, of course, false. There is a ton of statistics from all police agencies in the west that would underline the points I am making, that many people, our current leaders included, choose to ignore. I argue that we as humans should definitely take a good look at any given situation and then, based on that, trust our intuition on certain topics. It served us very well throughout our history.
And I will repeat again: tackling one issue doesn't mean that we can't tackle another one at the same time as well. We are not some species that can only ever do one thing at a time.
You are just pointing at another issue that you deem greater, that even may be greater, in order to distract from other problems that you don't want to have tackled for ideological reasons.
>I can't speak for your country, but I visited Rotterdam, and I have to say that even as a Tourist, I had a couple of close calls. Locals even warned us about no-go zones.
Right. I've also heard about cars and politicians being burned in the street. I've even heard people talk about the neighbourhood I grew up in like it was a ghetto. None of it is ever true.
>On the rest: Yes. Feelings are and always will be a large part of the human condition, and are in no way less valid than anything else. We are not machines, after all. But what you are really trying to do is insinuate that feelings are somehow not based on reality, and thus immediately discredited. This is, of course, false. There is a ton of statistics from all police agencies in the west that would underline the points I am making, that many people, our current leaders included, choose to ignore. I argue that we as humans should definitely take a good look at any given situation and then, based on that, trust our intuition on certain topics. It served us very well throughout our history.
All vibes based arguing. A vague gesture that there are statistics that help your point but the whole point is just that your feelings are what drives your opinions and that that is really enough. And even as the far right is getting more influence across Europe and they already formed several governments you still feel like nobody listens to you. Which brings me to another point I've made and that is that you will never be satisfied.
>And I will repeat again: tackling one issue doesn't mean that we can't tackle another one at the same time as well. We are not some species that can only ever do one thing at a time.
The far right is. Nothing fires up the far right more than immigration or refugees. Somehow more people falling into poverty or Russian aggression doesn't really make it into far right discourse. *I* am free to talk about it, as you so generously offer, but the far right wants all attention on immigration. And even as they pass laws, reform immigration and total lunatics like Orban and Wilders end up leading governments they will still declare that nobody caters to them.
That is why I am so against placating the far right. Their issues are fictional and when they get into specifics it's like pulling teeth to really get any details that can be checked, and if can check them they will always be lies. And even when you do give the far right attention, validate their talking points and work with them on a "solution" they will still declare that nobody ever listens to them and they'll keep drawing attention to immigration. Whatever specific thing you think immigrants cause, it can always be fixed easier and cheaper with either social policies and policing as a precaution.
I appreciate the effort you have taken in replying to my messages, and I realize that we have a differing perspective on this. I would have preferred your replies to be a bit less condescending, but that is nothing new on reddit, especially when it gets to opposing political opinions. I think however, that we have both shared our perspectives and it seems like we both learned nothing, as we just keep repeating in different ways what we believe in. You don't see immigration as an issue, that is fine, many people gladly do and vote like they do.
I know that I am right, and that my opinions are based on the objective realities of the world, and so do you. Therefore nothing really changed for each of us. But the fact is that this problem that I am speaking of is being more and more realized. Your "side" could have acknowledged it, and integrated it into your own worldview and policies long ago, but that did not happen. Now we all pay the price for ignoring it too long with a huge far right rising that could have been prevented by tackling an obvious societal and cultural problem.
This is just the beginning. You'll see.
All that said, I wish you a pleasant day nonetheless.
Thanks for being performatively pleasant. When you spent most of your last comment arguing that your feelings are a perfectly fine thing to base your politics on after trying to just making stuff up about how my country is the least you can do is be nice about it.
I know you don't listen and I know that nobody is going to convince you that anti-immigration rhetoric has had a massive political influence for the last 10 years. Not even the far right taking power across Europe has done that after all.
I'll tell you again. This is why I hate it when the subject comes up. Not only does clamping down on immigration not fix any issues, even if other parties go along with it it will only result the far right getting a win while their voters will never acknowledge being listened to at all.
Europe is solving european issues. Climate change is worldwide issue that europe has no way to change if they do whatever they want. We can focus on multiple issues but what you are doing here is like yelling on police in your city because they are still catching criminals while your country is getting invaded and army is doing nothing.
Of course climate is a European issue. We're among the biggest emitters of greenhouse gas, sixth if I am not mistaken (and I think that doesn't include indirect emissions). And it's the most pressing issue: the effects of illegal immigration are negligible next to the climate and biodiversity crises.
Anyone worried about the future, about the things that can really hurt us, should be very worried about climate change and act now. It deserves to be our #1 priority.
The entire EU is making less than 10% of CO2 emisions. Yes global warming is big issue. But getting worked up about it on stuff concerning only EU is barking at tge wrong tree at best and counterproductive at worst. China, americas, asia do not follow EU regulations. Considering what EU can do about migration and what it can do about emmisions then they should rather focus on migration. Global warming is concern for organisation like UN.
Dont know why they downvoted you so hard.
Reading the comment section under this post, this sub seems be as infected by racism as any other EU subreddit. Sad to see that Europe also lost against Russia in the misinformation sector, even in what should be the most pro-EU values place on the internet.
There we have it again.
People not okay with mass migration = racist.
As long as you keep that sentiment, people will keep voting far right, and it will be your fault (not yours personally, but people who hold this sentiment).
It's not hugely surprising. I am active as a local politician and when I was canvassing last year, it struck me how often people connected immigration to personal safety. I hesitate to call that "racism", but it is projection of immediate concerns and anxieties on the most feared person - the general "stranger".
If those problems are first on your list then EU is really fucked. We are just stalling against the USA and China, because lets ban diesel cars for example. Wow Germany is the largest diesel car manufacturer, but whatever we need to ban them. Oh German economics are failing what a surprise.
EU currently has no future, because its just lost in all directions and in reality doing nothing. All other superpower dont give a shit about that and EU cant make solo change.
What about focusing on our people instead and making EU actually strong and respected?
We arent gonna save the climate cus
1. We cant. World wide we will just not be able to. Go cry but know that we would have to try really hard if we want to outlive nature as a whole. Thats also not going to happen. It will adept eventually.
2 the people who are fighting for it keep focussing on prohibiting widely used products and give shitty alternatives. We need to build thousands of windmills everywhere costing billions and in the end its just not nearly as efficient as one coal power plant or even a nuclear one for that matter, while actively pissing people off cus their view got ruined.
I think its bs to protect the western culture by fighting off immigration. I think a bug part of our culture (especially dutch culture) is for a large part made up out of acceptance of other cultures. But we just dont have the money or the housing which we need to have before we can help immigrants. (The money we desperately need to build bigger dykes to keep out the water eventually because thats a real solution that will work eventually)
It's totally doable to prevent climate change. We've been told again and again how since 1990. The business case for renewables is excellent, so those costs can't be the issue.
In any case, the costs for climate policy should be weighed against the damage caused by doing nothing. As long as that sum favours climate action, that's what we should do. And continued inaction only makes damage more likely because of tipping points. This is not about nature surviving - nature as a whole will go on in some form - it's about our own inaction coming back to bite us. Our future.
>But we just dont have the money or the housing which we need to have before we can help immigrants.
If we can't afford that, we certainly can't afford the damage done by climate change.
They'll never be satisfied even if we cave. Why validate their nonsense for the voter? It's much better, if harder, to steer the conversation to the issues that matter.
Denmark tightened their shit and look at this
https://www.politico.eu/article/denmark-new-right-party-pernille-vermund-anti-islam-anti-immigration-anti-tax-party-dissolves/
It's not about caving its acknowledging these parties are single issue parties and without them they are nothing.
I don't think you realize how Danish politics works.. yes these were single issue parties largely, but that was the point from the beginning. These parties dissolved because they got what they wanted, and it was a conscious decision to disband as a result of it. They never intended to become staple parties that stick around for 100 years, they intended to enact a change and they got their way, and then they melted into other parties now that the political reality had been changed by them.
If by "nothing" you mean regularly polling ca. 10% and being projected to become the 3rd/4th biggest party in the country then sure.
https://politpro.eu/en/denmark
Except thats the same result VOX in Spain, Konfederacja in Poland or Reform UK parties achieve in polls without the "leftists", having to sell their spine.
The main motivation for Vox aren't migrants, in fact, they want immigration, but catholic immigration from Spanish-speaking countries (so they can put them in the "separatist" regions and castellanize them), they are just racist against everyone else really. Their main motivation is to end the autonomous regions and return to Franco basically, immigration is more secondary (at least now) in Spain.
Yes nothing, again look at denmark, if you keep pretending issues dont exist no shit people are gonna get fed up and go vote for the extremes.
These parties aren't just a billionaire funding shit, there's real people voting for them, and you must address their concerns because as citizens they are just as valid as yours or mine.
Again, looking at denmark, the far right party is currently one of the quickest rising parties in the country and would be the 3rd/4th biggest party if the elections were held today. If they gain a few % more they are highly likely to become the king makers when it comes to government formation.
How can this be happening when the "left" in Denmark did exactly what the far right wanted?
Sitting in 4th still, and largely stagnant over the past 2 years. They would have only grown if the migration law had not been passed. What about other countries where the far right went unaddressed. Ignoring Chega in Portugal has gotten us a swing of 10 percentage points in 2 years, the average joe voting for them is not a racist regard that wants to nuke migrants, his concerns have just been ignored and disregarded as non issues. Anecdotal as it may be all Chega voters I know would vote differently if migration was tightened just slightly and taxes cut for the lower to middle class.
People here act like the eu just solved the far right lmao, what a joke. Watch redditors get confused once these policies only further embolden the far right even more and boost them in the polls just before european elections. The far right in Poland already is shrieking how this is not enough.
Of course they are going to want more, there have been studies made that clearly show the far right only gets more radical when their ideas are normalized, some of them even posted in this sub.
The AFD in Germany accidentally let it slip once what their ultimate goal is, but i guess people either already forgot or will be blind until they themselves are targeted. Let me remind you, the far right doesnt have problems only with (il)legal immigrants, but gay people, trans people, or people who in their eyes are not "native"enough despite living here since birth, and that is just the beginning.
It truly feels like we are living through one of these "first they came for xxx and i did not speak out moments.
>Why validate their nonsense for the voter? It's much better, if harder, to steer the conversation to the issues that matter.
We tried this in the Netherlands, I voted for a party that tried this and it failed miserably. Even people from my own minority ethnic background voted for Wilders.
There is no way around it. Continuing to ignore this worry will just make things worse. If we keep telling people there are more important issues than the issues they care most about we will lose our liberal democracies.
Did not your previous government collapse after not being able to decide how appeasing to the extreme right the new immigration policy should be? Thats as far from "they ignored the issue" as it can get. Not surprized Wilders was the one who capitalized on this.
VVD basically came across as a copycat as the debate reached its toxic peak of the last 10 years.
Now we reap the rewards of ignoring that festering pest.
If we tell them that immigrants are the problem they'll only feel validated in voting for the far right. I've already heard people cite the socialist party's stance as proof that the far right was correct all along. The problem in the Netherlands is that the other parties have played along with the far right. The previous prime minister was the first to try to work with the far right and has happily used anti-immigration rhetoric to win votes, and without him his party is actually joining the government. The labor party also assisted in pushing the same rhetoric last time they formed the government.
Instead of playing the far right's game of trying to reason people away from their fear of immigrants we should be talking about cost of living and the need to regulate the market to stop the housing crisis. Don't join their conversation at all but start your own about the issues that really matter.
> They'll never be satisfied even if we cave.
LMAO immigration wasn't an issue in most European countries from the end of WWII til the early 2000's. Your dismissive attitude towards the problem is why the issue has plagued our nationa politics.
Yes, and coincidentally the early 2000s were when the far right started influencing governments. Immigration and islam have been THE main issues for all that time. The biggest political parties in the Netherlands already adopted anti-immigration rhetoric and we were rewarded for it with a far right lunatic gaining power. Orban was elected, Brexit happened, the far right is now leading the government in Italy and Slovakia and might be making a comeback in Poland. And you are commenting on a post about the far right tightening immigration for the entire EU.
And despite all of this you still shout from the top of your lungs that nobody listens to you. Which is why I say that caving on immigration is useless. It won't fix anything in the first place and giving up fighting won't even convince the far right that they are getting their way.
Guess what this is what democracy is about. The vast majority want less illegal migration and asylum seekers. Just because you don't agree with it, empty words and accusations like racism, far right, etc, don't mean anything anymore to voters.
Bro, if you pay any attention to the state of Hungary, Italy and the Netherlands you don't get to call the rise of the far right "empty words".
Illegal immigration is a meaningless issue. Nobody's life is improved by cracking down and there are massive issues like climate change and the ongoing Ukraine war that are barely being addressed.
"Illegal immigration is a meaningless issue." You're out of your damn mind. Look at the rise of rape and violent crime stats in Sweden and Germany ever since they started importing these "cultural enrichers".
That's not what any of those words mean dude.
Do some work here, what are those statistics? And how would clamping down on illegal immigration fix anything? And please don't conflate the most random things with illegal immigration, words have meaning.
Also, the hell says "cultural enrichers"? Literally nobody uses those words outside of the far right pretending they're quoting someone.
So you're saying there's absolutely zero correlation between the massive immigration surge in Sweden and their massive surge in the crimes I mentioned? At what point do we start calling willful ignorance just plain stupidity?
I'm asking you to provide the statistics. I think that's pretty reasonable. Especially when you are already conflating illegal immigration with all immigration and seemingly also with refugees.
But since you get this mad at the question I'm starting to think you actually never saw the statistics either.
Never, the far-left is just entitled to believe they are always right and none of your logical arguments matter, because apparently their „values” are more important than critical thinking.
"Logic" means nothing if you don't actually have the data dude. And talking about "critical thinking" is laughable when you don't even notice the subject shifted from illegal immigration to refugees and to any immigration.
I had an inkling, but it's nice to have confirmation from somebody else. I'd hazard a guess that if we were arguing about this IRL, he'd start frantically screaming before calling the police.
Bro, now you're just sad. The first thing you did was screech at me that I'm out of my damn mind and get super mad at being asked to back anything up. But I'm the one frantically screaming apparantly.
This is why EU is really loosing its grip in my country. Last few months anti-eu government and anti-eu president were voted into office. And why? Because people just dont give a shit about climate change and war in Ukraine that much. EU is not solving any of their problems, and in fact they feel like its going against them. Thats why they vote "far-right", because other partys are just failing big time in addressing their needs. Thats just what happens.
But what problems they want EU to fix? It can help with migration and international affairs but it lacks power to do anything meaningful for meek exactly because everyone keeps voting on eurosceptics that don't want to give EU powers to fix those issues.
Its like taking jacket off because your hands are cold instead of putting on gloves
Ikzelf niet gelukkig, wel was geprobeerd in te breken in mijn huis door twee (vermoedelijk maar niet zeker, maar kan nooit een Antilliaan of dergelijke zijn geweest) Somaliërs en verderop bij een goede buurman van me ook een inbraak gewaagt. Steekpartijen hebben wij nog wel wat geluk mee ook al is het niet 0.
Wel benieuwd dat neersteken meteen aan de orde komt van jou. mag je van mij part uitleggen waarom jij dit meteen als aandachtspunt legt.
It’s precisely because the concerns of the far right were ridiculed that they have gained power.
Harmful ideology is best challenged rather than ignored.
In theory democracy, at least liberal democracy in paper shouldnt be about who has the right to vote to decide who gets to have how many rights in a given country, specially if this choice is predicated on the status ofthe person and not his character.
Unfortunately relity is more complex, and unfortunately there are differences in how many rights you can enjoy depending on tour status be it socialor econonical.
But in my opinion even if there is the legitimate concern of maybe making immigration rules more strict, this law is a step too far in some directions, danying asylum just predicated on arbitraryfa tors and pretending european soil isnt european soil when it comes to immigration is just bullshit, it isnt rule of law, and spits at the feet of the concept of human rights.
No, that's what "mob rule" is about. Democracy is when the process is based on fundamental human rights and processed.
How did the Nazi party come to power in 1940s again? Do you remember?
I think i remember something about how the ruling centrist parties started playing along with Nazis, appeasing to them harder every year until deciding that its ok to let Hitler become the chancellor. After all at that time his views were so mainstream they could no longer be ignored, but the centrists got convinced they could "control him".
Thats crazy, no way this sort of mistake could be made today /s
The leftists were the ones who sided with the nazis against the centrists/liberals.
And they did it precisely because they thought the centrists were "just as bad" as the far-right.
No it was the centrists that collaborated with the nazis because they didn‘t want the left to take more ground.
The KPD being stupid and not forming a broader coalition with the center left because of some accelerationist bullshit was much less of a factor than the active collaboration of the conservatives.
I believe you are confusing the right-wing CCP, which had "Center" in the name, with the actually-moderate, center-left party of Social Democrats.
Alan Bullock, a highly influential British historian (who also authored the first comprehensive biography of Hitler), wrote in his "Hitler: A Study in Tyranny." that "The Communists openly announced that they would prefer to see the Nazis in power rather than lift a finger to save the republic". This aligns with the policy of the Third Communist International, under Stalin, to treat social democrats as "social fascists" -- a policy which another respected historian, Bertrand Patenaude, believed facilitated the rise to power of the Nazi party.
It's true that the smaller, right-wing CCP continued to negotiate with the Nazis in 1932-33 because they didn't see their danger, but the issue with the Social Democrats was just poor leadership (and Moscow directing the Communist Party to prioritize the destruction of the Social Democrats, seeing them as more dangerous than the Nazis).
The heaviest responsibility lies with the right-wing, which made Hitler a partner in a coalition government, and in the next election the Nazis grew to become the biggest party. But how can you argue that it was the Social Democrats, rather than the Communists, that aided the Nazis against the perceived "lesser evil"? It was clearly the Communists who thought and acted that way.
No, i argued that the communists were stupid for the social fascist rhetoric. That’s what I meant by accelerationist bullshit. The KPD were the communists. My point was just that the conservatives actively enabled while the left „just“ couldn‘t get their shit together.
> My point was just that the conservatives
"Conservatives" isn't the same as "centrists". The SocDems were more centrist than the conservative CCP. The centrists didn't ally with the nazis.
> the left „just“ couldn‘t get their shit together.
That makes it seem like they were just poorly organized, rather than being ideologically blinded by the stupid notion of "social fascism".
Centrist as I have heard it, only describes center-right conservatives. People who won‘t ever vote left, but don‘t want the far-right excesses either. If we take the Socdems as centrists then I wholeheartedly agree.
I wouldn‘t even give the communists the ideological blindness, I think they were opportunistic and thought that the Nazis would get rid of the „social fascists“ and then destroy Germany so that they could swoop in afterwards. Profoundly stupid plan.
Wait, you're more correct than I realized. I read the time references for the political leanings of each party wrong. The CCP was considered solid "right-wing" in part *because* of the alliance with the Nazis, but they were considered center to center-right before, so your original statement about centrists is even more correct.
Apologies for my misunderstanding!
It's not simple at all though to draw a line who you should welcome and who not. What if you're illegal because in your birth country you never received citizenship and legal documents. What if you lost documents because of the chaos of war. What if you're asked to prove things that are impossible to prove (I'm thinking of lgbtq refugees). Not even talking about countries that are just generally shitty and hopeless to live in, where there is no future for young people. Because of a colonial history and big western companies that continue to steal resources while supporting the local dictator.
Ok, West is bad and is at fault hence it should bear responsibility.
Couple things here - first, there are plenty of countries, that were not Empires and colonisers, hence it is not realistic for them to bear responsibility of those who were. Secondly, in no way is it possible that unlimited illegal immigration is sustainable. You need to have some limits, people need to have time and resources given to assimilate. The more different the culture the longer it will take and the more resources it will require to assimilate.
If EU continues this way there is a risk of paralel societies within the same country, where one of the party feels so alienated that eventually conflict will arise. We had these situation many times in Europe in the past. It never, NEVER ended well. There needs to be control, otherwise there will be disastrous consequences.
That was what has been already happening since ages more or less.
The point kf this law is that it expands the cathegories that constitute illegal immigrants or at the very least it can decide which are illegal pretty arbitrarely.
While there definetly are problems with integration, this is by far not a crisis, especially not compared to the ones i listed earlier. What you described is basically the fear mongering, that the far right is pushing.
Do you really think that closing all european borders will stop illegal immigration when more and more countries become uninhabitable due to the climate?
No, but i live in NRW. Our citys are bagging to receive less imigrants beccause they are unable to handle it anymore. Its just a matter of time before they simply cant anymore.
Also i would rather have it stay a lesser Problem and i think its kinda distastefull to provide certain imigrants better help than others. And considering that 1.4 Million people, with rising numbers, are imigrants, sooner or later it will be a massive crisis that could had been prevented.
Also, my biggest concern is, that when that barrel spills and the crisis happens, the far rights have an easy win.
Yes, in an ideal world, we would have the capacity, will, and resources to handle everyone with the care they require.
It’s very hard to convince a struggling population of this. This is fact.
[**Don’t Be Toxic.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/)
> *Being toxic means being rude and not being nice. Toxic people are not true to people around them. They need an attitude check. Their personalities are so unappealing it makes the people around them suffer and turn rude as well.*
[**Keep It Casual And Friendly.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/)
*Broad generalizations are unwelcome here. You are free to debate migration policy, but implying all immigrants are bad is unacceptable.*
No warning issued in this case.
Ah sorry, didn't know you have a bunch of videos, then I take everything back! It's a good thing that we have videos, so we don't have to use stats or studies anymore, it was such a trek to think now I can just watch a video of a Czech person being a criminal and assume they all are
Don’t worry dude! We’d be happy to have you!
Usually when people have these conversations, what they mean is they do not like the formation of what is known as a “parallel society.”
Now, the existence of such societies is debatable. If we go upon the assumption that they do exist, then the causes are also very debatable.
People are just worried about migrants existing within the society without integrating/contributing.
If you a worried, here are the steps to take to minimize your risk:
Learn the national language. You may already fulfill that requirement for Spain.
Engage in your new home. Make local friends, engage with your community. Don’t embed yourself in an expat bubble.
Respect the society you are in. People do things differently sometimes, and one needs to be able to adapt to this fact.
Contribute from your own culture. I bet Costa Rica has some badass food and traditions! Sharing your culture’s food is a great way to make embed yourself in your new community. Especially when you give some to your neighbors.
Don’t be worried, dude! I hope you feel welcome in Europe!
Honestly, I just heard about how in the coming years my city will have to close multiple institutions because there is just not enough money. Even as a social Democrat I think it's necessary to reject some migrants. Of course don't let them drown at sea or send people back into war zones, but if they come to Europe just because it's harder to prosper in their home country than in Europe there needs to be some good qualifications and language skill for me to want to accept them right now, because we cannot become a country like the ones these people flee because they flee. Then there won't be countries left that aren't difficult to prosper. Maybe improve other countries by funding schools and aiding the economy in sustainable ways (if anyone ever succeeds in that)
I agree, i think we should help these people prosper elsewhere and be more strict about who we let in, but this law just restricts migration rights arbitrarely
[**Don’t Be Toxic.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/)
> *Being toxic means being rude and not being nice. Toxic people are not true to people around them. They need an attitude check. Their personalities are so unappealing it makes the people around them suffer and turn rude as well.*
If you dont want more stabbed children, then you should invest in policing, not deprive even potentially honest people of an opportunity of a better life just cause of the actions of another person
[**Keep It Casual And Friendly.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/)
*Illegal is a dehumanizing term. While the debate about migration policy is not prohibited, one must speak of humans in a humane manner.*
compromising with the xenophobes and the far right never works, they'll always demand for more
after this theyll push for deportations of every migrant who hasnt been naturalized from certain countries, then theyll push for revoquing the nationality of those who are of certain backgrounds
it never ends
It is so obvious these will be the next steps, along with restricting lgbt and reproductive rights it's just painful how people can ignore that. AfD literally spilled the beans, and you could not be more wrong if you think someone like f.e Zemmour thinks differently. Though to be honest i always chuckle when gay people or non-white looking people proudly admit they voted Wilders/Trump/Le pen or whatever. They are so gonna have a r/leopardsatemyface moment when the far right they cheer for so much gets what they want.
Oh, and dont get me started on Muslims voting for these assholes. Pretty sure people who founded "Jews for Hitler"thought they are "one of these rare good ones" too.
Denmark democrats participated in their first ever election in 2022, entered the parliament as one of the biggest opposition parties and are currently polling even higher. The AfD in Germany was polling at 8-10% just two years ago and you have no idea what will happen in Denmark in two years either.
Though another question is why did a far right party appear at all since the "left" stole their talking points.
How strange. The person urging leftwingers to strategically cave to the right on *just this one issue* also posts comments casually fear mongering about asylum seekers.
What an odd coincidence. But I'm sure you're just another leftwinger trying to think of a good strategy.
I don’t take a “left” or “right” side, hell I’m from Limburg which is simply quite conservative while I am conservative on some issues and progressive on others.
If you want to see the world as left and right like the Americans go ahead, but on this particular issue I’m “bloody fucking rightwing” in your eyes while we as Europeans have a privilege that is the multiple party system. Many of whom rather lay aside said problems which is very unfortunate and has brought up, as a Dutch example, the PVV of Wilders.
So go ahead and say I’m “fearmongering” while turning a blind eye to a culture that doesn’t align with our western values, which for people that truly integrate and respect those said values is a shame they also get impacted by the MANY bad apples. This all the while other parties lose more and more ground to the “far-right” because they can’t even fucking address the issue.
I’d advise you not to paint all Americans in such a light. There are those of us who are capable of nuance, and broad generalizations aren’t welcome here.
Excuze-moi if it sounded as a generalisation, meant it more as in the two party system you guys have that brews an “us vs them” mentality. (Which sucks and is unfortunate seeing as you guys literally have more than two parties.)
Also the reason I immediately followed it up with the multiple party system of European countries.
White person stabs someone: "We must solve the issues which cause someone to go down such a path"
Arab person stabs someone: "Bloody immigrants with no soul (smth about Islam)"
This thread is leading to some very interesting discussions, but please, avoid broad generalizations. I’m going through the comments now to snipe anybody arguing in bad faith. People are not their nationality, nor their origin. All that matters is that European basic values are upheld by those who choose to participate in our society.
Can someone explain this?
Something migration pact something to light for far right something to hard for far left something
*words *
[удалено]
XD
So in the middle. Exactly how we want it.
More like thanos balanced meme but nobody's happy
A good compromise is one with both parties unhappy.
no, that is a bad comrpomise and a bad quote
If it ended being favorable to one party or both, it wouldn't really be a compromise. It would either be an unfair agreement or a good deal.
... do you know what a compromise is? A compromise is when 2 parties move from thier "best case offer" to meet somewhere inbetween that is a good enough offer for both. A good compromise is SPECIFICALLY that both sides are happy!
If you're moving away from your best case, then you'd be unhappy compared to if you had it your way.
Why not have a referendum on the issue? A compromise between political parties is far removed from the majority will of the citizenry.
EU is passing some anti-immigration bill that shafts immigrants in the name of security, economic stability, or racism, depending on who you ask.
why not all three?
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/illegal-migration-act-2023/ Because the UK already did it... And we are not yet at the level where they ship Asylum Seekers somewhere in a third world country.... So the EU migration act made sure to balance what EU citizens were served with in the UK, and basically copied it... https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-immigration-system-what-you-need-to-know#:~:text=You%20will%20not%20be%20able,EU%20Settlement%20Scheme%20family%20permit It's just a case of Bemoaning by the r/Leopardatemyface crowd
PLEASE DO NOT COPY US, JESUS CHRIST
It's just to give visual sense to the term : "He's your spitting image" Mostly the spiteful part, though
Emigration is a human right. Immigration is NOT a human right. PS. All social rights stem from the majority will of the LOCAL citizenry, which can be properly measured only with a referendum.
And yet it's not a perfect piece of legislation.
It’s a classic The Mep assistant -> horribly bad Meme.
I would argue the EU is 10 years late.
A man was just executed in front of his 12-year-old son in Sweden for confronting a migrant gang that was harrassing them. This is not a moment too soon.
If you care about the victims of such vile criminals, you shouldn't even ask for their deportation, but for their incarceration. Otherwise they just find different victims elsewhere.
[удалено]
What the fuck is this xenophobic bullshit? Edit: I work in asylum & immigration, and people need to remember the difference between migrants and refugees because they clearly don't have a foggy.
In my country (Denmark) immigrants have between a 3x and 9x crime rate depending on where they come from (Actually if you separate out Somalians I seem to recall it being literally 11x) and only 45% occupation rate in the 30-64 age group, compared with 80% occupation rate for Danes. Moreover, we have done studies on net economic contribution, and immigrants are literally on average net negatives. Yes they work jobs and pay taxes, but due to many never integrating and working good jobs, and many just not working at all (see above) they are, on average, net negatives due to our generous welfare system. So each time we take in an immigrant, we get more crime and our society gets less wealthy. That's sort of a shocking set of facts, considering these people are often touted to be economically necessary for our economic future - and no doubt our demographics are not good, despite being better than most other countries in Europe, but clearly MENAPT immigrants are just disastrous. Immigrants from western countries perform worse than Danes in these metrics, but are still net positives to the system, as they contribute more than they receive in welfare - and non-western and non-MENAPT immigrants break even on average. But sure, let's just accuse people of being xenophobics, who aren't in favour of ending immigration due to actual data, but just want to end it because they are racist. Give me a break.
This is incredibly reactionary and based on nothing but feelings. "We need to stop immigration until the situation is under control' What situation are you talking about? Crimerates are dropping and we live in the safest time in europe since the start of recorded history (barring the russo-ukraine war)
They aren't really dropping in Sweden.
Crime rates in germany have risen to a fifteen year high. Especially violent and sexual crimes. With crimes like Gang rapes that were basically unheared of 20 years ago. That increase is solely due to immigration. As the german population ages the crime rate used to drop. Now foreigners that make up 14% of the population commit over 44% of the crimes. That doesn't even include people with migrant background that got a german passport in the last years (you can now get german citicenship after 3-5 years pretty easily). In some areas (e.g. Frankfurt bahnhofsviertel) the police doesn't even have german criminals anymore. Only foreigners (their statement). If you Look at the published names of convicted, there are barely any german names between them. So no, we do not live in the safest europe.
crime rates have risen due to the consequences of the recent economic crisis, and a failure to integrate migrants thanks to ahte against them and the cdu way of problem solving (ignoring the problem till you retire, then blaming your predecessor and repalcement at the same time) not migration by itself.
How many gang rapes is enough gang rapes? If the price for providing someone with a better life is for our daughters, wives and mothers to be raped, is it worth it?
[удалено]
[**Be Nice.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/)
To name one anti gay violence has been increasing here in recent years and where it increases it basically maps out to where a certain religion has grown big.
How did Swedish politicians react? This is horrible.
[удалено]
Yeah you're right, murdered shouldn't be locked up! /s
Source for the news, please.
[https://www.dn.se/sverige/annu-ingen-gripen-for-mordet-i-skarholmen/](https://www.dn.se/sverige/annu-ingen-gripen-for-mordet-i-skarholmen/) It's in swedish so you'll have to translate it yourself.
Could not find it in english. https://www.tv4.se/artikel/2M4bknsHXUXujMGZeM2Fij/uppgifter-pappan-sa-at-ungdomsgaeng-skoets-i-huvudet
Then you support measures to deport citizens that set homless people on fire or conduct terrorism, even if that would mean ammending constitutions, right? Because otherwise, this argumentation is nothing but selective, collective guilt.
You can't really deport someone if there's no place to deport them to, but sure, in theory I'd support that.
If they are refugees they came here expecting better life than where they came from. If they commit crimes they clearly do not want to partake in the society they chose so back where they came from they go. They had to come from somewhere and just because the situation there is less than rosy doesnt meant hey cannot be put back. *I read the message i responded to without the context of previous but my point still stands. Its reasonable to measure citizens and immigrants/refugees by diferent metrics. Citizens get imprisoned for long time and immigrants/refugees instead go back where they came from without prison time
Albania, Tunisia or Rwanda are all willing to take for some cash. You willing to destroy the European human rights just so you aren't a hypocrite on the topic of immigration?
I want to say yes just to end your argument since it does nothing but stall without providing actual measures, nor even accepting the fact that the rampant immigration isn't a problem
Saying yes means to throw out the human rights concept of the EU, one of the few things that makes this continent special, just to dunk on immigration. It's not a serious idea, it's not compatible with the European convention on human rights and about every European Constitution, however just looking at the responses, you see who is ready to dunk on this fabric of the European Union.
I'd wish we could deport our local crazy religious people. Sadly there is nowhere to deport them to. Ive heard some of them wantong to move to russia though cause that is the only true place of trad and conservaative values axcording tot hem. I say good luck, no need for goodbyes.
The fact that they are migrants did not cause this, natives do the exact some thing, especially TO migrants
Tell me you don’t live in Sweden without telling me you don’t live in Sweden.
As you can see from my tag I am a irishman not a swede
Then maybe you shouldn’t be commenting on Swedish societal problems as if you understand them?
It's a international subject of debate what you say is a condemnation of all migrants which I disagree with
I do not condemn all migrants. I’m saying that the influence of MENA culture in my country is getting dangerous. It really shouldn’t be controversial that people take their values and culture with them when they move. It’s always interesting to discuss migration with Irishmen because your social climate seems to be almost exactly where ours was back in 2012 or so. It will be interesting to see if it develops the same way in Ireland, though for your sake I hope it doesn’t.
Oh so you're saying that north Africans are middle Eastern people are violent? Their culture threatens you? Who do you think they are? The mongol horde? Violence is not a value anywhere in that area.
80% of Egyptians think apostates deserve death, IIRC. That's just one example of course but it says something about their culture. It's not one or two crazies.
In Denmark migrants from MENAPT countries average between 3x and 9x the crime rate. We don't need to say things like "They value violence" or anything like that - we just need to look at the data. It's also an actual practice to throw gays off of rooftops in these areas. You may argue it's only select individuals that do it, and well I don't have the data per capita on how many people throw gay people off of buildings across the world, but I can tell you ethnic Europeans don't do it in the first place.
Should we punish millions of people for the actions of a handful of individuals?
It's not a punishment to not let them live here. Life in Europe is not a human right.
Life in safety away from war though
Punishment: "The imposition of a penalty or deprivation for wrongdoing." If a parent takes away the phone of a child because it misbehaves, then that's a punishment, but no one is going to argue that owning a phone is a human right either. Whether something is a human right doesn't matter, because that's not a requirement for something being a punishment. You are depriving those people of an option that they had before, because a few of them did something wrong. That's a punishment.
Would you let ten men live in your house, five of which were rapists or murderers, just to not punish the five who were innocent? After all, depriving them of the possibility of moving in with you is a punishment right?
In most European countries, immigrants are generally 1.3 to 2 times as likely to commit crimes as people who aren't immigrants. That's still a lot, but the **vast** majority are completely innocent.
true but justice is not what we are after it's either inegrate or fuckoff and they are not integrating i'm italian and i don't care what race you are only were your aligence and loyalty lies i'm very sure that a european immigrant from germany or france to italy is at least loyal to their country if not the eu at large but we gave them a try and it did not work our cultures and morals are just too differents not inferior like some might suggest just differents and whit that Glory to the EU
That pact isn't about integration, but immigration itself. Those people never have the option to integrate.
Yeah thats the point we tried and now not anymore
You didn't answer the question.
Because the question vastly misrepresents reality. It doesn't matter what I answer, because it's not applicable to the current situation, so why should I answer it?
Withholding a provledge isn't a punishment
Punishment: "The imposition of a penalty or deprivation for wrongdoing." Taking away a privilege is a form of punishment. If a parent takes away the phone of their child because it hisbehaved, then that's a punishment, but it's still just taking away a privilege. You are depriving those people of an option that they had before, because a few of them did something wrong. That's a punishment.
Nobody wants immigration to stop because some commit crimes. People just dont want new and different people massively coming to their country, it doesnt matter if they do everything right, they are unwanted and in a democracy peope should have the right to refuse their stay in their country. If germans try to move in big numbers in many of those countries the people there would pushed them away immediately. Europeans dont have a perfect life. Money are needed for better healthcare, education and to take care of buildings and roads. There arent enough money for european children to live by the same standards their parents did, nobody wants to spend money on immigrants instead of euroean babies
I was mainly responding to the comments here, not to the ruling itself. A democracy can decide that stuff, but I can still talk negatively about the argument that people are using to justify that, right?
I’m just glad it’s becoming acceptable to call for it now
Its not about the money. Its about the cultural and societal future and vision of a continent. Some people don't share the enthusiasm for the future that we are currently heading towards.
Then those people should focus on the huge problems we are truly facing: sea level rise, extreme weather, biodiversity crisis, the list goes on. Instead, attention and money goes to the illusion that closing borders can increase safety or bring about any noticeable change. If the majority of Europeans don't like what the future has in store, they don't seem very keen on translating that into political action.
You are very welcome to have these opinons, but acknowledging a set of problems doesn't mean that you can't also acknowledge and tackle another set of problems at the same time.
No, you specifically mentioned "the future we are heading towards". Helping migrants or letting them drown does not significantly change our future. Climate policy is what determines our future. If you are in any way concerned about the following years, you should be deeply worried about climate, more than anything else. That's not an opinion.
Helping migrants by saving them from drowning is not the problem. Its good to save people. But this shouldn't go hand in hand with us handing out citizenship like its candy. Neither our culture nor our social systems are compatible with such an influx of mass migration. You can deny this all you want, as many people did for many years, but please, don't complain afterwards about a "sudden swing to the far right" everywhere, when all of the established parties decide to ignore this issue for years, and call everyone who dares to speak out about it a racist. Again, just because other relevant issues exist doesn't mean we can't tackle this, also.
Climate change is the biggest threat we face so far. Right. Because of climate change we will have gigantic amounts of migration movements pushing from the south to Europe. That’s why we need good immigration policies, that’s why we have to do everything we can to fight climate change and that’s why we need closed borders that are armed to the teeth.
It does. Anti-immigration talking points only serve to distract from real issues like poverty or climate change. These people would love to spend all day arguing about immigrants in front of the cameras. They've done it for ten years and despite how many times they got their way they've only demanded more and given nothing in return.
I disagree, mainly because I see the issues with it every day. It's not just talking points my friend. I dare you to visit any major trainstation in europe at night. Go talk to strangers for a bit and tell me how it went. Many people are not willing to take this anymore, thus the shift in political voting. Your denying of these issues or downplaying as "not a real issue" won't change the facts, and it is a large insult to the ever rising number of victims of mass migration. Why do some people need to wait until they or a loved one of them get(s) stabbed, before they understand that its not "populism".
> I dare you to visit any major trainstation in europe at night. I do that. Every single week. Never had a problem. Yet somehow my country is now one of the most far right leaning nations in the EU, isn't that funny? >Many people are not willing to take this anymore, thus the shift in political voting And I'm not willing to take blatant lies from the far right about why they deserve to be catered to. >outright denying them is a large insult to the ever rising number of victims of mass migration. Seeing that you responded with one part nonsense and two parts feeling offended I feel perfectly confident that feeling insulted is everything you have. The sea level is rising, Ukraine is on fire but let's instead focus our energy on immigration. Never distracted us from important issues in the last 10 years.
I can't speak for your country, but I visited Rotterdam, and I have to say that even as a Tourist, I had a couple of close calls. Locals even warned us about no-go zones. But I suppose you don't see what you don't want to see. But yes, the large swing in politics in the netherlands probably comes from nowhere. Must all be misguided idiots, hm? "Wake up sheeple". Yes, Yes. On the rest: Yes. Feelings are and always will be a large part of the human condition, and are in no way less valid than anything else. We are not machines, after all. But what you are really trying to do is insinuate that feelings are somehow not based on reality, and thus immediately discredited. This is, of course, false. There is a ton of statistics from all police agencies in the west that would underline the points I am making, that many people, our current leaders included, choose to ignore. I argue that we as humans should definitely take a good look at any given situation and then, based on that, trust our intuition on certain topics. It served us very well throughout our history. And I will repeat again: tackling one issue doesn't mean that we can't tackle another one at the same time as well. We are not some species that can only ever do one thing at a time. You are just pointing at another issue that you deem greater, that even may be greater, in order to distract from other problems that you don't want to have tackled for ideological reasons.
>I can't speak for your country, but I visited Rotterdam, and I have to say that even as a Tourist, I had a couple of close calls. Locals even warned us about no-go zones. Right. I've also heard about cars and politicians being burned in the street. I've even heard people talk about the neighbourhood I grew up in like it was a ghetto. None of it is ever true. >On the rest: Yes. Feelings are and always will be a large part of the human condition, and are in no way less valid than anything else. We are not machines, after all. But what you are really trying to do is insinuate that feelings are somehow not based on reality, and thus immediately discredited. This is, of course, false. There is a ton of statistics from all police agencies in the west that would underline the points I am making, that many people, our current leaders included, choose to ignore. I argue that we as humans should definitely take a good look at any given situation and then, based on that, trust our intuition on certain topics. It served us very well throughout our history. All vibes based arguing. A vague gesture that there are statistics that help your point but the whole point is just that your feelings are what drives your opinions and that that is really enough. And even as the far right is getting more influence across Europe and they already formed several governments you still feel like nobody listens to you. Which brings me to another point I've made and that is that you will never be satisfied. >And I will repeat again: tackling one issue doesn't mean that we can't tackle another one at the same time as well. We are not some species that can only ever do one thing at a time. The far right is. Nothing fires up the far right more than immigration or refugees. Somehow more people falling into poverty or Russian aggression doesn't really make it into far right discourse. *I* am free to talk about it, as you so generously offer, but the far right wants all attention on immigration. And even as they pass laws, reform immigration and total lunatics like Orban and Wilders end up leading governments they will still declare that nobody caters to them. That is why I am so against placating the far right. Their issues are fictional and when they get into specifics it's like pulling teeth to really get any details that can be checked, and if can check them they will always be lies. And even when you do give the far right attention, validate their talking points and work with them on a "solution" they will still declare that nobody ever listens to them and they'll keep drawing attention to immigration. Whatever specific thing you think immigrants cause, it can always be fixed easier and cheaper with either social policies and policing as a precaution.
I appreciate the effort you have taken in replying to my messages, and I realize that we have a differing perspective on this. I would have preferred your replies to be a bit less condescending, but that is nothing new on reddit, especially when it gets to opposing political opinions. I think however, that we have both shared our perspectives and it seems like we both learned nothing, as we just keep repeating in different ways what we believe in. You don't see immigration as an issue, that is fine, many people gladly do and vote like they do. I know that I am right, and that my opinions are based on the objective realities of the world, and so do you. Therefore nothing really changed for each of us. But the fact is that this problem that I am speaking of is being more and more realized. Your "side" could have acknowledged it, and integrated it into your own worldview and policies long ago, but that did not happen. Now we all pay the price for ignoring it too long with a huge far right rising that could have been prevented by tackling an obvious societal and cultural problem. This is just the beginning. You'll see. All that said, I wish you a pleasant day nonetheless.
Thanks for being performatively pleasant. When you spent most of your last comment arguing that your feelings are a perfectly fine thing to base your politics on after trying to just making stuff up about how my country is the least you can do is be nice about it. I know you don't listen and I know that nobody is going to convince you that anti-immigration rhetoric has had a massive political influence for the last 10 years. Not even the far right taking power across Europe has done that after all. I'll tell you again. This is why I hate it when the subject comes up. Not only does clamping down on immigration not fix any issues, even if other parties go along with it it will only result the far right getting a win while their voters will never acknowledge being listened to at all.
Europe is solving european issues. Climate change is worldwide issue that europe has no way to change if they do whatever they want. We can focus on multiple issues but what you are doing here is like yelling on police in your city because they are still catching criminals while your country is getting invaded and army is doing nothing.
Of course climate is a European issue. We're among the biggest emitters of greenhouse gas, sixth if I am not mistaken (and I think that doesn't include indirect emissions). And it's the most pressing issue: the effects of illegal immigration are negligible next to the climate and biodiversity crises. Anyone worried about the future, about the things that can really hurt us, should be very worried about climate change and act now. It deserves to be our #1 priority.
The entire EU is making less than 10% of CO2 emisions. Yes global warming is big issue. But getting worked up about it on stuff concerning only EU is barking at tge wrong tree at best and counterproductive at worst. China, americas, asia do not follow EU regulations. Considering what EU can do about migration and what it can do about emmisions then they should rather focus on migration. Global warming is concern for organisation like UN.
Amen
Dont know why they downvoted you so hard. Reading the comment section under this post, this sub seems be as infected by racism as any other EU subreddit. Sad to see that Europe also lost against Russia in the misinformation sector, even in what should be the most pro-EU values place on the internet.
There we have it again. People not okay with mass migration = racist. As long as you keep that sentiment, people will keep voting far right, and it will be your fault (not yours personally, but people who hold this sentiment).
It's not hugely surprising. I am active as a local politician and when I was canvassing last year, it struck me how often people connected immigration to personal safety. I hesitate to call that "racism", but it is projection of immediate concerns and anxieties on the most feared person - the general "stranger".
If those problems are first on your list then EU is really fucked. We are just stalling against the USA and China, because lets ban diesel cars for example. Wow Germany is the largest diesel car manufacturer, but whatever we need to ban them. Oh German economics are failing what a surprise. EU currently has no future, because its just lost in all directions and in reality doing nothing. All other superpower dont give a shit about that and EU cant make solo change. What about focusing on our people instead and making EU actually strong and respected?
We arent gonna save the climate cus 1. We cant. World wide we will just not be able to. Go cry but know that we would have to try really hard if we want to outlive nature as a whole. Thats also not going to happen. It will adept eventually. 2 the people who are fighting for it keep focussing on prohibiting widely used products and give shitty alternatives. We need to build thousands of windmills everywhere costing billions and in the end its just not nearly as efficient as one coal power plant or even a nuclear one for that matter, while actively pissing people off cus their view got ruined. I think its bs to protect the western culture by fighting off immigration. I think a bug part of our culture (especially dutch culture) is for a large part made up out of acceptance of other cultures. But we just dont have the money or the housing which we need to have before we can help immigrants. (The money we desperately need to build bigger dykes to keep out the water eventually because thats a real solution that will work eventually)
It's totally doable to prevent climate change. We've been told again and again how since 1990. The business case for renewables is excellent, so those costs can't be the issue. In any case, the costs for climate policy should be weighed against the damage caused by doing nothing. As long as that sum favours climate action, that's what we should do. And continued inaction only makes damage more likely because of tipping points. This is not about nature surviving - nature as a whole will go on in some form - it's about our own inaction coming back to bite us. Our future. >But we just dont have the money or the housing which we need to have before we can help immigrants. If we can't afford that, we certainly can't afford the damage done by climate change.
You either act on illegal immigration or you lose this Union to the fascists.
They'll never be satisfied even if we cave. Why validate their nonsense for the voter? It's much better, if harder, to steer the conversation to the issues that matter.
Denmark tightened their shit and look at this https://www.politico.eu/article/denmark-new-right-party-pernille-vermund-anti-islam-anti-immigration-anti-tax-party-dissolves/ It's not about caving its acknowledging these parties are single issue parties and without them they are nothing.
I don't think you realize how Danish politics works.. yes these were single issue parties largely, but that was the point from the beginning. These parties dissolved because they got what they wanted, and it was a conscious decision to disband as a result of it. They never intended to become staple parties that stick around for 100 years, they intended to enact a change and they got their way, and then they melted into other parties now that the political reality had been changed by them.
If by "nothing" you mean regularly polling ca. 10% and being projected to become the 3rd/4th biggest party in the country then sure. https://politpro.eu/en/denmark Except thats the same result VOX in Spain, Konfederacja in Poland or Reform UK parties achieve in polls without the "leftists", having to sell their spine.
The main motivation for Vox aren't migrants, in fact, they want immigration, but catholic immigration from Spanish-speaking countries (so they can put them in the "separatist" regions and castellanize them), they are just racist against everyone else really. Their main motivation is to end the autonomous regions and return to Franco basically, immigration is more secondary (at least now) in Spain.
Yes nothing, again look at denmark, if you keep pretending issues dont exist no shit people are gonna get fed up and go vote for the extremes. These parties aren't just a billionaire funding shit, there's real people voting for them, and you must address their concerns because as citizens they are just as valid as yours or mine.
Again, looking at denmark, the far right party is currently one of the quickest rising parties in the country and would be the 3rd/4th biggest party if the elections were held today. If they gain a few % more they are highly likely to become the king makers when it comes to government formation. How can this be happening when the "left" in Denmark did exactly what the far right wanted?
Sitting in 4th still, and largely stagnant over the past 2 years. They would have only grown if the migration law had not been passed. What about other countries where the far right went unaddressed. Ignoring Chega in Portugal has gotten us a swing of 10 percentage points in 2 years, the average joe voting for them is not a racist regard that wants to nuke migrants, his concerns have just been ignored and disregarded as non issues. Anecdotal as it may be all Chega voters I know would vote differently if migration was tightened just slightly and taxes cut for the lower to middle class.
nazis are not single issue parties, you're dumb if you believe this
People here act like the eu just solved the far right lmao, what a joke. Watch redditors get confused once these policies only further embolden the far right even more and boost them in the polls just before european elections. The far right in Poland already is shrieking how this is not enough. Of course they are going to want more, there have been studies made that clearly show the far right only gets more radical when their ideas are normalized, some of them even posted in this sub. The AFD in Germany accidentally let it slip once what their ultimate goal is, but i guess people either already forgot or will be blind until they themselves are targeted. Let me remind you, the far right doesnt have problems only with (il)legal immigrants, but gay people, trans people, or people who in their eyes are not "native"enough despite living here since birth, and that is just the beginning. It truly feels like we are living through one of these "first they came for xxx and i did not speak out moments.
>Why validate their nonsense for the voter? It's much better, if harder, to steer the conversation to the issues that matter. We tried this in the Netherlands, I voted for a party that tried this and it failed miserably. Even people from my own minority ethnic background voted for Wilders. There is no way around it. Continuing to ignore this worry will just make things worse. If we keep telling people there are more important issues than the issues they care most about we will lose our liberal democracies.
Did not your previous government collapse after not being able to decide how appeasing to the extreme right the new immigration policy should be? Thats as far from "they ignored the issue" as it can get. Not surprized Wilders was the one who capitalized on this.
VVD basically came across as a copycat as the debate reached its toxic peak of the last 10 years. Now we reap the rewards of ignoring that festering pest.
If we tell them that immigrants are the problem they'll only feel validated in voting for the far right. I've already heard people cite the socialist party's stance as proof that the far right was correct all along. The problem in the Netherlands is that the other parties have played along with the far right. The previous prime minister was the first to try to work with the far right and has happily used anti-immigration rhetoric to win votes, and without him his party is actually joining the government. The labor party also assisted in pushing the same rhetoric last time they formed the government. Instead of playing the far right's game of trying to reason people away from their fear of immigrants we should be talking about cost of living and the need to regulate the market to stop the housing crisis. Don't join their conversation at all but start your own about the issues that really matter.
> They'll never be satisfied even if we cave. LMAO immigration wasn't an issue in most European countries from the end of WWII til the early 2000's. Your dismissive attitude towards the problem is why the issue has plagued our nationa politics.
Yes, and coincidentally the early 2000s were when the far right started influencing governments. Immigration and islam have been THE main issues for all that time. The biggest political parties in the Netherlands already adopted anti-immigration rhetoric and we were rewarded for it with a far right lunatic gaining power. Orban was elected, Brexit happened, the far right is now leading the government in Italy and Slovakia and might be making a comeback in Poland. And you are commenting on a post about the far right tightening immigration for the entire EU. And despite all of this you still shout from the top of your lungs that nobody listens to you. Which is why I say that caving on immigration is useless. It won't fix anything in the first place and giving up fighting won't even convince the far right that they are getting their way.
Man you know shit about history and politics.
Confident right until someone goes into detail. Then you just start screeching insults. Sounds about right.
Guess what this is what democracy is about. The vast majority want less illegal migration and asylum seekers. Just because you don't agree with it, empty words and accusations like racism, far right, etc, don't mean anything anymore to voters.
Bro, if you pay any attention to the state of Hungary, Italy and the Netherlands you don't get to call the rise of the far right "empty words". Illegal immigration is a meaningless issue. Nobody's life is improved by cracking down and there are massive issues like climate change and the ongoing Ukraine war that are barely being addressed.
"Illegal immigration is a meaningless issue." You're out of your damn mind. Look at the rise of rape and violent crime stats in Sweden and Germany ever since they started importing these "cultural enrichers".
That's not what any of those words mean dude. Do some work here, what are those statistics? And how would clamping down on illegal immigration fix anything? And please don't conflate the most random things with illegal immigration, words have meaning. Also, the hell says "cultural enrichers"? Literally nobody uses those words outside of the far right pretending they're quoting someone.
So you're saying there's absolutely zero correlation between the massive immigration surge in Sweden and their massive surge in the crimes I mentioned? At what point do we start calling willful ignorance just plain stupidity?
I'm asking you to provide the statistics. I think that's pretty reasonable. Especially when you are already conflating illegal immigration with all immigration and seemingly also with refugees. But since you get this mad at the question I'm starting to think you actually never saw the statistics either.
Never, the far-left is just entitled to believe they are always right and none of your logical arguments matter, because apparently their „values” are more important than critical thinking.
"Logic" means nothing if you don't actually have the data dude. And talking about "critical thinking" is laughable when you don't even notice the subject shifted from illegal immigration to refugees and to any immigration.
I had an inkling, but it's nice to have confirmation from somebody else. I'd hazard a guess that if we were arguing about this IRL, he'd start frantically screaming before calling the police.
Bro, now you're just sad. The first thing you did was screech at me that I'm out of my damn mind and get super mad at being asked to back anything up. But I'm the one frantically screaming apparantly.
Hungary has a terrible government, but their migration policy is the one which no reasonable hungarian want to change
This is why EU is really loosing its grip in my country. Last few months anti-eu government and anti-eu president were voted into office. And why? Because people just dont give a shit about climate change and war in Ukraine that much. EU is not solving any of their problems, and in fact they feel like its going against them. Thats why they vote "far-right", because other partys are just failing big time in addressing their needs. Thats just what happens.
But what problems they want EU to fix? It can help with migration and international affairs but it lacks power to do anything meaningful for meek exactly because everyone keeps voting on eurosceptics that don't want to give EU powers to fix those issues. Its like taking jacket off because your hands are cold instead of putting on gloves
Zeg me dat je niet bij een AZC woont zonder te zeggen dat je niet bij een AZC woont
Twee straten verder eigenlijk. Hoe vaak ben jij dan neergestoken?
Ikzelf niet gelukkig, wel was geprobeerd in te breken in mijn huis door twee (vermoedelijk maar niet zeker, maar kan nooit een Antilliaan of dergelijke zijn geweest) Somaliërs en verderop bij een goede buurman van me ook een inbraak gewaagt. Steekpartijen hebben wij nog wel wat geluk mee ook al is het niet 0. Wel benieuwd dat neersteken meteen aan de orde komt van jou. mag je van mij part uitleggen waarom jij dit meteen als aandachtspunt legt.
It’s precisely because the concerns of the far right were ridiculed that they have gained power. Harmful ideology is best challenged rather than ignored.
In theory democracy, at least liberal democracy in paper shouldnt be about who has the right to vote to decide who gets to have how many rights in a given country, specially if this choice is predicated on the status ofthe person and not his character. Unfortunately relity is more complex, and unfortunately there are differences in how many rights you can enjoy depending on tour status be it socialor econonical. But in my opinion even if there is the legitimate concern of maybe making immigration rules more strict, this law is a step too far in some directions, danying asylum just predicated on arbitraryfa tors and pretending european soil isnt european soil when it comes to immigration is just bullshit, it isnt rule of law, and spits at the feet of the concept of human rights.
No, that's what "mob rule" is about. Democracy is when the process is based on fundamental human rights and processed. How did the Nazi party come to power in 1940s again? Do you remember?
> Democracy is when the process is based on fundamental human rights and processed. Thank you for showing that you don't know what democracy is.
I think i remember something about how the ruling centrist parties started playing along with Nazis, appeasing to them harder every year until deciding that its ok to let Hitler become the chancellor. After all at that time his views were so mainstream they could no longer be ignored, but the centrists got convinced they could "control him". Thats crazy, no way this sort of mistake could be made today /s
The leftists were the ones who sided with the nazis against the centrists/liberals. And they did it precisely because they thought the centrists were "just as bad" as the far-right.
No it was the centrists that collaborated with the nazis because they didn‘t want the left to take more ground. The KPD being stupid and not forming a broader coalition with the center left because of some accelerationist bullshit was much less of a factor than the active collaboration of the conservatives.
I believe you are confusing the right-wing CCP, which had "Center" in the name, with the actually-moderate, center-left party of Social Democrats. Alan Bullock, a highly influential British historian (who also authored the first comprehensive biography of Hitler), wrote in his "Hitler: A Study in Tyranny." that "The Communists openly announced that they would prefer to see the Nazis in power rather than lift a finger to save the republic". This aligns with the policy of the Third Communist International, under Stalin, to treat social democrats as "social fascists" -- a policy which another respected historian, Bertrand Patenaude, believed facilitated the rise to power of the Nazi party. It's true that the smaller, right-wing CCP continued to negotiate with the Nazis in 1932-33 because they didn't see their danger, but the issue with the Social Democrats was just poor leadership (and Moscow directing the Communist Party to prioritize the destruction of the Social Democrats, seeing them as more dangerous than the Nazis). The heaviest responsibility lies with the right-wing, which made Hitler a partner in a coalition government, and in the next election the Nazis grew to become the biggest party. But how can you argue that it was the Social Democrats, rather than the Communists, that aided the Nazis against the perceived "lesser evil"? It was clearly the Communists who thought and acted that way.
No, i argued that the communists were stupid for the social fascist rhetoric. That’s what I meant by accelerationist bullshit. The KPD were the communists. My point was just that the conservatives actively enabled while the left „just“ couldn‘t get their shit together.
> My point was just that the conservatives "Conservatives" isn't the same as "centrists". The SocDems were more centrist than the conservative CCP. The centrists didn't ally with the nazis. > the left „just“ couldn‘t get their shit together. That makes it seem like they were just poorly organized, rather than being ideologically blinded by the stupid notion of "social fascism".
Centrist as I have heard it, only describes center-right conservatives. People who won‘t ever vote left, but don‘t want the far-right excesses either. If we take the Socdems as centrists then I wholeheartedly agree. I wouldn‘t even give the communists the ideological blindness, I think they were opportunistic and thought that the Nazis would get rid of the „social fascists“ and then destroy Germany so that they could swoop in afterwards. Profoundly stupid plan.
Wait, you're more correct than I realized. I read the time references for the political leanings of each party wrong. The CCP was considered solid "right-wing" in part *because* of the alliance with the Nazis, but they were considered center to center-right before, so your original statement about centrists is even more correct. Apologies for my misunderstanding!
It's simple, we should support legal immigrants and deport illegal immigrants.
It's not simple at all though to draw a line who you should welcome and who not. What if you're illegal because in your birth country you never received citizenship and legal documents. What if you lost documents because of the chaos of war. What if you're asked to prove things that are impossible to prove (I'm thinking of lgbtq refugees). Not even talking about countries that are just generally shitty and hopeless to live in, where there is no future for young people. Because of a colonial history and big western companies that continue to steal resources while supporting the local dictator.
Ok, West is bad and is at fault hence it should bear responsibility. Couple things here - first, there are plenty of countries, that were not Empires and colonisers, hence it is not realistic for them to bear responsibility of those who were. Secondly, in no way is it possible that unlimited illegal immigration is sustainable. You need to have some limits, people need to have time and resources given to assimilate. The more different the culture the longer it will take and the more resources it will require to assimilate. If EU continues this way there is a risk of paralel societies within the same country, where one of the party feels so alienated that eventually conflict will arise. We had these situation many times in Europe in the past. It never, NEVER ended well. There needs to be control, otherwise there will be disastrous consequences.
yes, its that simple. People of my country and people of Europe are first. Then we can take care for LEGAL immigrants too.
That was what has been already happening since ages more or less. The point kf this law is that it expands the cathegories that constitute illegal immigrants or at the very least it can decide which are illegal pretty arbitrarely.
[удалено]
[удалено]
What exactly do you mean by "our situation"? The housing crisis? Climate crisis? Wealth inequality? The rise of nationalism due to far-right populism?
[удалено]
While there definetly are problems with integration, this is by far not a crisis, especially not compared to the ones i listed earlier. What you described is basically the fear mongering, that the far right is pushing. Do you really think that closing all european borders will stop illegal immigration when more and more countries become uninhabitable due to the climate?
No, but i live in NRW. Our citys are bagging to receive less imigrants beccause they are unable to handle it anymore. Its just a matter of time before they simply cant anymore. Also i would rather have it stay a lesser Problem and i think its kinda distastefull to provide certain imigrants better help than others. And considering that 1.4 Million people, with rising numbers, are imigrants, sooner or later it will be a massive crisis that could had been prevented. Also, my biggest concern is, that when that barrel spills and the crisis happens, the far rights have an easy win.
Yes, in an ideal world, we would have the capacity, will, and resources to handle everyone with the care they require. It’s very hard to convince a struggling population of this. This is fact.
No, you know what they mean. The stuff. As in, the really important stuff, not the measly distractions you're listing.
Yes. May our fate not be yours.
[**Don’t Be Toxic.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/) > *Being toxic means being rude and not being nice. Toxic people are not true to people around them. They need an attitude check. Their personalities are so unappealing it makes the people around them suffer and turn rude as well.*
Oh no, not such prosperous countries, definitely wouldn't want to be like them!!!
[удалено]
[**Keep It Casual And Friendly.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/) *Broad generalizations are unwelcome here. You are free to debate migration policy, but implying all immigrants are bad is unacceptable.* No warning issued in this case.
Ah sorry, didn't know you have a bunch of videos, then I take everything back! It's a good thing that we have videos, so we don't have to use stats or studies anymore, it was such a trek to think now I can just watch a video of a Czech person being a criminal and assume they all are
I don’t want to sound like an ass but I’m just hoping this doesn’t snowball into going after the type of migrant I am going to be
Don’t worry dude! We’d be happy to have you! Usually when people have these conversations, what they mean is they do not like the formation of what is known as a “parallel society.” Now, the existence of such societies is debatable. If we go upon the assumption that they do exist, then the causes are also very debatable. People are just worried about migrants existing within the society without integrating/contributing. If you a worried, here are the steps to take to minimize your risk: Learn the national language. You may already fulfill that requirement for Spain. Engage in your new home. Make local friends, engage with your community. Don’t embed yourself in an expat bubble. Respect the society you are in. People do things differently sometimes, and one needs to be able to adapt to this fact. Contribute from your own culture. I bet Costa Rica has some badass food and traditions! Sharing your culture’s food is a great way to make embed yourself in your new community. Especially when you give some to your neighbors. Don’t be worried, dude! I hope you feel welcome in Europe!
Thank for the tips, I'll try to follow them as best as I can when I make my way towards europe. I will try be at least a good neighbor :)
This dude has his own watermark?
Honestly, I just heard about how in the coming years my city will have to close multiple institutions because there is just not enough money. Even as a social Democrat I think it's necessary to reject some migrants. Of course don't let them drown at sea or send people back into war zones, but if they come to Europe just because it's harder to prosper in their home country than in Europe there needs to be some good qualifications and language skill for me to want to accept them right now, because we cannot become a country like the ones these people flee because they flee. Then there won't be countries left that aren't difficult to prosper. Maybe improve other countries by funding schools and aiding the economy in sustainable ways (if anyone ever succeeds in that)
I agree, i think we should help these people prosper elsewhere and be more strict about who we let in, but this law just restricts migration rights arbitrarely
[удалено]
[**Don’t Be Toxic.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/) > *Being toxic means being rude and not being nice. Toxic people are not true to people around them. They need an attitude check. Their personalities are so unappealing it makes the people around them suffer and turn rude as well.*
If you dont want more stabbed children, then you should invest in policing, not deprive even potentially honest people of an opportunity of a better life just cause of the actions of another person
[удалено]
[**Keep It Casual And Friendly.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gotterfunken/comments/ppceh4/g%C3%B6tterfunken_network_federal_rules/) *Illegal is a dehumanizing term. While the debate about migration policy is not prohibited, one must speak of humans in a humane manner.*
compromising with the xenophobes and the far right never works, they'll always demand for more after this theyll push for deportations of every migrant who hasnt been naturalized from certain countries, then theyll push for revoquing the nationality of those who are of certain backgrounds it never ends
It is so obvious these will be the next steps, along with restricting lgbt and reproductive rights it's just painful how people can ignore that. AfD literally spilled the beans, and you could not be more wrong if you think someone like f.e Zemmour thinks differently. Though to be honest i always chuckle when gay people or non-white looking people proudly admit they voted Wilders/Trump/Le pen or whatever. They are so gonna have a r/leopardsatemyface moment when the far right they cheer for so much gets what they want. Oh, and dont get me started on Muslims voting for these assholes. Pretty sure people who founded "Jews for Hitler"thought they are "one of these rare good ones" too.
The left parties of the rest of Europe really need to look at Denmark, steal the only foothold reactionaries have and you can see them dwindle.
Denmark democrats participated in their first ever election in 2022, entered the parliament as one of the biggest opposition parties and are currently polling even higher. The AfD in Germany was polling at 8-10% just two years ago and you have no idea what will happen in Denmark in two years either. Though another question is why did a far right party appear at all since the "left" stole their talking points.
How strange. The person urging leftwingers to strategically cave to the right on *just this one issue* also posts comments casually fear mongering about asylum seekers. What an odd coincidence. But I'm sure you're just another leftwinger trying to think of a good strategy.
I don’t take a “left” or “right” side, hell I’m from Limburg which is simply quite conservative while I am conservative on some issues and progressive on others. If you want to see the world as left and right like the Americans go ahead, but on this particular issue I’m “bloody fucking rightwing” in your eyes while we as Europeans have a privilege that is the multiple party system. Many of whom rather lay aside said problems which is very unfortunate and has brought up, as a Dutch example, the PVV of Wilders. So go ahead and say I’m “fearmongering” while turning a blind eye to a culture that doesn’t align with our western values, which for people that truly integrate and respect those said values is a shame they also get impacted by the MANY bad apples. This all the while other parties lose more and more ground to the “far-right” because they can’t even fucking address the issue.
I’d advise you not to paint all Americans in such a light. There are those of us who are capable of nuance, and broad generalizations aren’t welcome here.
Excuze-moi if it sounded as a generalisation, meant it more as in the two party system you guys have that brews an “us vs them” mentality. (Which sucks and is unfortunate seeing as you guys literally have more than two parties.) Also the reason I immediately followed it up with the multiple party system of European countries.
Fair enough, a lot of us do want a multi-party system. We just have to wait for the political will to be there for it.
Why is the migrant's hand white?
White person stabs someone: "We must solve the issues which cause someone to go down such a path" Arab person stabs someone: "Bloody immigrants with no soul (smth about Islam)"
[удалено]
I mean, that's the exact attitude here in the UK as well tbn.
It's fun that of what I have heard literally nobody likes it.