Europe's identity crisis
In future an immigrant arriving in Germany and wishing to stay may have to sign an "integration contract". That is the idea of the Integration Minister, Maria Boehmer.
The contract would set out basic German "values," including "freedom of speech" and "equal rights for women". The idea behind this is the club: if you join you have to accept the rules. "Anyone who wants to live here for a long time," says the minister, "and who wants to work has to say 'yes' to our country".
In different forms ideas like this are surfacing across Europe. The concern is that significant parts of European cities exist as "parallel societies". There is not a shared identity and so there is not a common citizenship. Politicians are concerned that if communities do not relate to each other it is easy for rumour and prejudice to flourish.
Initially one of the basic tenets of multiculturalism was that newcomers brought with them their own culture, which was respected. Increasingly, however, the mood is changing - migrants are expected to integrate and embrace a country's basic values.
The French are currently debating national identity and emphasizing "core values". The French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, has said that all beliefs are respected in France, but "becoming French means adhering to a form of civilisation, to values, to morals".
The French Immigration Minister, Eric Besson, said "we must reaffirm the values of national identity and of the pride in being French". He wants the Marseillaise to be sung as often as possible and the French flag flown. A parliamentary commission is looking into banning the burka - the veil that covers everything but the eyes. The French president has already given his view that "France is a country where there is no place for the burka".
Britain, too, has introduced citizenship tests. Migrants have to take language and citizen classes designed to help them integrate better. Only the other day Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that "British people want to be assured that newcomers will accept the responsibilities as well as the rights that come with living here, obeying the law, speaking English, and making contributions".
Identity has been a subject that politicians have been wary of but now, as a subject, it has become mainstream. Across Europe they detect voter unease and they want to head off that concern finding expression with extreme parties.
In 2001 I covered riots in the northern British town of Oldham. The far right acted as provocateur, but a mainly Muslim enclave called the Glodwick estate battled with the police. Five years later I returned. What struck me was how separate the communities had become. As far as I recall, the school in the estate did not have a single non-Muslim pupil.The headteacher told me that she could not talk to some of the mothers because they rarely left their houses. Occasionally the children were put on a bus and taken to another part of town so they could meet children from other cultures.
What rarely happened was that a child would go to a friend's home after school and so experience and enjoy different traditions. Now the situation there may well have changed, but I encountered a concern then about "parallel societies" - that they could not just be breeding grounds for myths about others but that they weakened the idea of the common bond.
It is natural for immigrants, when they first arrive, to want to live amongst their own community. It is often the only way to find work. In New York you still find a significant number of Irish or Italians working in the fire department or the port authority. But the vast majority of arrivals wanted to become "American" and to embrace their new country with all its customs and values.
In Europe the views of the ethnic minorities differ hugely. A poll in France found that only 4% of Muslims there want to live exclusively among other Muslims. In Britain some migrants from Pakistan and Kashmir are more cautious about living alongside other communities in the giant melting pot that is Britain today.
In Switzerland this weekend voters will be asked to decide whether to ban the construction of minarets. There are only about 300,000 Muslims in the country and many of them are from the Balkans and so do not practise Islam. But a handful of minarets has become an issue. As has happened before in Switzerland, the debate is surrounded by controversial posters, including one showing a woman in a burka standing by a Swiss flag flanked by minarets which look like missiles.
I covered the last similar referendum in Switzerland. Then the immigrant was portrayed as a "black sheep". Many rejected the tone of the debate, but it was not difficult to find people fearful that their known world was disappearing, that their national identity was being diluted.
So, across Europe, there is an active debate as to whether more should be asked of migrants to embrace the societies they are joining.
I'm 
© 2012~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~52~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Assimilation of foreigners cannot be attained by signing contracts. America is the champion of assimilation hands down. Assimilation comes from acceptance of foreigners as equal human beings with equal rights, enforcement of rational laws which protect the rights of everyone equally, and a pervasive mainstream culture which makes rejection of that point of view unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of citizens becauase it makes sense and they know their own rights will be protected. In nations where police turn a blind eye to crimes against minorities and immigrants, where contempt for those aspects of foreign cultures which infringe on no one else's rights, where foreigners are segregated and viewed as "the other" in every possible aspect of society, where immigrants and minorities do not have equal opportunities for jobs, housing, where immigrants who are citizens cannot run for office and stand a chance of winning so that they can fully participate in society, there will never be assimilation and harmony. These shortcomings mark Europe's culture, its history, and make it distinct from the United States of America which was created through immigration. Over 99% of Americans trace their family ancestry back to those who came from other countries. America has become increasingly a nation of inclusion, Europe remains a place of exclusion. It is doomed to die for this reason if for no other. No amount of edicts from Bussels or anywhere else can change hearts and minds. Here's a reminder;
"One contributor says he stole the coat of a Belfast rose seller, another says his friend distracted one Romanian lady while others urinated on her. The group administrator even encourages "ambitious types" to post videos on the website."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/
This from Belfast Northern Ireland but stories like it could have come from anywhere in Europe. When people who post here say I don't know Europe because I haven't been there in over 30 years I say this is what I saw and this is how it still is. This is how it always was there and is likely to remain. And the fact that Europeans will not even acknowledge that this a problem in fact one of their greatest problems condemns them to live and die with it forever.
Complain about this comment
Gavin said "initially one of the basic tenets of multiculturalism was that newcomers brought with them their own culture, which was respected. Increasingly, however, the mood is changing - migrants are expected to integrate. . ."
It is a frequent misconception of Britons that multi-culturism is practised elsewhere when it is actually a by-product of British liberalism. I hope and indeed expect the UK to remain tolerant of other cultures that dwell among us while not putting demands on immigrants to 'assimilate' at anything other than the pace they feel most comfortable with. To impose our own cultural values (which include tolerance) on others would be intolerant and hence undermine our own culture.
In the Continental countries i am most familiar with there is no multi-culturism. France is an example of the 'melting pot' that demands that immigrants rapidly comform to the norms of the indigenous society. Germany on the other hand expects immigrants to remain permanently separate 'Gastarbeiters' who will one day return whence they came. ('Yes' or 'out' the Continental answer to more questions than the EU.)
These attitudes stem from deeply held values within the host societies themselves, and are not something amenable to change by government proclamation or by making the immigrants sit an exam. Immigration is a test of the host communities which we pass in the UK by remaining true to our own traditions of respecting the cultural and religious values of newcomers.
Complain about this comment
The ideal world for human beings would be homogenized with no difference in culture, morals, religious beliefs, aspirations or potential but the reality is that mankind is composed of people who are different physically, mentally, morally and religiously.
The question of assimilation of people from different cultures is only a poser for those countries that are willing to take in immigrants of which is true for America (as MAII states) but also Europe which has been invaded and domiciled by invading tribes since Neolithic times and especially so from pre- and post- Roman Republican times.
France is populated by the Visigoths and Franks from central Europe, the British Anglo-Saxons were invaders and the Germans are made of stock from Goths, Vandals and other warrior invaders.
No man or Nation is an island but because men (and women) are fearful and mistrustful of 'strangers' we all fear people who are different to ourselves. That fear can represent itself in behaviours ranging from simple loathing of immigrants to acts of seclusion or forced integration of immigrants.
The problem is that no one person can say that their society is better or worse than another society and whether the immigrants bring or do not bring with them better cultures and behaviours. The UK currently has a morbid fear of excess immigration that may well result in increased votes for domestic nationalistic parties such as the BNP or UKIP but I sometimes dread to read newspaper reports of the behaviour of our nationals both at home and abroad ..... the flower of our civilized nation behaving like yobs and vandals wherever they go - how depressing is that!
It is my belief that immigration is a benefit to all societies but the 21st Century has introduced a new problem for those societies that are willing to accept inward immigration and that is the volume of the numbers of immigrants and would-be immigrants. The sheer number of people entering Europe with different cultures, behaviours and beliefs is causing friction and these futile attempt to generate codes of behaviour are a waste of time as the reality is that the cost of such enormous numbers of immigrants will be the release of prejudice and bigotry and see the rebirth of nationalist and segragationist policies that demean all peoples of Europe and of which hostility and brutality become the consequences.
The solution is not the ending of immigration but the control of the numbers so that assimilation, if desired, can be seen as achievable and of benefit. The alternative is unfettered and unrestricted migration which defies assimilation and makes segregation more likely and more satisfactory for the newcomers - the creation of a Ghetto mentality as it were.
The latter effect has to be avoided before it is to late if it is not too late already!
Complain about this comment
MarcusAureliusII you should be a bit more modest regarding your own history. Especially towards segregation which ended late 60's or the fact that non-white citizens endured prejudices until very recently (Chinese migrants sent back home, Japaneses during the WWII, Africans for centuries, etc.).
Ask Indians what they thought about the Indian act.
There is a big difference between the advertisement (ie propaganda) you seem to enjoy and the reality. the USA is one of the most open society in the world but I don't think the gap between modern European states and the USA is so big, especially when you look at the current socioeconomic status of the African-American community (I won't remind you their own history) or the rampant xenophobia near the Mexican borders. So clean your own mess before patronising the others.
Complain about this comment
Isn’t the UK and Europe a place where immigrants with totally different sets of values (nothing to do with race) can turn up and demand that everybody accept them, warts and all? Even if some values and cultural practices are totally alien to the culture you are entering? Such as honour killings, arranged marriages, unequal rights, etc?
Where you can just say “racist, intolerant, xenophobic” and plenty of armchair intellectuals needing of a cause will rally to your defence?
Where many immigrants are told they can act like they have the right to not be offended? To dictate what is acceptable to say and what isn’t?
Usually by getting in the back door of free speech by saying “well, it’s hate speech if it doesn’t agree with me”?
Complain about this comment
I am still trying to come to grips with how the British "accept" migrants, or for that matter, anyonenon-British. As an expat in an Arab country, I have chosen to live in gated Western communities because I want my family to enjoy the liberty and freedom I espouse. In the last four years, I have found the British to be the least forthcoming. They can be your next door neighbour, and will say a warm hello every morning, but then go and stand behind an invisible wall. It never goes beyond that. My family and I are sufficiently fluent in English, but the British in our community will always pretend they have difficulty understanding us. My children speak with in near-perfect Brit accent, but never get invited to any sleepovers.
Please dont think I'm complaining. I'm just trying to make the point that the British are just not terribly good at making strangers feel welcome. I usually beat most people at tennis, and I've walked over to the British chaps quite a few times to invite them to play; they just won't join mefor a game. The Australian was quick on the uptake, the next door Greeks became good friends, even the South Africans are very friendly and forthcoming, but not the British. If I, with all my outward Westernisation in attire and demneanour, have not been able to make an impression, I'm not surprised that immigrants are attracted to ghettoes.
While official Britain is wonderfully accomodating of my needs as an immigrant, the British street has a long way to go before it rids itself of its own prejudices. Assimilation is not going to work if, despite the migrant's best effort, the local chap is just bent on ignoring him.
Complain about this comment
To Oliderid. Your comments of America's discrimination are valid. However, I have not known any other county to adjust and right its wrongs so fast. Propaganda is hardly the issue. You fail to realize that america is so big and has so many facets all you only get exposed to the media in your home state and their portrayal of our country. I see in rural areas chinese, hispanics, and "rednecks" living in harmony. Maybe its because of the obesity crisis in this country, referencing they all get along because they like eating each other's cuisine. Regardless they do coexist with commonalities even religiously. Look at NYC within a decade of new immigrants arriving to this day, discrimination and stereotypes rapidly disappear. As far as socioeconomic, that effects all people in the US not just the african american society and truth be told, we all get the same start. Free education, healthcare (for children), and government aid for college. We even have laws passed to ensure a correction for socioeconomic difference in our state run school systems giving them preferential entrance to our universities. Ensuring that everyone has the same out come. Guess what?, we all learn about each others culture with mutual respect in these school systems. The only time you see discrimination is from the ignorant. The majority of this country comes from european immigrants. So I guess if you see these issues of discrimination due to assimilation, maybe its just remnants from your culture that we haven't bred out yet.
Complain about this comment
I am deeply grateful for this article. A wonder of an analysis of culture and demography, supported by a German politician that apparently knows nothing about immigration.
Of course, right away one of the steady contributors of false information is on the spot:
“Germany on the other hand expects immigrants to remain permanently separate 'Gastarbeiters' who will one day return whence they came.”
No, it does not, and it would by the way also make the initiative by minister Boehmer meaningless. Anybody with the slightest insight in the German population will understand that right away. Germany needs immigration, and through the interior the German government has actually invited all immigrants in Germany to apply for citizenship.
We will get to the same place with this analysis as the EU sceptics are reaching with their: nowhere. The reason is also the same: lack of understanding of interests. The real policy is the following: Keep unproductive immigrants out, get as many productive immigrants as possible in, while wrapping everything in mist.
Complain about this comment
There are three basic facts relating to immigration:
1. Politicians do not always respect our wishes. Quite often we need to force them to obey our (the majority of the people)wishes. In Britain the LIB/LAB/CON group of politicians and media people have utterly and completely disregarded the people's wishes re immigration.
2. There was no such thing as a "multi-racial society" or "multi-cultural society" anywhere in Europe till about 1970. These concepts did not derive from the people. They were imposed on the people and a whole industry was created to force these concepts in.
3. There is, or rather there was, a concept by a type of naive or foreign-funded "idiot" that immigration is a test of the host communities which we pass in the UK by remaining true to our own traditions of respecting the cultural and religious values of newcomers. What??? Respecting honour killings, arranged marriages, unequal rights, killing people who change their religion, "female
circumcision", suicidal bombings, lying to the non-believer (us) as a virtue, thinking of our country's enemies as "brothers" and us as enemies - in our own country.
We now know, from Blair's speechwriter, that millions of people from outside Europe were let in quite deliberately.
There is no identity crisis in Europe. All Italians, French etc know who they are. But millions of people have been let in who at best can be only an alien wedge and at worst a dangerous alien wedge. People want a halt to immigration and stste-aided repatriation for people who cannot fit in.
Complain about this comment
I knew MAII would trot out the same rant he does every time. Funny though, I live in Europe, I am legally living with a Latina that is a mix of various races and there isn't this feeling that he talks about, at all.
In fact, I know several Latino's that migrated over here that first lived in the USA, and they all claim that compared to racism in the United States, over here is nothing.
Not that I want to say that the USA is inherently more 'racist' , but it's quite easy to find arguments like that too. Oh, and as for the facebook group, I've seen stormfront MA, and it's filled with Americans, silly you.
Complain about this comment
‘When in Rome, do as the Romans do’, is much more than an old saying. Reflects the need to become part of the place and culture you live in. Going to extremes is often the problem, and there are different circumstances to consider, as in any problem. You can keep your identity and become a citizen in a new country. But creating enclaves among other cultures, like little cities within the cities, does not promote integration to the new society, neither help the new society to understand and accept the new members. It is not to become an alien to yourself, is not to be an alien to the rest of the people with whom you have to live. Balance is not easy, but possible.
Complain about this comment
Gavin you have pointed the causes of EU failure and it will continue to fail. EU is hypocritical union, and the beliefs are all useless. They want to do what the US is doing and that is practice democracy and yet it does not exist is Europe if you are an immigrant. The US is the only country that really practices freedom of speech and religion. You talk of about freedom of religion yet the EU is discriminating against mostly muslim minorities, reading your article, the European countries are so focused of getting rid of the burka and hijab than helping these people get education and jobs.Where is the freedom if no one is allowed to practice their religion and culture? That is very stupid for French president and German Chancellor agreeing to these ideas of segregation and discrimination. US is the only true democracy and freedom. And remember as you keep doing this, you keep segregating the immigrants they become isolated and develop the radical ideas that we are trying to eliminate. talk about educating them, giving the opportunities they came for instead of threatening them with taking their freedom of religion and culture. Do not side with the radicals cause now the French and Germans are doing that by taking those cultural and religious rights. Radical will be using that against the civilized world. We need more opportunities for the immigrants, they left their countries for that,and if they cannot get it in a civilized countries that EU take itself tobe where would they go.if they had them in their countries , then they would rather stay home. Learn from the US how to integrate, US is the best country, where anyone can be who they want to be.
Complain about this comment
Has it struck anyone else that the last three threads have been about how we view the future of the EU but the moment immigration from outside the EU comes onto the agenda, suddenly nobody is talking about Europe.
". . . Eric Besson, said "we must reaffirm the values of national identity and of the pride in being French"
". . . Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that "British people want to be assured that newcomers will accept the responsibilities as well as the rights that come with living here, obeying the law, speaking English, and making contributions".
". . . Nicolas Sarkozy, has said that all beliefs are respected in France, but "becoming French means adhering to a form of civilisation, to values, to morals"
"That is the idea of the Integration Minister, Maria Boehmer . . . The contract would set out basic German "values". . . "
What happened to Europe overnight - did it evaporate?
Complain about this comment
There shouldn't be any immigration from outside Europe, exceptions to be made where people are overwhelmingly of British descent and culture. In the short term one way of making sure that there will be a proper immigration watch is to make ministers personally liable for criminal actions committed by non EU people who were let in , in their period of office.
Complain about this comment
#14 - giltedged
Absolutely ridiculous. We in Europe have consistently exported skills by making education - especially in the professions and sciences - available to all comers.
Now we find ourselves in the position of needing to reimport those skills to ensure our own standards of services. We are generally happy to pay the going rate. In a way, everyone is a winner.
Can you seriously imagine the NHS, for example, coping without immigration labour?
Complain about this comment
I'd don't see it as identity crisis, if it is done properly it can only be a good thing.
#9 giltedged, who asked you "Respecting honour killings, arranged marriages, unequal rights, killing people who change their religion, "female circumcision", suicidal bombings, lying to the non-believer (us) as a virtue, thinking of our country's enemies as "brothers" and us as enemies" No LAB/LIB/CON asked you that, that statement is a lie.
#12 BigMo, neither of those politicians you mentioned talk of "segregation and discrimination" they want imigrants to accept their new countries and blend in they don't want the current situation of segregation.
About lesson is only a good idea, I don't know if the US offers classes to imigrants but I would imagine a minimum knowlwdge of what the rules and customs of your new country are is not a bad thing.
Complain about this comment
You cant compare US to EU. In the US, there´s no racism, because whites live in suburbs and minorities in cities, so they dont meet too often each other. Whites left cities in 70s and what left is Detroit.
Complain about this comment
I am an immigrant - an English person living in France. I came here 10 years ago, only the second such person in our village, expecting to have to learn to speak the language, adopt to local customs and traditions, etc. There are now nearly 60 of us in a commune of 350 (more is the pity!). My wife is now a French citizen.
We have both been welcomed by the French because of our efforts to 'integrate' (the same cannot be said, I am afraid, of some others from the UK); indeed, we are more accepted here than people from Paris or Picardy. Dutch and Belgian friends here also feel welcomed - because they want to integrate.
On the other hand, I lived in one large village in Oxfordshire for 24 years, was involved in all sorts of village activities - and never felt part of the community. I emigrated before I graduated from being a newcomer to being an incomer!
There are two sides to this issue - the immigrant has to want to integrate, and the indigenous community has to want to welcome them. It has little to do, frankly, with race or nationality or religion - just basic common human courtesy. Unfortunately, that is sometimes not so common.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Maria Boehmer is not minister. She is the integration commissioner of the federal government, (CDU) as everybody can read on the page (in English):
http://www.swr.de/international/en/-/id=233338/nid=233338/did=5597018/tp42hc/.
The article here is misrepresenting the facts on German politics. This is not German politics it is Mrs. Boehmers personal ideas. It is completely unbelievable that this is called "Europe's identity crisis". It begins to look like a serious disagreement on what "Europe" is.
Complain about this comment
threnodio_II wrote:
#14 - giltedged
"Absolutely ridiculous. We in Europe have consistently exported skills by making education - especially in the professions and sciences - available to all comers.
Now we find ourselves in the position of needing to reimport those skills to ensure our own standards of services. We are generally happy to pay the going rate. In a way, everyone is a winner.
Can you seriously imagine the NHS, for example, coping without immigration labour?"
You might tone down your insults directed towards other contributers, threnodio. Referring to arguments as "absolutely ridiculous" does not enhance your own position.
Now, to address you claims:
"We in europe" is a delightfully hopeful phrase. Do you mean "we the owners of factories who demand cheap labour", or do you mean "we the workers in factories who would rather not compete for work with the results of rampant over population in the third world"?
Secondly, you presume a very great deal by presuming that "we" NEED to import skilled labour. We can't we simply train it?
A society can always ... ALWAYS.. train the skilled labour it needs. The choice of whether to train or to import is only economics in action. If it is cheaper to import than to train, and the short term cost is the only factor, then the choice is generally to import. And the consequence is the erosion of the intellectual capital in the society importing the skills. And by stimulating demand for training in other foreign markets, another consequence is to increase the rewards for those who do train the required workers.
Now when "we" pay the going rate for imported skills, have you factored into the cost analysis the damage done to the training market?
How many training jobs have been lost in the UK and Europe because governments have consistently decided to destroy the training market in favour of cheap imports?
What is the cost of that, when all those mature workers go on the dole instead of becoming respected teachers of industrial skills?
Now moving on to your example of the NHS, you propose that the NHS could not serve society if not for imported labour. With respect, you take enormous liberties of credibility by proposing the NHS as a crucial and valued service to the community. Arguably the fact that the NHS spends so much taxpayers money on imported skilled labour is a ghastly and unforgivable waste of money for insufficient returns to the taxpayer. And yes, arguably it is a good thing to take the payers money and spend it on immigrant labour so that the NHS can make its economic reports more palatable for the taxpayer.
Both sides of the argument are legitimate. Neither is "absolutely ridiculous". However, I would offer the opinion that, in future, if you wish to make an argument about a wonderful industry which owes it glorious results to the valued contributions of skilled labour, you could do better than choose the NHS.
Anyway, at the centre of this debate about immigration is the core economic philosophy of the participants.
If you believe that cheap labour is crucial because those who own large business's must be allowed to prosper at the cost of those who do not, then immigration will always be preferable to training. If you believe that a wealthy middle class is enhanced by high labour costs (because the value of training family members and the value of family members working in the family owned small business increases with the cost of labour) then immigration will always be a negative thing.
To me, the debate is about whether you want a society of middle class small business's and high wages, or whether you prefer a few mega lords of industry who employ armies of slaves who work to remain poor.
I concede that everyone is entitled to their own preference, however I do not accept that "we" are all in this together.
If "we" were all in this together, "we" would all work for a wage, or "we" would all run our own business.
Complain about this comment
The photo of the Muslim women shows the specific Islamic/Arabic idendity covered still vastly as the identity of Middle Eastern countries as: 'our Islamic countries' according to all Muslims; and where their culture and identity has its roots and continues to exist. Why the Islamic identity is not, never has been, and cannot ever be the European identity - on the contrary - Islam is vastly different in religion and culture have nothig in common; and confirmed by the BBC program 'The Crescent and the Cross' that Islam and Christendom have been enemies from the start of Islam. To deny this; and that emnity between Europeans and Muslims therefore continues to exist, is fooling oneself.
There are millions of Europeans who feel highly offended by the pressence of Islam, and no matter who or what European governments stand on their heads protesting about their 'dicrimination against Muslims', won't help, cannot help, for the violent emnity declared in Koran/Muhammed/hadiths against Christians and Jews, under extreme insults of blaspheming and degrading to 'a prophet in Islam' Jesus-CHRIST/Messias of Christendom, why Koran cannot be accepted in Europe - nor Muslims.
It is not possible for Muslims to live with such a highly offensive book amongst us; and Muslims only seemingly integrate 'haram' to do so, live mostly in their own cultural enclaves and religion. 'Haram' is Christmas, the Holy Cross; Churches - with Italy reacting vehemently after the forced removal by the so-called 'Human Rights Council of EUROPE (!) of the Holy Cross from all classrooms in Italy.
with as result another CLASH-WHAM with Islam in Europe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AdDR1efRCY&feature=related
I fail to comprehend that European governments deliberately imported religious and ethnic conflicts, denied Europeans their specific identity - even imported outright enemies such as under Islamic terrorism - attacking us from within.
And yes, a great pity indeed that 'dear old England' no longer exists because of mass-immigration, also has lost her specific identity.
Complain about this comment
Threnodio @13: Certainly many contributors to this blog would love to see Europe (rather, the EU) evaporate! But you touch on the natural dual nature of the EU/nation-state relationship. Perhaps you found the speed with which politicians shift gears from ‘ever closer union’ to ‘stay the hell out’ a bit disconcerting? :)
Complain about this comment
Contracts are an excellent idea. (This may be the topic on which I finally engage MAII, for those of you who enjoy that kind of combat & have been waiting to see what might transpire as a result.)
For now, allow me to limit myself to this opening salvo:
Who invented multiculturalism? Europe.
Can anyone therefore impute intolerance to Europeans with any kind of truth supporting that charge? No.
Should burkas be banned? Yes, of course. When I see a woman in a burka or hijab, I see a captive of an ideology that denies girls and women the right to make their own decision about something as basic, innocuous and ultimately fundamental as what to wear in public.
The cloth merchants, as an African Muslim leader recently pointed out, are a huge force behind the attempt to enshrine hijabs and burkas in some kind of aura of respectability.
The fabric may not clink like a chain, but it is every bit as cumbersome as shackles, and -- crucially -- it sends a public message to everyone else: "I am controlled by a priesthood of old men who live by 9th century laws."
If Muslims expect women from other countries to pay homage to their customs when in their lands, they need to allow their daughters, sisters, wives and mothers to pay homage to our customs when they are in our lands.
When our daughter interacts with Muslims on this subject, she hears: "Our women wear a veil on their head because Jesus's Mother did."
Did Jesus's Mother use a cell phone? Did She have running water in the house? Did She watch TV?
The absurdity of the argument is self-evident. When "Jesus's Mother" wore the garments of the time, they were Fashionable for that time. They were functional for a society with dust & sand storms, camels, donkeys, and limited water that had to be drawn from a well and carried home (usually by the woman, regardless of how she felt on that day). It made sense to cover one's legs from brambles, one's long hair from dirt, one's face from the blazing sun (as well as slave traders and aggressive men).
It no longer makes sense. Does anyone seriously believe that if the Holy Family (of any religion) lived today They would dress according to the norms of ancient times?
Since we cannot seem to arrive at a simple, straightforward consensus about acceptable public behaviour, and norms -- since we continuously experience the need to prosecute honour killings across Europe and certainly in America, or are still fighting to end FGM, or to catch slave traders and minimise the adverse population impacts of polygamy -- we do indeed need to resort to some contractual documents.
It is only fair. And it is intelligent to try, as it is not an expensive approach. It will certainly do zero harm -- may very well help clear up confusion about expectations, social responsibility, and accountability.
Complain about this comment
It is not possible to introduce vastly different cultures and religions without asking for trouble, with past and present history giving ample examples of this - and world-wide - continuously for thousands of years cause ethnic and religious conflicts.
Besides inter-ethnic and religeous conflicts exists between migrant communities e.g. Hindus do not exactly 'love Muslims'; Turks do not accept their children marrying Moroccans; Pakistanis not that their children marry Christians; Surinam people loath the Ghanees; sunnis hate sji'ites and the other way around; Muslim fundamentalist hate everybody non-muslim - and Muslims in general hate the Jews, why Europe to her SHAME has imported grand-scale antisemitism.
Immigration has brought vastly more problems than benefits; and I fear Europe will pay a very high price in the future for the stupidity of EU governments; and proven by extensive over the top expensive 'Security measures against Islamic terror'.
Complain about this comment
I have never been asked if I wanted immigration in my country. This offends me greatly. As a Briton I resent the influx of immigrants. Let them work hard as my ancestors did to improve their own land, and not invade mine to reap the benefits of generations of hard work.
Just after WW2 when most economies were expanding, we imported west indians and africans, france imported North Africans Germany imported Turks and Japan said no, we will automate, miniturise and become productive without cheap labour. Guess which society still retains its culture and values the most?
Multiculturism is a left wing lie and will remain so as long as human nature holds sway over our actions, ie for ever.
Complain about this comment
It seems to me that, whenever a society (eg a nation) feels insecure, it starts to question the "values", etc of anyone who wants to enter it. Many EU countries are still going through unsettling times: hence the insecurity. Immigrants are accused of stealing jobs from "true-born nationals" - whatever the proof, whatever the idea of "true-born national".
France was the leader in the debate on how to determine nationality, and has re-visited the theme more often than any other nation. Their first naturalisation laws date from the early 19th century: but, oh how they have changed - so often - yet have come back into equilibrium again.
Forget it. It's a passing phase. We'll get over it - and carry on as usual.
Complain about this comment
I think it a little short sighted to suppose that Islam is a male subjugation of women. A better way to describe it would be say that it is a female subjugation of the whole society.
To understand why I say that, you need to look at some rather improbable financial statistics which come from the Islamic world, and also to look at the comments made by the leading female members of Islamic society. Many of the most vocal and demanding supporters of radical Islam are female. You ignore that fact at your peril, if your aim is to understand what drives the culture.
It is true that women in Islamic society are short changed in terms of human rights, especially poor women, when compared to their western counterparts. But it is also true that men are also short changed, often more so. Yes, the Islamic faith makes huge demands upon women, but it also makes huge demands upon men. Sharia law allows a man to be stripped of property in many colourful and interesting ways, and the attendant causes of legal action in family law would make any western man wary of having too many Islamic wives.
But rather than dwell on details of family law, let us look at the broad statistics: the bottom 45% of the socio-economic ladder in Islamic society is exclusively male. In western society it is only bottom 5 to 10% who are exclusively male.
Further, the subjugation of women as domestic slaves is fundamentally a benefit to WOMEN. When we hear of child brides being forced into marriage, we generally receive the implication that it is an urge for sexual gratification by the male which has created the marriage. This is a false perception. Nearly always the child bride is being roped into a contract of domestic servitude, and her new "owner", and the instigator of the marriage contract, will be the number 1 wife.
Inside the Islamic family, it is women who make the rules for women, and it is women who use women as slaves inside their own household. It is also women who instigate legal actions against women in order to enforce the cultural niceties of sharia law. You know the story you read about where the woman was stoned to death for adultery? Well that legal action was almost certainly brought by a female litigant, not a male.
Now the catholic church was another institution which subjugated the rights of women for the benefit of more socially important women. Grandmothers routinely employed traditional catholic law in order to make other women breeding machines for their beloved sons, so that the flock of darling grandchildren could be increased.
It has always been the desire for raw power from elderly women, to control the lives of younger men and women, which has driven the political economy of religious law. It has NOT been the sexual drive of males, as the radical young lesbian feminists would like to have us believe. If you doubt this claim, check the facts. The easiest way is to go to a catholic church or a mosque, and see who lines up to talk to the priests, and watch who contributes what to their welfare. See if you don't observe elderly women lining up around the block to have their grievances heard.
What changed the abuses within the catholic church was not the restriction of abuse my men, but rather the separation of church and state. Once the law changed to prevent old ladies going to the priest and making donations in return for judgements on family members, the abuses stopped.
This ought to be the context of our problems with islamic society. It is not islam itself which is the issue, and nor is it the mythical gender war between males and females.
What is driving the conflict of values between west and east is the conflict of laws: the west has separated church and state. The west has taken the power of law away from the priests who survive on donations from elderly women. Islamic society has not. Sharia law the law of priests, is still the islamic law. In essence, the islamic world has not evolved to the point where church and state are separated, and so the donations to priests in local scenarios, rather than the public tax revenue, is what drives the political economy of the law.
Regrettably, western society is unable to confront this problem of a conflict of laws, because (I suspect) we simply don't care much about the issue anymore. It is "only" the children of Islamic families who horse traded by priests and grandmothers, so we don't care. We don't demand the state step into these situation and demand a clear separation between church and state. In effect, we allow the political economy of the islamic society within our own society to contravene the established rule of law.
But we must not blame the islamic society for this failure. It is entirely a failure of the western community. If we cared more about our own law, and if we honoured our duty of care to the children of islamic families who are left victim to sharia law, then islamic folks would integrate perfectly into our societies.
Complain about this comment
#16 Chris Arta
"I don't see an identity crisis" Neither do I.Eg Italians know who they are ie Italians,Catholics or lapsed Catholics, Europeans living in their own country, knowing their history. Similarly the Germans etc. And for example the Pakistanis. They know they are Pakistanis, Muslim, Asians. The problems start when Muslim people, for example want to be given concessions regarding what they wear, what they eat, what country Britain should not go to war with, issuing death threats to someone who writes against their religion and most ominously demand the introduction of the despicable Shariah Law
People are aware of continuous Islamic immigration and the much, much higher Islamic birth-rate. They don't like it and they know full well who the LIB/LAB/CON people are and what they will do about it - ie Nothing.
Then you wrote :
#9 giltedged, who asked you "Respecting honour killings, arranged marriages, unequal rights, killing people who change their religion, "female circumcision", suicidal bombings, lying to the non-believer (us) as a virtue, thinking of our country's enemies as "brothers" and us as enemies" No LAB/LIB/CON asked you that, that statement is a lie.
I did not say a LIB/LAB/CON said that. I said some "idiots" think and in fact wrote that "immigration is a test of the host communities which we pass in the UK by remaining true to our own traditions of respecting the cultural and religious values of newcomers." And I said certainly not if those cultural and religious values include "female circumcision", honour killings etc. In fact we should fight not to have these vile cultural and religious values introduced in the UK and Europe.
The trouble is that the LIB/LAB/CON people have shown inertia or worse. And we also have found out how they fund their life-style. The people see degradation everwhere. They remember for example, a House of Lords undemocratic but honest. It now has a load full of inglorious people kicked upstairs, "ethnic" baronesses whose only skill seems to be "ethnic" ie non-ethnic (one of whom employed an illegal immigrant), a Pakistani-born gentleman who apparently threatened to surround the House of Commons with 10,000 immigrants if the leader of the second most popular party in Holland was allowed in.
People are sick of immigration and how their politicians for their own personal, selfish reasons are kowtowing to the immigrants' wishes. Basta ya! Enough is enough!
Complain about this comment
The United States is the champion of assimilation and multiculturalism. Europe is not. The countries that are best at it in Europe (the UK and France) are peculiarly like the U.S. because they have had extended multi-ethnic empires. What this gave these countries, which is lacking in the rest of Europe is a flexible concept of Identity. In the minds of people the idea of what it means to be 'French' or 'British' is flexible in the UK and France. In the United States to become American - that is to be seen as American by most people - is to be (a) born there or (b) arrive legally, support yourself, and share the parts of your culture that you think people will appreciate and keep the rest to yourself. You can even wear a Burka if you and your religion dictate. If a woman is being oppressed the courts are now more and more effective at dealing with women's issues like this. You don't even really need to speak English to be America! For example, my butcher where I grew up spoke only Italian and had an American flag in his shop and anyone I knew in the neighborhood would go the mat with someone for saying he wasn't American.
That is simply not the case in most of Europe. As an immigrant (and I am one) you can me sign all the contracts you want, I can speak the language fluently, and yet I will never fully 'integrate'. Today, holding that out as a possibility is just cruel - and most immigrants know it. If you have 'distinguishing features' that you can pass on to your kids such as a foreign name or skin color your kids will never be considerered fully (Belgian/German/Danish/etc.). Until Europeans broaden their identities and learn to really rip down this national defensiveness Europe will have immigration problems.
Seriously, in Belgium at least, even EU citizens face HORRIBLE discrimination on the job market and in society. I have a good friend who is Spanish and another who is Bulgarian. Both of them speak Flemmish fluently, both of them have incredible credentials, and both were treated like people stealing something by the authorities when they tried to register, and both were turned down for jobs to lesser applicants because of reasons that ran the gamut, but boiled down to - you aren't one of us.
The new President of the EU is on record as saying that Muslim values are incompatible with European Christian values. At the height of post-9/11 hysteria the entire governmental establishment were unequivocal in their support of American muslims. To this day the line is that Islam is perfectly compatible with American values so long as one accepts a non-fundamentalist interpretation.
So, honestly, how can Europe expect to assimilate people from other countries when you can't even assimilate your fellow EU citizens! How can Europe expect to embrace its huge muslim minorities when the first President of the EU is on record as saying 'your values are incompatible with ours.'
Does America have race relation problems? Yes. Of course so does Europe now that you have substantial minorities festering in urban ghettos. We have been dealing with it, struggling with it, and working through our issues with new immigrant groups for 240 years. Each new group of migrants posed a problem, but we have solved them and worked through them. The door to full integration was there, and still is.
Just as America has a lot to learn from Europe about how to care for its citizens and how to be a more responsible and long-viewed globally focused society Europe has much it can learn from America about multiculturalism in practice (rather than in theory).
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
# 27 French Derek
"Forget it. It's a passing phase. We'll get over it - and carry on as usual."
No we won't. This is a totally new situation. Islamization by immigration is not something Europe has experienced. To learn about this we need to speak with Lebanese Maronites, Palestinian Christians, Egyptian Copts, Iraq Assyrians and other Christians. A few examples. The Maronites were as sophisticated and well-off as anywhere in Europe in the mid-seventies. Today? In the whole of Israel (inc Palestine) there were almost 2 million Christians out of 10 million Israelis,Muslims and Arabs, 5 years ago. Today there are a mere 150,000. In Iraq two Assyrian Christians were crucified this year - for being Christians. Assyrians were the great civilizers of the Two Rivers. In Egypt the Christians were forced to kill all their pigs .... because of swine flu. The most demented correction is made in Islamic lands if it goes against some 7th century Arabian desert cultural quirk.
Complain about this comment
I agree with no. 30.
What the EU will probably do is: ban the burka; then let honour killings happen holding their noses; and finally denounce the USA for
withholding the crucial details of "how to get along with others" thereby putting it in someone else's lap, killings millions of innocents.
and proudly saying thereafter we let others fight our battles and are therefore righteously peaceful.
OOPs couldnt hold it in.:)
Complain about this comment
I think it is unimportant to delve into the minutiae of Islam. What we should be aware is what happened historically and what is happening now.
Islam is as Islam does. We know what it does in the 21st century. So the only logical answer to the problems created by Islamic immigration in Europe is to stop it, utterly and completely. The second thing is to make it impossible for non EU immigrants to go to Europe by EU routes Eg some minister in Europe elects to give illegal immigrants the right to stay (the usual silly argument -"at least they will pay tax") They should never have the right to go elsewhere. Also there is a need to stop countries like Sweden from giving "refugee status" to anyone.
Complain about this comment
You seem to forget that we so called English are a mixture of non-gaelic speaking Celt, Roman, Dane/Viking, north German and Norman French... and that's just the races that invaded and stayed here. Since England was created by the Frenchman William (somewhere about 1066), we have also received large numbers of Hugenots, (French) and Jews from various countries persecuting them. I've probably missed a half dozen races that have also settled here unnoticed! These have all been assimilated into what we now call the English Race, and they all call themselves Englishmen.
My fathers generation were almost paranoid about the arrival of the Jews from Germany and eastern Europe; Mine was terrified of the influx from the West Indies. Both of those arrivals have, or are in the process of, assimilating and changing, slightly, the race that is called English.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
threnodio_II
Re #13
You be careful!
Pointing out the European Union's Citizens feel no cultural, no historical, nor heritage, or social cache, still less a genuine voice, and absolutely no loyalty toward the great Federal project, is guaranteed to have your name on the list for repatriation at the earliest moment!
Personally, I am one white English who absolutely embraces the multi-cultural dimension that enriched and developed the UK over the last 50 to 60 years. The UK has clearly economically-culturally benefited from the influx of peoples from across the World - - whether it be West Indians, Chinese, Africans, Australasians, Asians or Europeans - - all have brought some gifts and talents plus a wealth of activities that have greatly contributed to the British Isles ongoing prosperity.
I also think with G.B.'s particular colonising history we have a responsibility to maintain, develop and assist those lands originally forcibly linked through the modern bodies such as Commonwealth of Nations etc.
Where I draw the line is in the idea 'immigration' per se from mainland Europe or from outside the EU should be encouraged/allowed irrespective of what the UK actually requires of its Citizens.
By geographical accident but also by political-historical definition the British Isles are a finite land mass: It is dangerous nonsense not to severely restrict access to these Islands when already predictions for 2025-30 are that the population will be in excess of 70 million.
Now is the time for all cultures to be celebrated in the UK, but also clear, defined and stiff rules, regulations for any future immigration (therefore 'open borders' is a non-starter).
It is also the time for clear, defined and comprehensively applied assimilation of all cultures within the UK: Every economic migrant, asylum seeker etc. entering the UK and applying to settle must be informed and made to sign agreed basic 'pro-west' Humanitarian principles. These are predominantly Judao-Christian in origin and concept any other 'cultural' group must understand there is no question of any other sort of applicable legal status or inter-action (therefore Sharia Law is a non-starter).
It has always seemed to me the Commission for Racial Equality etc. got their constructs all wrong: No one would agree an immigrant should be allowed to drive on the opposite side to the British Traffic system. One has to wonder why this fundamental piece of commonsense is not applied in all other aspects of everyday life? Afterall, the person's Faith cannot be allowed to excuse them from obeying the Highway Code (Sikhs and crash helmets is a classic example of sound, flexible British Common Law sense), so why should it be any different when it comes to any other aspect of lifestyle within the UK, or indeed mainland Europe?
Anyone seeking to legally enter and remain within the UK who is unable to accept these privileges that come with residing in the UK should be invited and/or instructed to leave forthwith.
Incidentally, I would have no problem with every 'white' indigenous Citizen having to sign the same commitment-declaration as the 'new arrivals': What's source for the goose...
I can hear the Human Rights lawyers chomping at the bit; well, to my mind they would be the first group made to sign-up or ship-out!
Complain about this comment
In Russia there is also a Muslim-Christian problem, due to similar circumstances that Europe has. Post USSR collapse gasterbeiters from Southern USSR states streamed to Russia, as life conditions post-collapse were worse in muslim USSR constituencies.
We never saw so many muslims at once in Russia as during past 20 years. (In USSR all mostly lived in own republics, in own partitions, and according to local life-style preferences). And then we got all at once met together in the centre, gravitated to where it's safer.
Shock and Awe! and wow (how Mavrelius would have put it :o) Only foreigners around of all sorts. Granted, here it's easier than in Europe, because there is a base of old USSR and Empire times' common understanding, not total aliens as is the case with Europe. Rather, new old friends :o)
BTW, can't "old Empire times" be the uniting base btw some European countries and the new-comers to them ?:o)
Still, the effect is a Babylon mass-? eh? get together.
The other day was entering subway, saw ahead a woman in big black gown all around. Must admit that slowed my pace to near stand-still :o)
Memoirs of theate taken hostage, various belts things still run fresh.
Then I realised it's a nun! from a monastery - same clothes :o)!
black hood long black gown - a rare thing to see these days, but I cheered up and walked quicker. Then I stopped again - "who knows them", a nun or a burka - things got so mixed up these days - I don't want to stand by any long black gown.
Awful mix up of things, when you can't tell an own Russian Orthodox nun from a Catholic may be nun from a muslim girl in burka and may be there are more options to the long black gown.
Still, in St. Petersburg it's a one-off. Our muslims don't wear muslim clothes - because no one is break-neck to dare to stand out additionally :o)))) On the other side, in other parts of the Russian Federation - a Russian girl wouldn't dare to stand out additionally :o) -and will wear a head scarf.
It's a Federation - some republics are 90% muslim, other republics are 60% Russian (never more than 60%) but still there is the preferred local style to which one adheres depending where exactly one is lucky to have landed down :o))))
Complain about this comment
The last thing we need to learn from the US is immigration and assimilation.
Basically we do not need immigration. Our European countries are fixed, if anything over-populated with their own history, culture, architecture etc. Indeed there shouldn't be any immigration apart from a)internal b) highly educated people selected as individuals on merit and very few in numbers. We certainly do not need to import drivers, teachers, doctors or whatever. Internal market forces should provide for that.
There is no identity crisis. We know who we are. We know that we want to remain who we are. The crisis is with the immigrants whom our politicians have let in
And we do not need to lose our identity in TV singing contests, multi-faith episodes, TV programmes deliberately fairytaled to provide a "cross-section of the community"
Complain about this comment
#21 - democracythreat
"You might tone down your insults directed towards other contributers, threnodio. Referring to arguments as "absolutely ridiculous" does not enhance your own position".
I might but I will not. Far too often have I been the butt of your insults to take lessons from you in courtesy.
#38 - cool_brush_work
". . . is guaranteed to have your name on the list for repatriation . . ." LOL. To where CBW, does being a non-conformist make me 'homeless for the purposes of the Act'?
Complain about this comment
Have also heard an interesting discussion on the theme, in the route mini-bus on the way to dacha. Dacha is suburbs, and in suburbs rent is cheaper, so there settle many immigrants. Accordingly, such bus routes will have more "ex-USSR" in it than St. Petersburgers.
A Russian woman was making a loud speech to her friends "How good muslim men are" :o) !
"Look how hard-working their men are! Not like our Russian lazy-bones! hey work and work, round o'clock - and send all money home to their families, leaving for themselves a very minimum - because they care about their children!
While a typical Russian man doesn't give a damn about neither his wife, nor his child, divorces 10 times a life, to make someone to pay aliments (those, payments) - you have to hunt for him with the police (:o))) in fact. true :o) - and the only time a Russian man normally remembers he ever had a son or a daughter - is when he gets old and needs someone to look after him. While Muslim chaps - all for children. It's our men who have to learn from them, not the other way around."
("yep, yep, correct - nodded the females in the bus around :o)
Then one man in the bus lost patience listening to this for 5 kilometres and said "Don't give me this crap! How do they actually care for their children, I wish to know! They've got 6 to 12 - and don't tell me it is possible in Russia on one's honest salary to keep more than 1 child fed and clothed. What kind of care and up-bringing that is? You are un-fair, gals :o) Besides, these gasterbeiters now have "one child behind in every Russian city" :o))))
Then a muslim woman interfered, said "Yes, yes, all true, our muslim man are mad about children, but about wives - I'd wish to correct you - a muslim man can easily leave his wife and divorce as much as he likes - but as to the children - he'd keep them by any means anyway, sure."
Then I said type I want to speak up for Russian man, not so hopeless goners :o))), and "that Russian man in the bus is absolutely right - how can you care about 7 kids is beyond me."
Then that "Russian man" said to me - "Thanks a million, of course, only you are wrong - I'm not Russian. I'm Armenian. But all the same."
Then the passionate bus quarrel ended up as it was my stop. :o)
Complain about this comment
Gavin: there certainly is an identity crisis in Europe, but no where is that crisis more conspicuous than in the UK. I'd like to hear your views on where the UK now is on national identity. I myself am British (ie anglo-saxon) by birth but have lived nearly all my life abroad; I have real difficulty comprehending "Britishness" these days when I visit the UK. On the up side - Britain seems to be regaining a sense of identity and self-confidence; on the down side - what have we been doing while the rest of the World has been marching forwards???
Complain about this comment
Actually, my earlier comment ...30 something...was rude and not positive in contribution. ("pop,pop fizz fizz..oh what a relief it is"..)
But, I can add a positive note---WHOA YOU GERMANS!!
That is a great plan--the best plan to come out of Germany since..Beethovan (SP?)
Truly it is ..the only problem is what are European or even German values and in what priority...
Very important--BUT Matheson you should be proud to be German today...
NOW another great idea from Germany... just in time for Europe, too.
Wow. no, I'm feeling better about Europe today than for ages...it is neat there, and Germany has just made The crucial contribution to its survival/future-I hope :)
Complain about this comment
After riding in public transit in Moscow for many years, Alice, I must agree with you that there are many mentally ill people in the ex-USSR.
As in other places...
Moderators are considering whether my earlier, carefully-worded reply to democracythreat can be published.
In and of itself that tells you just how alarming the whole process has become.
I write as a woman who studied Islam at Harvard, respect believers, honour freedom and has great affection for many forward-thinking Muslim leaders.
Even that is not sufficient.
I think everyone should worry.
Complain about this comment
#29
I think mostly we agree, none of the "honour killings, arranged marriages, unequal rights, killing people who change their religion, "female circumcision", suicidal bombings" sit well with me either. But I hope that's what politicians or liberals have in mind when they ask to respects other people's traditions.
I also think that a contract that immigrants do not aspire to any of the above "traditions" is not such a bad idea. Even some clothing can be included in such a contract.
I know that people may see a contract as severe, but been asked to accept the culture of the country of your choise (not the one you were born in by no fault of your own) should be the most natural thing in the world. If one is not forced to move to Europe, one should make a conscious choise, I will be able to fit in there with their customs and their laws or no I can't fit in there and I like it more here where I am and will stay here.
I fail to see how the above violates someone rights, it is same as if I decide that I believe it is my right to kill, therefor I'm not guilty of any crimes I commit and if the community through its laws decide that I'm a killer and I should go to jail, then they violate my rights.
Complain about this comment
oh Web Alice...good story...always thot US and Russia ..similar situations
and the nice reaction..."oh what to do".. lololol:0))
and to Threnodio, this is Europes more pressing problem..and the symbols(pres. n foreign Minister) are only symbols..next an anthem?
But, it is confusing, yes, so soon, but, (peaceful) Germany's mind is focused now:)
Complain about this comment
Just do not worry too much, Maria.
Worry, worry, worry will make you seem to yourself insane..I know:)
Complain about this comment
This European self-righteousness is just making me feel nauseous. My wife and I earned our PhDs in engineering from European universities and we can converse fluently in half a dozen European languages and yet we still do not have the right to freely work or live in Europe after 9 years on this immigrant-hostile content. Last time I changed employer I had to wait for 3 month a get a new temporary, job specific and employer specific work permit and lose 5 workdays back and forth to the foreigners’ office to prove that I am a decent honest person who cares about his health, lives in a large flat, not in debt and is not a terrorist. So although I deeply cherish the so called European values, that is why we moved to Europe at the first place, I do not feel like pledging allegiance or signing any contract with any state that keeps on making our life difficult by discriminatory stupid legislations.
Personal feelings apart, I think a more active form of advocacy for liberty, freedom of expression, gender equality and secularism should be directed to the new comers from particularly religious societies.
Complain about this comment
stellarBeloved, I suspect you are not a woman.
If you ever had to find work as a woman, in any reasonable profession, you would understand better what I mean.
So would democracythreat, if that individual lived in a society where one wife could have many lawful husbands, and the men actually had to give birth as a result of performing their connubial duties.
Any man who ever had to give birth, even once, would find cause to worry about the plight of girls, women, children -- and about their rights.
Including the right to express an honest, reasonable opinion.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
maria-ashot @45, well, we are in the English traditional :o))))) PC world domain, one has to respect local customs :o)))))))
Besides, this particular internet geographic location :o)))) is enhanced by being EU-PC correct, so it's double hoops to jump through :o))))
Still, I think it's good in Russia a bus quarrels about muslim-Russian things openly, more straightforward points, up to the point. In Britain a similar bus wouldn't speak up on the issue - not because finding it un-interesting - but because all are mentally limited by what is ? "comilfo"
oh. fitting as a possible discussion, and what is un-fitting. Weather is fitting, and the rest of subjects gets sorted out as well, but by own English channels, that they know of.
Complain about this comment
As a native american I can see exactly what foreign immigrants have done to america... The only festival of ours you even come close to is thanksgiving or the harvest festival... I am pretty sure if you speak to the aborigines of Canada or Australia they will also tell you a horrendous tale about losing their culture and heredity because of the masses of immigrants... oh well..
Pretty much immigrants have been taking their 'ways' around the world since we left the african basin, thats the way the world works, and its no good saying "ours is the best way we must make rules to protect it"..
Oh and when you are writing down those rules you might do well to remember where the alphabet originated and when you are trying to reinforce the rules with guns you might remember where gunpowder originated... and then you might think about how not everything you take for granted as your "cultural right" even orginated in YOUR culture
Complain about this comment
... regarding the bus comment... my motherinlaw (scottish) on a bus in Glasgow the other day with a "foreigner" driving the bus - she thinks he was Bosnian. The bus driver came to a section of redirected traffic and was not sure where to go whereupon he asked a passenger if he should go right or left ... the passengers exploded on the poor guy screaming that a non british person should not be driving a british bus if they didnt know where they were going etc etc....
the bus inspectors had to come and take the poor guy off the bus..
i tried to explain to my motherinlaw that wasnt very 'pc' but in her "mindset" and those of the others on the bus if you dont speak british then you should not be doing a 'british persons' job
Complain about this comment
#45 - maria-ashot
You absolutely right to be worried.
We should, however, step back. In the post after yours at #46 ChrisArta refers to "honour killings, arranged marriages, unequal rights, killing people who change their religion, "female circumcision", suicidal bombings" .
I fully understand that he is directly quoting from a previous post and I mean no personal disrespect but the idea of putting 'suicide bombing' in the same sentence as the other examples quoted is frankly absurd. (Enter DT who will doubtless accuse me of of using 'absurd' as a term of abuse). We in the west may well struggle to accept standards which seem normal in other cultures but there is a distinction between those standards of conduct and blowing yourself to eternity in the somewhat bewildering probability that you may take others with you.
What this discussion is about - or ought to be about - is the degree to which you are willing to accept the importation of different cultural values as part of the immigration package. My own view, for what it is worth, is that the line in the sand should be drawn where something becomes unlawful in the host country. Quite clearly, in western society, killing anyone for any reason (other arguably for self defence) is unacceptable - so plainly 'honour killing' is outside the law. I am not sure where 'killing people who change their religion' came from but the same must be true.
But as to the other examples, female circumcision is, I am sure we would agree, barbaric in that nobody has the right to deprive another human being of a bodily function but it is illegal. You can spend a great deal of time in prison for 'committing grievous bodily harm'. Arranged marriages are only 'arranged' if one or other party believes they has been compelled to do something against their will and it is, again, unlawful.
What is needed here is not cultural integration. It is an acceptance that your host country has a set of laws with which you must comply if you wish to live there. If the law is not to your liking, live elsewhere. Not so difficult is it?
Complain about this comment
Absolutely comme il faut, Alice.
Not too many Christian campaniles in Saudi Arabia, last I checked.
Nor even in Kuwait. Althogh, I hope, possibly some in Egypt, due to Coptic history & minority (however afflicted).
As for Russia, recently the Patriarch spoke at length about how much traditional Christians and traditional Muslims have in common. Days ago -- on the Patriarch's birthday, no less -- a masked man executed a young priest inside a church not far from where I recently walked.
The results of the investigation are still being awaited. Of course, it could also be a calculated provocation.
Or it could be a nutjob -- including even one of these mentally ill people concerned about Russia's evolving foreign policy vs. Iran.
There has been no coverage of this event in the Western media that I have seen.
YOu remember the saying Leo T. used as the title for a short story: "God sees the truth although sometimes bides His Time..." (usually mistranslated).
Of course there are sensitive subjects.
In California, we are struggling with the large number of violent rapes being committed at a disproportionate rate by young illegal immigrants from Mexico.
It is not only naive, but actually unjust, callous & negligent to say: "Don't dare mention there is any danger to women in California from illegal immigrants." But of course it is true. The news reports tell the story.
Cultures that do not instill respect for and concern for women end badly. You know how that applies to the ex-USSR.
Similarly, those that fear the power of words end up eating their own. And that also applies to the ex-USSR.
In the matter of Iran alone, unless all sides learn to be open & honest about their positions, the likelihood of an ultimate confrontation only increases.
And so it goes. I am off to read about the Iver chapel. Good night to my beautiful, snowy Venice of the North, and her magnificent knight by Falconet.
British friends, see you in the morning. Europeans, à tout à l'heure, j'espère. Arrivederci, Roma!
Fellow Yanks, see you sooner than you imagine, and have a genuinely uplifting Thanksgiving with all your favourite people.
T. à v. und Alles gut! Ola kala!
Cheers!
Complain about this comment
Mr. Hewitt,
Why is there no direct link from the BBC blog network page to your blog?
Please ask the techies to correct this oversight.
I thank you!
Complain about this comment
In an earlier comment I suggested that integration was very difficult if certain immigrants didn't want to integrate. But an over-zealous moderator appeared to regard that as somehow politically incorrect and removed it. I would have thought it was simply stating the obvious and would be grateful if my comment was re-instated.
Complain about this comment
Thank you, threnodio. I will address this (No. 55) tomorrow.
We agree, and you know it.
I think what they do to girls in the various genital atrocities (and I know these are by no means specific to Islam as such, nor endorsed by all Muslims, by any means) comes very, very close to the horrific scarring of some of the most traumatised victims of suicide bombers who survive.
I think the fact that mothers and other female relatives participate in the FGM procedure, which is performed without anesthesia, also elevates these crimes against humanity very, very closely to the stature of the atrocities perpetrated by suicide bombers in which lives are lost. I think the ordeal of hundreds of thousands of girls who survive some of the more extreme kinds of FGM is comparable to some of the ordeals endured by victims of Dr Mengele (although other crimes of that monster were obviously even considerably worse).
I also believe the experience of the children who survived Beslan is fully comparable to the ordeals of African and other girls who have been mutilated out of ignorance and tribal custom.
I am afraid some people think there is a kind of similarity between the circumcision of boys or infants and the practices of FGM. There can be no comparison.
It is very distressing content, so I do not recommend looking it up -- but the content is out there and it is absolutely stomach-turning. You wonder the earth does not simply swallow up humankind, when you find out what mothers are capable of doing to their own helpless, shrieking, bleeding daughters.
It is every bit as bad as the old pre-Communism Chinese practice of smashing the feet of little girls with rocks and then causing them to rot for the rest of their lives. if you survived and remained gangrene-free (when the job was "done right") you could basically hardly hobble around for the rest of your life. The purpose? It was "erotically enticing" -- and conveniently prevented the victim from running away.
I have had students as recently as a year ago who still had very old grandmothers with bound feet.
Few men ever delve as thoroughly as they might into all the horrors to which girls and women (more often than boys and men) are all-too-often exposed.
The WHO does, UNICEF does, Amnesty and a few other agencies do. But very few policymakers even have time to contemplate how awful it really and truly is.
Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, and a lady colleague, just published a book on this subject, Half the Sky. Have you seen it, threnodio?
There is a very legitimate reason for lightening the burdens of women & making it easier, safer for them to live & enjoy Individual Sovereignty (JS Mill).
God/Allah most certainly would not mind, as they are a part of the many miracles of Creation, alongside their husbands, brothers and sons.
That is really only Logic speaking, obvious and simple Logic.
And see you all again tomorrow.
Complain about this comment
julie @54,
that's all the time here, all bus drivers are recent arrivals and often they don't know where is what. That is of course they know the route, but get lost when passengers start asking "does this bus go to?" "where is your next stop" etc. You simply formulate questions simply and describe how things look like on the way.
There is even a joke now "Moscow city council finally took a decision to introduce compulsory lessons of Uzbek, Tajik and Kazakh in schools so that muscovites start understanding each other" :o))))
Complain about this comment
#49 - Amgad_S wrote:
"This European self-righteousness is just making me feel nauseous. My wife and I earned our PhDs in engineering from European universities and we can converse fluently in half a dozen European languages and yet we still do not have the right to freely work or live in Europe after 9 years on this immigrant-hostile content".
But do you not see that this is entirely the problem? You are educated, multi-lingual and doubtless perfectly likeable people. The problem is that you have become part of the westernised society in which you have chosen to live and basically all you are complaining about is that you do not receive some kind of special treatment by virtue of your degrees. Your degree, for all the years of effort that went into it, is not so different from the bureaucracy you despise. It is a piece of paper.
If you are sincere about your commitment to western European values, is there any obstacle to you seeking citizenship?
Contrast that with Julie's (#53) post. A people entirely stripped of that which was rightfully theirs by a bunch on greedy Europeans who were subsequently thrown out by a bunch of second generation Europeans who in turn dare to characterise it as "Manifest Destiny". You both have the right to feel aggrieved but there is one big difference. She did not feel the need to tell us about her extraordinary academic achievements or how damned inconvenient the paperwork is.
Complain about this comment
His point (Amasgad) ..sorry Amasgad)
is that he is everything the Europeans want in an immigrant yet
his skin color makes it impossible to be European in Europe...
Gays can blend in, Blacks cannot..(I've always been told by African Americans)
But, for him and Blacks separate but equal does not work...its to despair...and
Yes Maria, women have a harder lot in life, they are loved, then hated, then loved, then used as punching bags,
then Trail Blazing a path for their people, but never receiving much gratitude..much less the job.
Complain about this comment
Maria-Ashot and Caledonian Comment
"Moderators are considering whether my earlier, carefully-worded reply to ,,, can be published."
I tell you. You won't find and Lord Nelsons in politics or the media. In one of the BBC TV programmes I watched recently instead of a debate about immigration or Islam or what Blair's speechwriter said in an interview with a Sunday broadsheet or what one of the panelists apparently did recently ie solicited a huge grant from an Arab sheikh to build a monumental mosque in his constituency it turned into a virtual public show trial by the politically-correct Establishment. It wasn't pretty to watch.
The point is, however, one can feel the ground shifting beneath one's feet. In Italy there is talk of a citizen's militia to help the police in relation to illegal immigrants. In Belgium there are all sorts of weird combinations to keep Flanders largest party out. Similarly in Holland and Austria. And a poster has actually said that the President of the EU had said that Islam is incompatible with Christian Europe.
Legal power follows people power.
Complain about this comment
#59 - maria-ashot
"Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, and a lady colleague, just published a book on this subject, Half the Sky".
No, I confess that I have not seen it. I am not sure whether the moderators will appreciate my being explicit but my view is that there is a mutuality in personal relationships which is by definition destroyed when the opportunity is denied to either party. To that extent, female circumcision is totally barbaric just as male castration might be.
This seems to me entirely different from the barbarism involved in any surgical procedure which could be performed humanely but involves wilful cruelty. I cannot begin to understand where such grotesque practices originated but it is simply not good enough to dismiss the people who practice them as barbarians. I have no idea whether there are any anthropologists out there but input might be helpful.
Complain about this comment
It should be remembered that respect works both ways, too many times people enter anouther country and expect that the indiginace population should bow to their the new commers religon/ way of life/language.They expect to be included but want every written word translated into their language rather than learn the language of that country.We europopeans have been guilty in the pass and have been slatted for it but 2 wrongs don't make a right.Nor does the fact the british in history took over the rule of countrys mean that the population of that country has the god given right to have a british passport.We as a modern day population are not responsible for our past crimes we can be sorry but we cant turn back time.Every country somewhere in history has commited a crime against anouther country none of us are without guilt.In order to go forward each country needs to keep its identity and culture and language if someones chooses to move from their country of origin then they should relize that they have fully engolf that country that means speaking that language wearing that countrys clothes and respecting that country religeon.That should be the grounds for entry to any country at the start if people cannot or will not do that then they should not be allowed to settle in that country regardless of whether they have friends or relatives in that country.We in england made the same mistake as america back in the early 60s and that was to build modern day ghettos by putting vast numbers of immigrants into a few areas creating small communitys within communitys which meant neither side bother to intergrate with one anouther the new commers not trusting the resident population so not even bothering to communicate with them and the resident population resenting the fact they were calssed as not good enough to mix with but that to them the new commers were getting preferentual treatment in housing school places ect:.That mistrust still exists today in this enforced multi culturism.It is not racism it is ignorance on both sides each scared of losing their identitiy.
Complain about this comment
My final comment. We have Julie posting from a native American viewpoint, Amgad_S from a non-European position, maria-ashot's feminist perspective (forgive if I am wrong) and stellarBeloved's gay view.
Have we forgotten that we are all human beings?
Complain about this comment
WA
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. There isn't a more racist nation on earth than Russia and it always was. Every black American dissident who went to the USSR to find nirvana came back bitterly disappointed. Eldridge Cleaver left Russia preferring to return home to a prison sentence in America than remain in Russia. Today there are routinely brutal beatings of foreigners by skin heads and the police just look away exactly as it is in former East Germany.
BZ
"The countries that are best at it in Europe (the UK and France) are peculiarly like the U.S. because they have had extended multi-ethnic empires."
The UK and France are NOTHING like the US. For example, you could have a PHD is economics in France but you aren't even getting an interview let alone a job if your name is Mohammed because one look at your name on your resume, what Europeans call a CV and it goes right into the trash bin. So how would someone of African descent become the leader of France? BTW, the US does not have and never had an empire. For a short time measured in a handful of decades it occupied a few countries after wars including the Phillipines and Cuba. Today it has troops stationed around the world but it does not control any other countries the way real empires like the imperialists of France and the UK did.
giltedged;
"The last thing we need to learn from the US is immigration and assimilation.
Basically we do not need immigration. Our European countries are fixed, if anything over-populated with their own history, culture, architecture etc. Indeed there shouldn't be any immigration apart from a)internal b) highly educated people selected as individuals on merit and very few in numbers. We certainly do not need to import drivers, teachers, doctors or whatever. Internal market forces should provide for that."
I think your views represent that of the majority of the EU's citizens, far more than anyone in Europe is willing to admit to. How nice to think that your views hold sway. It makes it far easier for the US to compete against a society that has written off most of the human race as undesirables because of their origin, race, or ethnicity. It is why most of the best and brightest invariably come to the US sooner or later along with their less talented friends and relatives. And how nice to know it won't change either.
Complain about this comment
maria-ashot wrote:
"I write as a woman who studied Islam at Harvard, respect believers, honour freedom and has great affection for many forward-thinking Muslim leaders."
I will not hold all that against you, though it does make me cautious. Still, i am keen to hear your views on the political economy of sharia law.
Myself, I studied law at a uni for common folk, I have no respect at all for "believers", I think freedom is a myth that fails to account for responsibility, and I think "forward thinking muslim leaders" is a contradiction in terms.
I tell you maria, if i wasn't so good looking I'm not sure I could put up with the social approbation I face on a daily basis.
Now you said:
"Few men ever delve as thoroughly as they might into all the horrors to which girls and women (more often than boys and men) are all-too-often exposed. "
I think that is unfair, and grossly sweeping. Who are you to comment on what men do? Do you know all men?
Anyway, it seems absurd on the face of it to suggest that women are exposed to more horror than men. How can that possibly be so? Men are routinely invited to go to war, and face appalling victimization within the military and brutality on the battlefield.
You talk of women having their feet crushed (you talk about it as if the chinese people made a habit of laming half the population: you forget to note that this was only upper class women who were made this way by their grasping, social climbing mothers). What about the legions of men who have crushed their own feet in order to try to escape the horror of mechanized war, only to be shot for so doing?
No doubt you will claim that it is civilian women who bear the brunt of the suffering in war.
Meh. I am the unknown soldiers sense of spurious disbelief.
My own view, having taken into account many and varied personal experiences with all manner of scoundrels, harlots, rogues, pimps, lawyers and harvard graduates... is that men exist largely within a male society, and females exist largely within a females society. That is to say, men largely make the rules for men, women largely make the rules of women. Of all the social taboos one can break, to transgress across the gender divide and start telling the other gender how to live and behave seems the most heavily punished by most societies.
That is generally speaking. So men with strong views on abortion are often held in contempt by women. Women who have theories on infantry tactics are not highly regarded by men.
Now feminism seems to break down this barrier, by claiming that women have the right to do everything men are traditionally allowed to do. Curiously, men have not been extended the same courtesies. There are a great many aspects of family law which refuse to promote the concept of gender equality. Mothers, for example, are still considered far superior to fathers as care givers. That is just a legal norm. It is simply accepted as a fact, not as a cultural privilege to mothers.
Of course, it might also be true. I don't know. I am just observing that the common law still provides numerous instances of gender specific privileges for women, and precious few for men.
Now my own theory of how we came to this social predicament is that modern feminism coincided directly with anti communism in America. At the same time as marxist "class based analysis" was purged from higher education, we saw an upswell of feminism.
To me, that makes perfect sense. If you can't mention class, then when someone else compares a rich male to a poor female and concludes the genders are not equal, you just have to sit there and say nothing. You can't say "Hey, they are different classes! Compare poor males to poor females! Or compare rich females to rich males!"
And thus, you have the rise of modern feminism. Curiously, or not, it has been promoted by disgruntled working class females at universities where they have been unable to break through class barriers and marry into the quality.
i find that curious because it seems that women who are denied social advancement AND who are denied the opportunity to make a class based analysis blame men, and not women, for their predicament.
When marxism was the fashion, this didn't happen. Poor men and poor women united against the opposing class, and the gender differences were largely forgotten.
Anyway, it is a fascinating topic for debate, and I have little doubt that you will enlighten me greatly on the subject.
Being a graduate from such an expensive university, and all. My low class male self awaits edification.
Just remember that i give tax advice to wealthy women in Switzerland for a living, so you mustn't tell me anything that will bring me into professional conflict with my clients. That would be terribly indiscreet and unprofessional. But they must have taught you that at harvard, I'm sure.
Complain about this comment
maria-ashot raises serious questions. shame on me, I mostly joke.
(if one doesn't joke here - you turn insane :o) So, un-healthy amount of smiles from my side. Sorry all. But I guess you've figured it out earlier.)
Seriously, we had a thing 2 weeks ago epitomising local Christian-Muslim relations. In a Navy base, 50 Muslim draftees (for service in the army here is still compulsory) beat up blue 12 Russian draftees, to very interesting conditions, bundled them up, made out of unconcious bodies the word "KAVKAZ" (Caucasus), recorded a video of the procedure - and put it out into YouTube.
Big bang.
No 1 - Fleet. Until this "event" Russians still cherished century-old hallucinations that Russian Fleet is "upper caste", "white bone" where there are no men - but white fluffy clouds in breeches, equipped with snow-white handerkerchiefs :o)))), constantly curtseying to one another, and, how to say, one word - "Fleet".
(In "the army" - yes, all is possible, one word - "army" :o))))
No 2 - 50 Caucasus boys in one Navy base.
???
What happened to the century-old likewise rule "no more than 5 boys from one town in one garrison". Until this moment the army draftees offices had the reputation of being the most skilled in inter-nationality relations in the whole country. They are the only ones who constantly keep in mind which of the Federation's 86 regions can't stand which other neighbour and were aiming to achieve the mix, in which "wrong" combinations do not meet up together, with nothing to do but sit silly in a distant garrison. Or, as minimum, that one side never has an advantage in quantity over the other, so in case they start fighting, they beat each other evenly :o))))
No 3
Why Russians dared to lose the battle? :o))))
No 4 - "KAVKAZ" - at which no one wonders, I'm afraid, at this point, so it's not "No 4". By the way, pronounced in Russian "KAFKAZ" :o)))
But the cheek of it!
No 5 - what do 50 "KAVKAZ" boys do in a Navy base? This is news. Chechen Republic, for example, is still not draftable. The Chechen President constantly complains in media, "why can't our boys serve in the Russian army? Aren't we Russia? You don't trust us? What are all your sweet words worth then" - good point, BTW.
The Chechen Republic, LOL, is the only one of 86 regions who WANTS to serve in the army - and is not allowed to, while 85 others hate the business - but are made to.
But the Army stand dead still against, type "there are other Ministries to break their brains about how to sort out PC and friendship and cultural and religious issues, none of our business, our business is that there won't be one "chancy" big bang". As they put it "after which there won't be anyone left to discuss etiquette".
So.
Awful.
Complain about this comment
#53 - you are totally right. I really get freaked out by this frantic backward looking cultural conservationism. Like, what made the current distribution of language, buildings, and peoples so sacred? For millenia people have been oozing all over the planet, mixing and trading. When Napoleon invaded Germany people cheered because maybe the invading armies would bring all that cool stuff they had in France. It wasn't until later that nationalism erupted and we all started looking back on some lost past.
The funniest part is most of the time it doesn't even work. Look at cultural conservation of languages. The French and Dutch language academies are trying to preserve the integrity of the language while keeping in current but keep changing their minds how to spell basic things! Is it cicus or Cirkus? Kirkus? Meanwhile, the only thing English has is the OED which basically has the policy of 'if people use it, it goes in' - and our spelling system hasn't evolved much beyond shakespeare! HA!
Complain about this comment
threnodio: Of course if one encourages, defends or participates in a barbaric practice one is being a barbarian.
That's precisely the whole point. Maybe only for a short period of time: but it is being barbaric.
When atrocities were alleged to have occurred at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, by sources as reputable as Seymour Hersh writing in the New Yorker, that makes the perpatrators -- and those who commanded them -- barbarians.
The Nazi atrocities were acts of barbarism.
Barbarians may wear Savile Row suits and drive Maseratis. If their actions are barbaric -- particularly when there is not the least sign of being appalled by one's own or a kinsman's (kinwoman's) murderous behaviour -- they are barbarians.
Eunuchs in Chinese Imperial courts, and those who castrated their own young sons for the purpose of advancing the family's status in the Forbidden City, were being 100% barbarian even while they acted effete, refined, learned and enormously superior to others who were less squeamish or less ambitious.
People have done horrible things over the course of history. A staggering number of times it has been done by parents to their own children. And by children to children.
Fritzl was worse than a barbarian. So were the recently captured cannibals in the UK and Russia. So were the child soldiers of Sierra Leone, the mass rapists of Darfur, the genocidal mobs of Rwanda. Some acts of mayhem transcend even "mere" barbarism.
But barbarism in and of itself -- the 150 minute gang rape of a fifteen year old by schoolmates in California -- is very much alive and kicking. In all our societies. And it will not respond to group therapy: we have already tried that in the so-called blue states of the USA.
Alas, for as long as we hesitate to confront such actions and call them by their proper name, we cannot completely uphold Civilisation as the alternative to Barbarism.
The side that is more ruthless has a very good chance of sweeping all else away. It has happened before, time and time again.
Complain about this comment
threnodio: As for No. 66, well, I have been called worse than a feminist before.
I am not a very typical feminist. I am pro–human, pro-woman, pro-girl, pro-child. And I do love men: civilised ones, naturally enough.
Yes, it would be fair to characterise me as a kind of feminist. A lot of my friends would not understand, but I do.
My entire problem with Islam can be summed up as follows: (1) Be nicer to women: not necessary to keep them under so much control all the time. They do not need to emulate the excesses of the other extreme promoted to sabotage women's dignity, prospects, self-concept (Kate Moss or the Kardashians or strip culture is what I refer to) -- but they ought to be able to dress comfortably and less conspicuously "different" when in public in societies not historically Muslim.
(2) Polygamy is not a good policy for anyone (Muslim, Mormon or other). Polygamy promotes overbreeding which today is a very serious problem. Your sons may not actually thank you for providing them with 43 brothers and 200 or more nephews, fifty years from now.
(3) Stop hiding from the history. It cannot be changed; it cannot be rewritten. It must be confronted and acknowledged, because only then do the genuinely good parts emerge, buffed clean of the blots that otherwise obscure them
We cannot build a harmonious future for all humankind on lies. Besides, people do remember, and there are many more of them than can ever be silenced.
Complain about this comment
And finally, threnodio:
Yes, we are all human beings: human beings present because a woman gave birth.
I am less of a feminist than a person obsessed with Justice & Logic.
The female half of the population makes the critical decision to bring more humans into the world.
All other groups mentioned (Muslims, gays, various races, even 'barbarians' [my word]) represent minorities. Largely disconnected one from the other, until they decide to become mutually linked up.
What every human has in common is a Mother. Yes, a Father, too. Not too many Fathers I have met suffer discrimination. Even within marginalised groups, the males of the population tend to have a slightly easier time of it than the females.
And that is why, however complicated your own feelings might be about the women you have known, it is time to say, 21 centuries into the modern era: give them all a chance before you dismiss the females as some kind of "second-rate" life form -- necessarily "inferior" as even the likes of Lawrence Summers asserted as President of Harvard!
Isn't that what that highly touted UN Charter on the Rights of the Child promises? The right of every child born to fulfill their potential? Well then?
Complain about this comment
How very brave of you DT...
As a gay person, I knew/know lots of women (ironic, no?) in my life and some are gay and most are straight,
they are 50 percent of the world's humans and one thing noticed by me, is that
as an obviously intelligent person (you)....
maY have not all the facts perhaps...but, educated (not intelligent like you) IMO, Men are notorious for being quite dismissive of women's rights movements...probably from ignorance, not evil,.
But, I, for instance, know that women were dismissed as lesser during the 1960s Civil Rights movements
by these very same leftist(?) (educated) men.
But, innocently, I learned these facts from feminist women and reading history--a fun thing--hanging out with women as just friends.
Just an observation, not a judgement.
Complain about this comment
Maria, I have serious question for you, regarding barbarism. A few of them, in fact.
Is the military industrial complex a form of barbarism?
To extend the question, was the invasion of Iraq an act of barbarism?
Is the sale of weapons to warring states in Africa barbarism?
Is the CIA's support of regimes like Saudi Arabia barbarism?
Is capital punishment in the USA barbarism?
Is the war on drugs barbarism?
Are privatized prisons barbarism?
I am not trying to prove that the USA is some sort of great satan here, and I acknowledge that you have provided a home grown example of barbaric practice in your post.
My point is that barbarism can be profitable, and that profit seems to be the highest virtue in the western world. Furthermore, we in the west tend to focus on "the other people's sin" rather than our own.
For example, you can go to any western media source you like and find articles about the poor suffering US and UK soldiers in Iraq. Try finding one about their victims, and you will have a hard time. That is despite the bare fact that the victims of our soldiers violence outnumber the casualties suffered by vast numbers. That is despite the fact that our soldiers are volunteers who are paid to take up arms against people in foreign lands.
It seems that if western corporations make a profit, it isn't barbarism. Or rather, the corporate media refuse to describe it as such. To me, this is a logical extension of the fact that the corporate media exists on the advertising revenue of profitable corporations, and thus it is suicide for the corporate media to accuse western corporations of barbarity.
In a society where profit thus drives the information available to the people, is it really sensible to discuss barbarism beyond that which we actively participate in? What is the moral purpose?
Yes, it is true that some folks in the Sudan engage in deplorable activities. But how does that matter, when there is not much we can do about it?
Would it not be more useful to discuss the barbarity we can change?
For example, everyone with half a brain now admits that the USA cannot contain world wide terrorism by occupying Afghanistan. Therefore the continue presence there is based on nothing more than political expediency. Obama is being advised that he can't withdraw without looking weak. So the killing continues. every day, more afghanis die and every day our media mentions only our own casualties. Meanwhile the coffee shop set discuss female circumcision in hushed tones, as if that is the most pressing evil in the world.
If our society refuses to make our leaders accept the international laws regulating war and the invasion of states that do not pose a direct and immediate threat, is it really sensible to discuss the "barbarity" of other states?
Our own war criminals walk free and are lauded in the public media, and you wish to cast blame on far away cultures. I don't understand that thinking. I don't see the point, and I do not understand the moral position.
Complain about this comment
democracythreat, oh oj ugh. ugh.
Russian law, by the way, rightly says, "that only when a child was? eh, well? artificially emplanted as an embryo into a third party, how to say, rented woman, to grow the embryo inside her for 9 months - and then the ready baby is awarded back to the happy parents, who ordered the business - THEN and only THEN - both mum and dad have equal rights to the child."
And even this, I think, is lacking in being fair, because even in that case a happy dad doesn't go through any operations and anaesthesia and cuts and holes, how to say. :o)
Complain about this comment
I truly like you Democracy Threat...its not you, your writing, or your opinions, its me and my opinions:)
I was just thinking ...uhhh ohhhhh for you... cuz one thing I did learn in life is do NOT insult 50 percent of the world's population.
Complain about this comment
And, ddt, if you think that women are somehow "originally fit" for child-bearing business and find it the most natural thing to do, like "hey hop what's the problem?" how to say, I don't think it is so.
Can't imagine a single woman who would NOT love to be able to get a ready child instead of going through nine months when you always risk your life, because come any disease you can't take proper tablets to fix yourself - because what not harms the baby. Everything does, practically.
You get a pneumonia - you can eat antibiotics and fix yourself.
You get high BP - you can treat your high BP. A woman in that condition has a choice btw Ceasar (no doubt a very health fortifying operation :o)))) - and a stroke.
If you think females are somehow naturally inclined towards the business it's no way at all, simply, LOL, there is no other way to get yourself a baby. While you - can.
________________________
Back to the theme; these girls in head-scarves in the photo look very Russian :o)))). Except, our patented snub? turned-up? nose is missing :o)))
And those white scarfs under? And the cold colours of the scarfs. And the scrafs are tied up "wrongly" :o)))) - we tie the ends simply under the chin. In which maria-ashot is right again, by the way - Russian girls don't wear head scarfs at all anymore, because once you are not a peasant working in the field under a blazing sun - what do you need a scarf for?
That's life risking non-stop for nine months.
Complain about this comment
Mavrelius what's that with "the most racist on Earth""? well, that's your normal state :o) (this is speaking to myself :o)
What's that "not a single African who went to the USSR was happy" something?
Happy to inform you :o) that in the recent mayor elections in Stalingrad :o))) - Volgograd these days - we had whole two African Americans competing for the position, both cheerfully supported by the locals as their best options ever. One became a local hero popularly called "our Stalingradsky Obama" :o)))))
In the end United Russia won of course, THE current our
only :o) party, but the attempt was serious, and the support was paramount. Besides it's bad they both met in one Stalingrad, may be if the chose 2 different cities, not to compete against one another, well, same outcome would be, in fact. So we'll wait until they join United Russia party :o))))
Complain about this comment
Russians can't be "the most racist people on Earth" simply because we hold a unique quality as compared to absolutely all other world nations: the most of all Russians hate Russians.
All the rest are bad, but bearable :o)))) - compared to own folk.
That's why you will never find a "Russian community" or a "Russian ghetto" or a "Russian any thing - compact living together" - in any world capital. When we see each other we ran away. We know them (us :o) way too well!
:o)))))
(maria-ashot and me are a temporary exception that only proves the rule and anyway it only seems to you while in fact you are sleeping)
Complain about this comment
I must have missed the part where the people were actually consulted as the whether they wanted their country swamped by people of a vastly different culture. No wonder the BNP is growing
Complain about this comment
Im awake, Web Alice,
its only 8:15 pm here in USA, but I'm probably keeping people awake.
Or putting them to sleep. :)
Complain about this comment
Oh yea, Russians are not bad,.. they don't know who is bad...we don't know who is bad ...
but the scary part is
some people think they do know "who is bad" :)
Complain about this comment
stellar-beloved I'm afraid I close the shop now :o), sorry for letting you down at just 8:15 (5:24am here - you lost several minutes somewhere :o)))) BTW very heroic of Americans to part-take in the blog at some un-convenient day times instead of talkative night times.
Complain about this comment
No. 75, democracythreat:
In answer to your questions, as succinctly as possible:
1 - Yes, when it subverts the truth, and when the purpose of a war becomes to earn a profit or to seize assets through deviousness. Lots of barbarians can handle advanced weapons systems very effectively. Most free-lance arms merchants are barbarians.
2 - Of course. I was 100% opposed to the war in Iraq. Marched against it in SF with my entire family five times. I was also opposed to invasions of Afghanistan -- except now I find the Taliban even more objectionable, because they are more barbaric and not to be reasoned with.
I support the UK's Iraq Inquiry and like many Americans (probably most by now) believe Bush-Cheney (also Rummy & Co.) were chiefly after the oil fields. As well as the money to be looted from various war-related budgets.
3 - Yes. Unequivocally. Arming anarchists and torturers is of course barbarism. Watching them torment innocents is barbaric.
4 - I have never been a fan of the CIA, even though some of my friends may work for them. No one I am related to does. I would never consider it. I believe there are some in the elite of Saudi Arabia who are indeed finally moving towards important new accommodations of the legitimate rights and aspirations of their own girls and women. I am pleased whenever the King intervenes, as he did in the rape case(s). I think Saudi Arabia will best serve its own interests by preserving traditions as traditions for purposes of celebrations or court life (as the Japanese Imperial court, for example) but will otherwise let their citizens loosen the habits a bit. Most emphatically I believe it is in the interest of addressing climate change to abandon polygamy as an institution and discourage families from having excessively large collections of offspring. I really fail to see how it can be a good thing to attempt to rear, say, more than 24 children? (And I have met elite Arab sons whose fathers had more than twice that many... sons only. Daughters were not even counted.)
A more complete answer is to be found in the content respectfully addressed to you, that has up until now not been cleared by the moderators (to my knowledge). I would rather not have to rewrite all that again. It was really tame, by the way, compared to a lot of what appears on BBC blogs...
5 - Capital punishment is not barbaric. A swift, professionally-managed exit from this world is absolutely just and merciful in cases of certain extreme crimes: the rape of a child; cannibalism; genocide; terrorism (suicide bombings that fail; training/coaching of suicide bombers, etc.); abduction; enslavement and slave-trafficking. Acts of treason in which others die (Ft. Hood) are to my mind clear examples of the kind of monumental crimes for which a clean exit is the best way to provide closure for victims and all of society.
I am profoundly disturbed by grave crimes against the young, or by cannibalism. I fail to see why anyone should have to be responsible for bringing a cannibal food every day. I don't see why keeping Fritzl around is considered "civilised."
There is a finality about death that is both effective as a deterrent and as a tool of healing. An ordeal is then "over" once and for all. People like Pol Pot deserve to be put to death. So did Stalin, Hitler & his henchmen, Lenin, Trotsky. All of them.
Of course, there is the inevitable counter-argument about "innocents wrongly accused" and "botched executions." With regard to the latter, I would say: obviously, the point is, it ought not be botched. That is an altogether different matter. Neither should anyone be executed if there is doubt as to their culpability. In Fritzl's case, there is no doubt.
Counter-question: If one believes in God, an innocent executed goes to Heaven. If one does not believe in God, and is a Darwinist like Dawkins (currently being feted by CNN), what difference does it actually make? Isn't evolution all about the randomness of certain events, accidents, calamities? What then is wrong with a quick, virtually painless execution of a person who has tortured others "just because"?
5 - What "war on drugs"? I have not noticed any. The manufacturing, promotion and distribution of substances that destroy a human being's mind and body is indeed barbaric. Lots and lots of people have made huge fortunes selling addictive intoxicants. Some have done more harm than others.
Just as any clean room will always have some microbes present, there will always be some barbarians trying to passed for civilised people in any civilised society. Sometimes they even attain high office. (Dick Cheney instantly comes to mind. He even shot a friend in the face with a hunting rifle, and got away with it.)
Having some uncivilised people around does not actually threaten Civilisation until they attain a critical mass, and begin to openly work to destroy it. At the end of every peace march I was in came a group of anarchists whose behaviour was not only provocative, it was intolerable. No one could approve of it. There were never more than a few dozen (at least in SF). They were all too often revolting to look at -- and they were mostly young.
As an educator, I believe that if I had had them in a classroom all to myself, for a few months, I could have helped some of them climb a few steps higher in terms of reaching for Light and clinging less to Nihilism. Then again, who would let me? They seem to serve a purpose of some sort for some interests, as you surely know.
6 - I am opposed to privatised prisons. I am opposed to "security subcontracting". Most prisons in most countries could stand a whole lot of reform. On the other hand, where is the money? Certainly it has become scarcer than ever.
The American situation with prisons is dramatically different from the situation in EU countries, mostly because of the complexity of neglected social issues (including unchecked illegal immigration; undocumented Mexicans -- specifically Mexicans -- swell California prison populations by a huge factor, and it is not p.c. to discuss, although statistically it is incontrovertible) but also because of the catastrophic failure of US public schools.
The situation in prisons in Russia/Ukraine or for example China is even worse due to the many decades of Communism that still have to be overcome, whose dread effects on the populations will take some generations to dissipate.
Any other questions?
Of course barbarism is profitable! That is why it persists...
What few of the decision-makers in the power elites realise is that Civilisation is infinitely more profitable than barbarism. It is also more pleasant. But you have to give it a try.
Dare I say, yet again: Apple Computers? Steven Spielberg & Dreamworks? Pixar? Lucas? Industrial Light & Magic? Peter jackson? (There is a safe place for barbarism in some storytelling.) The Rembrandt they are about to auction at Christie's? That recently rediscovered Leonardo? Contraceptives? Mobile phones? Central heating? Recording devices? Water filters?
We have actually gone in the right direction many times. What we must stop doing is stopping halfway, and, like Lot's wife, looking back all the time, essentially in knots over the thought: "Are you sure it wasn't better when brute force ruled the day, women obeyed without a word and a man could simply kill his worst enemy and be done with it?"
A father just recently executed his 13 year-old son for apparently sexually violating a three year-old sister. Can you imagine the pain that must be tearing them all up inside? What went wrong? Somewhere, before the father went wrong, someone got to the son and told him this was something that could be done to a little girl, even to your own sister. Where did that message come from? The real criminal is the source of that original message. Teen brothers do not normally think of hurting their sisters in that way. The behaviour has to have been suggested by some event. And of course it drove the father mad with grief.
That is an example of probably quite civilised people being driven by extreme suffering to barbarism by an external environment that sends confusing messages to young boys.
The barbarity we can change -- can indeed change -- is the belief that the suffering of women and girls, the injustice they are exposed to are "never going to change" or "are part of a woman's lot" or "are culturally determined" or are "just how things are and not really a big deal."
It starts with every husband and father, with every male above the age of 16 (an age where I observe most males become quite rational and generally well-capable of some self-regulation).
It is not difficult. You don't have to instantly respect all women, defer to all women, love me (for example) or agree with me: start with the ones you interact with daily. Imagine how difficult it must be to be the person in the house who is always the one responsible for cleaning the toilet for others.
I have done informal surveys amongst my students. Anonymous surveys. Virtually without exception in most families the toilets are cleaned by females. It is really a very indicative detail.
Oh, for heavens' sake, gentlemen: just think about it for an hour or so, will you? Really think about it! What is the life of the woman next to you, the woman in front of you really like? What was your mother's life like? Would you wish that life on your own son? Why not?
Why does the Qu'ran include a prayer thanking Allah for being born male? Could it be from compassion (quite possibly)? Should that not perhaps now change, as we have the power to make the lives of girl children better?
Go find The Female brain, democracythreat. A great scientific text. Read it, at least parts. Then let us discuss the profitability of barbarism -- and whether, in the end, that greed might not actually kill us all.
Complain about this comment
gnite
Complain about this comment
Alice, as for the head coverings and how "they look like Russian girls' -- or nuns --
Having been raised in that culture, and indeed experimented with the "kosynki (kerchiefs) for church" for a few years, I can say, from experience: it is all nonsense.
Basically, covering your head in winter makes sense. Covering your head in extreme summer because you are working in the fields, or walking through woods and want to avoid things sticking to your hair, makes sense.
Covering your head 'because it is holy' is nonsense. It is tribalism. It is foolishness.
Greek Christian women do not cover their heads for church. They have been Orthodox Christians longer than Russians by 1000 years. Catholics stopped doing it years ago. It should be optional, and absolutely fine not to.
Seeing parents carefully bandage their little girl-baby's head for church always makes me feel sorry for the child.
Again, it is from blind tradition that is not linked to actual knowledge or reason. Heads were originally covered in the ME because of the climate and relative shortage of water. It was just hard to wash hair often. Covering it kept it clean.
When churches first appeared in Russia, if you read Paul of Aleppo's account of his visits to Russia, the actual reason for women having heads covered was because of the cold. It was a concession to the females that they could have heads covered (with pretty impressive shawls and head decorations, as you recall) because of the winter cold. Services could easily last four, five, six hours. Covered heads kept the girls and women warmer. Men and boys (he writes) "bravely endured the chill, complying with the obligation to have heads bare."
Similarly, the real reason there was no tradition of sitting in Russian churches was because they were following Greek practice. In Greece and the Levant, it was acceptable simply to sit on the floor at specific moments of the long services. In those countries, wood was scarce & costly. But in Russia sitting on the floor impossible due to the climate. Result: Russians trained themselves to stand for hours from early childhood.
Europeans, on the other hand, built pews.
Often, the reasons behind the "holiest" of practices have nothing to do with holiness at all. They are simply practical considerations that can actually be modified with no harm done. But the holier-than-thou community is too rigid even to listen half the time. And there is a lot of that to get beyond, in the ex-USSR.
As in, really, what would happen if they moved Lenin's corpse? Big deal! Another kind of barbarism...
When my mother died I did not keep her body in the front room for ever to remind my children of her wonderfulness... That would have been barbaric.
Complain about this comment
"In Britain some migrants from Pakistan and Kashmir are more cautious about living alongside other communities in the giant melting pot that is Britain today."
My understanding is that Britain is still 95% white. While some of this number are from non-British European countries like Poland, Britain is still a far cry from a 'giant melting pot', at least by New World standards, even if London is.
"There are only about 300,000 Muslims in the country and many of them are from the Balkans and so do not practise Islam?"
But take into account Switzerland's small population. 300,000 is about 0.1% of the American population, but is a much higher percentage of the population for Switzerland.
And what is with Muslims who do not practice Islam? If they don't adhere to Islam, then aren't they not Muslim? I know at lot of Muslims have an unhealthy obsession with Jews, but 'Muslim' is not a 'race' (or ethnicity, if you are one who defines ethnicity by genes and ancestry and not culture) the way 'Jewish' is. And unlike Christianity - where 'non-practicing' Christians may be slackers, but may still theoretically be Christian - I am under the impression that to be a real Muslim does require adherence to some rules. And in theory, a strict Muslim might still be assimilable into Swiss society and not be a terrorist, terrorist threat, or terrorism supporter. Likewise, a victimised 'Muslim by birth,' but not in practice, may be all of those things.
On the topic as a whole, I think Gavin's touched upon something that makes common sense. That is, multiculturalism equals multinationalism. If European countries do not want to be nations defined by common ancestry, great, but then there is even more impetus for the new nation to be bound together by a common culture. The way I see things, multiculturalism is the same as a nation having many ethnicities (defined as being a group with a particular culture), and thus a nation with many different sets of values, some of which may be at odds with each other. A multicultural nation is a nation divided into many smaller nations, and the people's loyalties are more to those smaller, ghettoised nations, than to their purported real ones.
Complain about this comment
#84
"Isn't evolution all about the randomness of certain events, accidents, calamities?"
Answer - No. Evolution is not random.
Complain about this comment
So after all it appears that most people here agreed that some form of a contract that one understands the rules of his/hers country of choise are a positive thing.
To someone that said due to his experience of filling out too many forms he would not like to sign a contract. I can't follow the logic to that, if his residence status is such that he is not a citizen, he will have to fill forms. I have to fill forms to tell people who I am all the time. For a period when I worked in Belgium, I had to register with the police, local council, tax office, etc. but that's how the work there! I didn't like it, but they were not asking me to do all those things to be nasty to me! It is required apparently :)
About the US been the "land of the free" that is a dream also! No matter where you move to US, Europe, the middle East, India, China, Japan, someones personal freedom extends until it offends someone else! Newcomes will only be able to express their freedoms until they reach the point where things they consider personal freedoms and rights offend the people already there.
If a person from a tribe from South America arrived in the US and said our custom is to walk naked and I wish to walk naked here also, then he/she would quickly find that their freedom is violated.
So knowing up front that in a society the rules that you have to follow to live in that society are "x" and you make that decision is the fairest way forward.
Also I could agree with some of DT comments regarding training, with in some EU states young people out of work reaching 20% - 25% where is that supposed shortage of labour that our political leader are so eager to fill? Or is it our super-rich that through our political leader want more people to keep costs down and have more customers closer at home?:)
Complain about this comment
Gavin, you say that in America the vast majority of arrivals wanted to become "American" and to embrace their new country with all its customs and values. But America has a grave lack of integration of it's different communities - many residential neighbourhoods are highly racially segregated and not a good example of racial integration at all. According to Wikipedia, 'although people of different races may work together, they are still very unlikely to live in integrated neighbourhoods'.
Complain about this comment
threnodio
Re #31 and #41
You be careful!
They are looking for recruits to Tristan Da Cuhna and St Helena: "non-conformist" are welcome during the annual potatoe famine!
Complain about this comment
As for "Russians being the most racist" (Thank you for pointing it out, Alice. No. 80).
That kind of mindless slur is precisely why I fought a duel at Harvard some of you may have read about it.
It is enormously offensive, especially when you consider how many Russian lives were sacrificed -- millions upon millions -- to liberate victims of slavery, Nazism, supremacism.
No, Russians are not perfect -- no ethnic group is. One thing Russians are not, as a group, is Racist.
Yes, there are skinheads and neo-Nazis in Russia as elsewhere. And yes, the Internet, rap music & contact with "cool young Europeans" do help popularise it. But it is a mental illness affecting a tiny number in a few big cities, and it has nothing to do with race or racism: it has to do -- in Russia -- with poverty & hopelessness & unemployment.
In part because the truth about Bolshevism & 1917 has yet to be definitively addressed -- Lenin still being celebrated while Peter the Great is insulted at every turn -- many young Russian fringe youth react violently by turning to the other extreme. They have been denied a normal connection to their own complex past, and so decide "the truth is the opposite of what we have been taught." Which is of course nonsense.
Marcus-II, have you ever lived in Russia, to have intimate knowledge of how 'racist' Russians are?
I have lived amongst Americans for some 44 years, and been an American for 52. When I say something about the States, it is founded in facts. You may disagree with the interpretation, but the facts are there.
You --like far too many Americans -- simply hate Russians. Those Americans who blindly hate Russians tend to hate them far and beyond more than anyone else that ever lived, even Obama.
The only hatred I can compare it to is the blind hatred many Americans have for Sarah Palin. It goes way beyond mere rivalry or animosity or professional resentment.
It attains the vitriol of, well -- racism.
And racism is very much more of a US of A problem than a problem anywhere else on earth. Which is precisely why, like so many other "authentic USA" constructs, it is then suddenly projected onto everyone else, as being "obviously a consequence of having light skin."
People who actually engaged in selling slaves, owning slaves, conquering foreign peoples, founding colonies in remote corners of the world often rationalized their barbaric practices by imagining the people they were hurting so severely were somehow "less human." This, by the way, has been successfully used by some ideologies to conceal intolerable abuse of women are children; we have the ideas, once widespread, that women are not quite on the same level as men, or that child labour (remember Dickens?) is inoffensive, that those lives have less worth than the life of a young adult male.
Most people on earth are not born with feelings or thoughts about some other humans inferiority. Those concepts are 100% taught. And they have never been taught in Russia, as any kind of widespread attitude. Even when peasants were owned as "property" and sold (which was of course barbaric), it was not because they were viewed as any kind of lesser human -- it was because the concept of a human's rights had been lost under the effect of centuries of extreme violence in the intricate power struggles that preceded the decision to "attach" serfs to the land they "belonged" to.
It is not racist to love what you come from. It is racist to believe others are less than you by virtue of their DNA. No sane Russian believes that.
I have never yet personally come across a mentally competent European of European ancestry who believes that, either, in the period from 1957-2009. Can you point one out?
Complain about this comment
#67
MarvelousII
Take it easy there tiger! The USA is an empire (in decline now I may add) and has always been since since 1789. For more than 200 years the USA has been a very successful empire. Sorry to ruin your illusions, but reality is harsh. How else do you think it increased the territories it occupies today from what it had in 18th cent? If not as an empire? And don't try to sell me the lands in the west were empty. America is no less an empire than France, England or Russia!
Complain about this comment
Phillip Sullivan you wrote: "Free education, healthcare (for children), and government aid for college."
See. This is what I mean about patronising the others.
Free education is a basic right in all european countries
aid for college (and universities) are basic rights in almost all european countries as far as I know
free healthcare is available in almost all european countries and it is basically cheaper for the rest of the population.
The real gap between European countries and the USA are "economic opportunities". Newcomers in Europe still face more prejudices that's the real issue.
And then you wrote : "The majority of this country comes from european immigrants. So I guess if you see these issues of discrimination due to assimilation, maybe its just remnants from your culture that we haven't bred out yet."
What a modern, balanced and free of prejudices point of view ;-).
Face it, You simply talk about things you don't know. You compare what you know (the sates) with a big black hole in your mind (modern Europe). Frankly what's the point?
Complain about this comment
Amgad _S
Re #49
That is a very tough experience over 9 years! Which European Nation/s are you living in?
That said, I think you and your wife need to ask yourselves 'why' and 'how' did the European free and open "values" you admire become so much less free and open and now respond so negatively to non-Europeans?
Could it be that in those same '9' years many other non-Europeans also arrived in the Continent, but unlike you, they came with absolutely no admiration or intention to assimilate those 'ideals and values' and have since demanded mini versions of the foreign territories they left behind?
It is always a puzzle to me (and I suspect many UK/Europeans) to understand how this could happen?
Of course I understand 'foreigners' leave their Nations to make a better life for themselves and their children in the wealthy, prosperous modern Europe (economic migrants): So, if those 'foreigners' see that Europe is doing so well and it is a good place to raise a family, 'why' and 'how' then do they settle in Europe and promptly attempt to change the Europe that is doing well to resemble their lands that are not doing so well? Does it not occur to them that the reason Europe is prosperous is precisely because of those European 'ideals and values' and most expecially because it is NOT like their birth-places!?
Where is the logic in suffering all sorts of hardships and indignities to reach the 'promised land' only to then set-up enclaves of obvious ethnic social-cultural dissention at best and unfortunately outright resistance as well?
I would say it is not for Europe and Europeans to change their social-cultural ideals and values developed over centuries, but it most cetainly is the duty of any 'new' arrival to accept those traditions and, Faith aside, where possible to embrace Europe.
Of course that 'embrace' concept comes up against significant issues where Islam is concerned: Muslims are enjoined to follow no other as "God of Islam is transcendant, the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator and Lawgiver.." and, "..He is what He is, absolute and eternal.." and it is as such that the Muslim worships Him.
The standard Judao-Christian UK/European Citizen must be seen by followers of Islam as "al-kafirun" ('unbelievers'): As such, the UK/Europeans in general because they do not accept/embrace/live-by the uncompromising "Message" transmitted through Muhammad of the pure doctrine of the One God are incapable of following Shari'ah Law which governs every aspect of the Muslim's life on earth.
Which does not leave much room for accepting never mind taking up the 'new' lifestyle of a successful, prosperous and wholly modern Europe!
I am afraid we return again to the Human Rights Lawyers (of my #38 ): They are a concept totally alien to Islam's Shari'ah Law and whilst the Judao-Christian based UK/Europe are proud of and see as a strength these legal moves toward a more just and humane society the view from Islam is that they are a weakness that can be exploited.
Shari'ah Law comes from the Commands and Prohibitions of God contained in the Qur'an and from the Teachings and example of the Prophet Muhammad: Therefore, no interpretation is permissible; and therefore, strictly speaking all argument is lost before it has begun when the Word of God is the only Word.
In the Judao-Christian UK/Europe Law has been established over centuries and is an ever-changing, responsive body of agreed/disputed principles - - that simply is not the case with Shari'ah Law - - "There is no power and no strength except with Allah (God)".
How we, traditional Britons-Europeans (and any 'west'-orientated National entity), resolve these crucial fundamental differences with an increasing 'foreign' segment of the society now living within the geographical region will I believe determine the course of Human History in the 21st Century as much as any policies on the Environment and Climate.
Complain about this comment
Maria-ashot
You kill me. You really do.
"And racism is very much more of a US of A problem than a problem anywhere else on earth."
-Yuks. I love it that when I speak English to the a bus driver in Flanders to find out where I am going I get helpful or disinterest. When my Nigerian friend does she gets yelled at to speak Flemish - or if the person is progressive - French (because don't all blacks speak French!). Because, yeah, I totally see this happening in a big city in America.
I also like how there are - literally - ethnic and race riots in Europe fairly regularly - whereas in the U.S. you can count them on one hand after civil rights.
I think it is hilarious that in the U.S. no racist party actually holds any seats (and hasn't since the late 1960's), and yet one of the largest seat holders in the Belgian parliament, and a rising party in the UK is a racist party.
I also truly appreciate how - even as all these things happen - people say that Racism is an 'American problem' and that the U.S. is 'the most racist place on earth. It seriously cracks me up.
Complain about this comment
Although hyperbolic, I tend to agree with the core tenet of the first poster's comments.
I am an immigrant from Canada to Germany. While I certainly don't feel that German society as whole is racist, I do have the feeling that in comparison with North American and perhaps other New World countries founded primarily on immigration, Europeans' attitudes towards immigrants are at their best characterised by benign tolerance as opposed to a willingness to accept the newcomers as completely equal members of the club.
This is not to say that I think that Canadians, for example, would instantly bestow the status of "Canadian-ness" on an immigrant who had just stepped off the plane or boat. There as here, a degree of willingness to integrate on the part of the immigrant is expected. But in return for this, there is a willingness on the part of (most) Canadians to regard immigrants who make this effort as "real" Canadians.
(I am not saying that this attitude has always been the prevailing one in Canada. Certainly, my own family experienced the blunt end of past generations' racist attitudes towards immigrants from certain parts of the world. But we are talking about the here and now.)
After almost 10 years in Germany, I have the impression that most of society regards even those who were born in Germany, but of an immigrant background, as being from "away" rather than from Germany. To say that non-ethnic Germans are regarded as "guests" is putting it too strongly, but neither are they regarded as brothers and sisters. Furthermore, there is no deep-seated belief that people from an immigrant background can be anything they want to be, i.e. leaders of society. Figures like the new Health Minister are the exceptions that do not prove the rule.
Can this change? I think so, but some fundamental changes, especially with regards to the commonly accepted definition of "German-ness", would be necessary. Must it change? I think it must: what incentive do immigrants have to integrate if they know that they will never be accepted, merely tolerated?
Complain about this comment
#85 - maria-ashot
I have to part company with you on the subject of capital punishment. Putting people to death is tantamount to an admission that a society cannot find anything of worth in their most serious of miscreants so they choose instead to climb right down there in the gutter with them and kill them off.
Add to that the ghoulish practice of conducting these exercises in the presence of an 'invited audience' in the name of victim support then seek to justify it terms of justice when in fact it has more to do with revenge and you begin to see what a facile and unimaginative process it is.
Complain about this comment
#99
You are right revenge does not mean justice.
Complain about this comment
# 97, sound like very anecdotal evidence right there.
I do however like the fact that you seem to think that I'd be able to walk up to a bus driver in the USA and speak my own language and get a polite answer. - Also, I like the fact that you consider it to be your right to be spoken to in English by the busdriver, he should ask you to speak Flemish, you're so good at integration, I wager?-
I do, by the way, see a reaction like that happening, anecdotically, in say ... Texas, in regards to say ... an inquiry in Spanish as to where you would be going.
Oh, and don't fool yourself, the USA has it's racists in the extreme-wing of the conservative party. Oh, and race riots in the USA are more common than you think, but they don't make international news unless they're really big, silly.
Complain about this comment
maria-ashot and threnodio,
on "innocents wrongly accused" in death penalty verdicts.
It's been 13 years and 2 months they say, when the last death verdict was brought into action in Russia - that when they killed someone, but because of the latest discussion here what to do with death penalty in future
(in most part must say no discussion - population said let's kill, government said "no we won't")
anyway Zhirinovsky as always had an idea, on TV -
"by all means lets' keep death penalty for serie child rapists and killers - and to those who worry about innocents wrongly acused - let's compliment the law with another law - death penalty likewise to the prosecution head who signed the prosecution case when delivering it to the court. :o)))))
Not to the judge - but for the chap who rounded up the file and signed and sealed it, on behalf of all employees who run the investigation - if later in any amount of yeas it's found that an innocent was murdered.
Then our Prosecution will think double before passing over to court badly investigated cases."
Russian society wants blood of the serial child killers, as we have some currently in prizons whose record is 16 to ? dozens of 5 year olds' raped and partitioned afterwards. Their mums besiege all TV channels and
Constitutional court demanding blood.
Complain about this comment
I understand noble threnodio stand, and approve of, but on the other hand I'm not sure I'll be able to withhold from revenge in any such case as above.
The thing is Russians took to taking justice in own hands, seeing that the system is absolutely unable to provide for anything resembling it.
TV told the story of what they painted a monster - a man whose both kids were raped and killed - waited 5 years for the court verdict, saw that the killers were let out 6 yrs later "for good behaviour while in prizon" - took a hunting gun and shot both killers on exit of the prizon. Whole Russia saluted to him, in spite of TV efforts.
And such cases are abundant.
Complain about this comment
It's may be abroad equipped with video-cameras all over it is that children abusers are caught after the first case, while with Russia's vast space un-recorded to video-cams - a serie killer simply moves to another republic and starts all over again - and then to another republic - and starts all over again, and only when his victims' list reaches a couple of a dozen - the federal investigation puts their brains together finding "a similarity" and that's when one such monster is caught.
By the time our criminals get caught they are already such criminals, how to say, that you wonder how Earth carries them at all, and how can you "improve" one such sample by prizon is beyond anyone's understanding.
Complain about this comment
American electric chairs and injections also look barbarous to Russians, all shudder, type "how is it - killed just one or two people - and is killed?"
Russian law starts "talking" of death verdict at much higher quantity levels, there has never been anyone subjected to death verdict or "just one -2-three murders." Far worse cases.
Complain about this comment
1-2-3 in Russia, with our attitude to human life record, has always been considered in the category of "a slip of a nand" :o))))
When Russians demand death penalty it is cases of absolutely mass murder by any standard
Complain about this comment
The day Irish started migrating to England, the north-south divide subdued. East Europeans brought some relief to Irish. Immigrants of different colour/religion gave East Europeans something to complain about. I pray for Aliens to lend and all our problems (differences) will be resolved
Complain about this comment
And, yes, it is jeering at all things, I don't know, "human", the ceremonies with which killers are killed in the USA.
When death verdicts were still executed here - it's the men were shot, because this is the death verdict - "to be shot" - without any public exposure and media or "perks" and un-healthy staring. Chinese also like those "ceremonies", ugh.
Shot in some ?I don't know where and how and by whom - nothing to boast about when you kill someone even if he is a killer. Dirty business done over dirty business.
Complain about this comment
@WebAlice
Just killing someone does not solve any problems. The person killed does not become better or worse after death, the crimes he/she (most often he) do not become any less. There is no proof that it stops future monsters from been born. So stick them in a jail until they die, does no harm to anyone anymore.
Complain about this comment
operator
Re #107
Presumably you are trying to be light-hearted!
The Irish are recorded in England as early as the 8th century and there's evidence they gravitated from England pre-christian era - - the longterm English intervention in the island of Ireland seems to be from around the 12th century onward (various King Henrys) - - however, if you think of the 'protestant' Scots and English of the 16th to 18th centuries crossing to Ireland and the return trip from the 18th to 20th centuries by the Irish then you will realise settling the north - south divide had nothing to do with the Celts.
Complain about this comment
ChrisArta, I agree that whoever you kill won't mend up what has been already done by that time.
But one problem death verdicts solve - gives population the (false) feeling that there is "justice" in this world, so much lacking alas, :o)in justice in all aspects.
Yes it is self-fooling, but humans aren't machines and should not strive to be. They are black boxes, who need illusions - otherwise it is very hard to live. And one can easily turn a machine-monster itself - because - watch the logic - "in the world where there is no justice, even in utmost cases crying to the sky, - all is allowed. It's un-balanced world, where notions are turned upside down, where there is nothing "holy" - a disgusting place to be. "
For Russia cancellation of death-penalty done a week ago was very premature.
Europe where investigation works, police aren't corrupted, has a feeling that "criminls shall be caught and processed somehow". Europe can allow herself the exuberancy and? leisure to cancel death penalty. People don't earn for it, because they know that criminals shall be caught - the most important part, and as to the "revenge" - well, somehow, "according to the law".
On Russia's side there is zero assuredness that "criminals shall be caught" and the only scare for them that was still hanging around in the dustance was "there is a 1/1000 % chance that when caught - will be shot."
Now population does not have even that consolation.
Nothing but a curtsey from Russia to the EU. I don't believe for a sec. that the tops who initiated the cancellation are not Russians and don't share everyone else's ideas. Simply they've got a work to do in hands, which work currently requires for us to be friends with the EU.
Besides, their kids don't live "on the ground" and are safe, and themselves they are safe, and can allow themselves the same luxurious allowing attitude as the Europeans can.
Complain about this comment
The death penalty issue is a curious one. I think Alice has the best position, as far as I nderstand the legal arguments.
Revenge, curiously enough, is actually considered a legitimate reason for punitive justice to be issued by a criminal court. In plain english, what that means is that a judge is entitled to look to the public's satisfaction with the verdict, and the public's sense of justice having been done, when deciding upon the penalty for a convicted criminal.
So, yeah, it sounds counter intuitive, but revenge is actually a legitimate reason for punishing folks in court. It it taken into account by judges. They call it nicer names, but "the public satisfaction with justice being seen to be done" is really just a nice way of saying the lynch mob is happy today if we hang this sucker.
So revenge is legitimate at law, even if the priests and moral philosophers would have us forgive and forget, and refrain from the destructive desire for revenge. We are allowed to desire revenge, but we must let the state do it for us. that seems to be the law. I thought it was odd when I first saw it, anyway.
But the real case against capital punishment.... and the real reason it is a barbaric and unforgivable practice conducted by ignorant societies... is what alice said. Courts make mistakes. Judges make mistakes. Prosecutors make cases to get promotions, and nobody likes an unsolved kiddy murder and rape. Nobody likes the fear, and so innocent people get sent down to make everyone feel better.
And if you think it doesn't happen A LOT... then you haven't read the statistics. It happens a lot. Judges and the legal system are subject to human error. Not only that, but it is precisely because the law takes into account such things as the desire for revenge ("justice being SEEN to be done") that human error becomes compounded. Judges are not discussing guilt and innocence on a BBC chat room forum with reasonable folks. They are faced with a guy who might have raped and killed and perhaps eaten a three year old girl, and a room full of folks who want to punish somebody. Not a cool situation, when you are not really sure because the cop collecting the evidence would have failed high school even if he had tried to pass, and the defendant's lawyer is a duty solicitor who has never been able to convince a single person that he is worth employing as an advocate, and who thus lives from the scraps provided by the system (folks who can't afford real lawyers and who are cast adrift with legal aid).
So that is the argument against capital punishment, in a nutshell. It is easy to take a life, but unless you can give it back, you ought to be 100% sure that your legal system doesn't ever make a mistake.
And we know our system makes a lot of mistakes. And we know that nobody has the power to give back what they would so readily take away.
So capital punishment is out, as an option for decent reasonable folks.
It just is not worth killing one innocent person in order to get the satisfaction of watching a thousand guilty people die. Not when the guilty folks will be doing solitary and hard time in any case. That is a bad deal, and no decent society should take that deal.
So, by the way, I extend my admiration and thanks to the russian court system, and the legal community over there in ruski land. They get it. The world just got a bit more sane, and a bit more decent. The world is a better place, thank to russian lawyers.
Complain about this comment
The two biggest factors that make integration harder are being a different colour from the majority and having a different religion from the majority. Obviously the first can't be changed and the second is unlikely to be changed. As someone of European origin and Christian background, if I moved to France or Germany, became fluent in the language and developed a local accent, then after a few decades I would be fully integrated and my children would be accepted as 'fully' French or German and nobody would know that we were immigrants.
If I and my children were of African origin, or prayed in a mosque or temple, then I'm sure that we'd be treated differently, especially in villages where people of non-European origin are rare. Then in the next generation my children would be less likely to marry indigenous French or German people, and would continue to be less integrated due to race or religion. It wouldn't matter whether I'd signed a contract or not - I would be treated differently to how I'd be treated if I was of European origin.
Maybe eventually people of different physical appearance will be accepted as being stereotypically English, French etc. (in the same way as potatoes!) but it may take a century or two...
Complain about this comment
thanks, dt :o(
Making the world "better".
At the expense of Russians losing last hope for "justice".
But as our Kremlin reckons (and who else doesn't for that matter) -
those are patient folks, have seen nastier things done to them, survived somehow, a plus-minus one death penalty law taken away from Russians - won't change their landscape greatly :o)))
Yep, we are all accepting.
Shrinking alongside our acceptance at a rate of 2ndWW in peaceful times :o))), in 50 years - state stat. committee's most optimistic forecast - will be twice less in amount, in spite of all the abundant Chinese-muslim immigration.
We are all accepting only less and less wanting to live in the resulting world.
Complain about this comment
BZ
Re #70
Quote, "...when Napoleon invaded Germany.. people cheered.. cool stuff from France.."
A delightfully unconventional cultural image which I'm sure we can all conjure with: However, as there was no Germany during the Napoloeonic era it leaves the main thrust of your 'nationalist' argument deflated!
See 1864 to 1871 von Bismarck and Prussia for the 'nationalism' that led to 'greater Germany' development: Amazingly, with all its fame and notoriety; it is a relatively new European nation.
In European terms 'Nationalism' can be post-dated in the British Isles to the Norman Conquest of Anglo-Saxon England and similar ventures elsewhere in Europe during the early Middle Ages.
That Boneparte reignited the 'nationalism' of the Poles with his creation of the Duchy of Warsaw, renewed Spanish and Portuguese pride by installing his worthless brother on the Iberian Peninsula, stirred affection among the 'Rus' for 'mother Russia' by the Grande Armee 1812 invasion, and undoubtedly cemented the political United Kingdom by his attempted stifling of atlantic trade is further proof your interpretation of History is a bit wayward.
Complain about this comment
while some get on "hunger strikes" refraining from food on own will, to get what they want - :o)))) - Russians are on death strike.
Complain about this comment
Marcus #67: You misunderstood me: I never said the U.S. had an empire - but that French and UK's empires gave them more exposure to other peoples and helped them to broaden their concept of identity FURTHER than others on the continent - though not TO THE SAME DEGREE as in the United States. I think for the most part we agree.
Leo #101: I do not expect to be spoken to in English, but I expect the same bus-driver that spoke to a white person in English to extend the same treatment to a black person - the point you see. I am more than able to communicate (now) in Flemish in order to get directions on a bus, and still get a more courteous reply. A foreigner who fails to speak English is very likely to get the same response regardless of skin color outside of particularly backwards areas (like Texas). Further, as someone who lived in the U.S. for many years and who studies social conflict I can tell you that I am very aware of the frequency of race riots in the U.S.
It is anecdotal though - so I will expand the sample a little (although I think the PM saying that the values of his Muslim constituents are anathema to those of Christian Belgium is a pretty good indicator of the generality of these sentiments), in my Flemish class we all shared our experiences getting on in Belgium. All the white foreigners had mostly good stories, while all the dark foreigners had nothing but horror stories (this was the first time I heard about 'the bus driver problem' before witnessing it myself).
But again, I never said that racism wasn't a problem in the U.S. but (a) we admit it and (b) try to deal with it. European sit and say 'eh.. it's an American problem', and 'we aren't racist here' as your political leaders say openly racist things, and as your textbook publishers produce language texts noting 'white families as 'traditional' and dark families as 'non-traditional' or 'foreign'.
Complain about this comment
AnonymousCalifornian
Re #88
Quote, ".. 'muslim' is not a race (or ethnicity if you are one who defines ethnicity by genes or ancestry..) the way 'jewish' is.."
It does not in the elast how anyone may use incorrect definitions the basic fact is that people of the 'jewish' faith are not a racial group anymore than 'muslims', 'christians', 'bhuddists' etc.
'Race' is each of the major divisions of humankind relating to distinct physical characterisations as set out by scientific study.
It follows a person's 'Faith' cannot be used anymore than their mode of dress, language, customs in a definition of their 'racial' group.
Sub-division of 'race' allows for specific groupings, e.g. the Europeans become French, Hungarian etc. but only in so far as they have an ethnic authenticity/origin - - so there are african french and hungarian, arab french, hungarian etc. - - however, as muslims, jews, christians etc. do not exist from one common denomination descent-line no 'faith' can be used as a 'raceial stereotype' (it's basically where the Nazis' genetics theories completely defied reality).
Complain about this comment
cool-brush-work @115, right, which "Germany" before? We remember only Prussia, then there is a memory lapse, then the Weimar republic, then - yes, Germany, then "the good Germans" :o)))) and "the bad" ones :o))).
And, prior to Prussia, say, times Alex Nevsky - it was really simple -"where Russia ends start "nemtsy" - literally - the unable to speak ones" and it is still LOL the official Russian word for "Germans" - we don't use "germanic/German" whatever that root, to form the name. But the original 12th century word - "nemtsy". Accordingly, for example, we were fighting with "the silent ones" in the 2ndWW and now are friends with the same "silent ones".
Reflect slav sincere disappointment at meeting the first tribe going West who can't speak Russian. You talk to them :o))) and talk and explain things "on fingers" - and they only chirrup back something unrecognisable! :o))))))
Complain about this comment
# 117
See, the thing is, it's still quite anecdotal. My spous is of foreign origin and dark skinned, way darker than most of the immigrants in Belgium. I have quite a lot of friends that are from non-European origin. I have evenings that I'll be in a bar and I'll be the only 'ethnic' European at the table. Those 'horror' stories you refer to, exist, obviously, but they're not as commonplace or as ingrained in society as you are making it out to be. In fact, I just this weekend met some of the group that follow 'inburgering' with my girl, and they had no horror stories to tell. In fact, most of them thought that the stories were quite overrated (yes, we do talk about racism, it comes up).
To say that there is no debate about racism, to me, just sounds like you don't follow the debate. Especially since it's been at the centre of just about every political discussion since the rise of Vlaams Blok in the late 80's, early 90's. In Holland it even goes a lot further.
Also, I really dislike it when people conflate religious identity and ethnical background. Muslim, and Christian values, are not something that I think are in either case central to our society, and infact, as an atheist, I'd be happier if it didn't exist at all. I do come from a university where the traditional songs all end with 'à bas la callote'. In fact, if you were in Brussels last friday, you might have seen them, St. V did block up the entire city centre.
Religion is a value system that has no more 'worth' in being defended or exempt from criticism and insult as 'socialism' or 'capitalism'. I have friends that are Muslim, my dad's a Catholic and my girl evangelical, but I don't think any of those beliefsystems have intrinsicate value.
Brussels, by the way, is also the first region to have somebody in parliament that wears a headscarf.
You're not helping the debate, in my opinion, by blaming all the problems on those racist Europeans. It comes from both sides, and when I see groups of youths harrassing women for not being dressed according to their religion. Groups of fanatics that go by shops in their neighbourhood, threatening them because they sell alcohol. Then there's also a problem. It goes both ways. Even if there are other factors, but I'd say that a lot also is class and not race based. If your flemish is good enough, I'd recommend looking up Bleri Lleshi's article in 'De Standaard'. He's quite a bright guy, and his analysis is not bad, even if flawed in some areas.
I've never heard somebody say it's an 'American' problem, by the way. The only comparision you could draw is the Latino immigration in the southern USA and the Maghreb immigration here, which do show parallells. Neither will be solved so easily.
Oh, and what a tsjeef says is not always the predominant mood. Less Van Rompuy.
Did you know the head of the PS is a gay immigrant son? ;)
Oh, and in Brussels, the bus driver will probably be from immigrant origin. ;) Seeing as it's a city that's predominantly made up of people from immigrant decent.
Complain about this comment
Hi guys I just wanted to share some gems from the European immigration legislations with you so that you can understand why such demands for more integration seem absurd to me. Strange enough the same rules exist with minor differences in all the European countries where I lived, that is 5 countries.
1- All the years spent studying, earning PhDs, doing research or even teaching in the university do not count towards permanent residence or work permit status.
I have a colleague who came on scholarship for undergrad and stayed for PhD and worked afterwards as research associate in the university for a couple of years. He, after 13 yrs in Europe, does not have permanent residence or work permit status, he is a practicing Christian by the way.
2- Regardless of the spouse qualifications or language skills he/she can not work if he/she comes on family reunion visa. Speaking of gender equality, this piece of legislation is essentially a hurdle facing any foreign woman who is married to a foreign resident and want to have economic independence.
3- The years to get a permanent residence status must be spent in the same country and must be continuous. So the big talk about freedom of movement and the open fluid European labor market does not apply to foreign residents.
4- All the contribution to the social security while on a temporary job-specific work permit is practically a donation, or a toll, for the indigenous. This is because once the work relation for any reason ends, the work permit is invalid and thus one cannot recourse to the labor office to help in the job search, not to mention to have unemployment benefit. So every month I am paying a handsome amount to finance a system that by law I can never benefit from! Anyway that is why I was allowed here at the first place, is not it?
Complain about this comment
You can legislate against discrimination but not against prejudice. Since it must be obvious to any half-intelligent person that to dislike someone simply because of the colour of their skin, their sexual preference or the fact that their sabbath happens not to be Sunday is downright stupid, you are left with the question of why people see it that way.
Usually it comes down to selfishness. If you are struggling to find work but see immigrants all around you holding down jobs, it is simple enough to infer that immigration is the main obstacle to your employment prospects. It almost certainly is not true but it is plausible. Look at all the rubbish that was spouted about 'British jobs for British workers' when the recession started to bite. This was work most 'British workers' would not have touched with a barge pole 12 months earlier. It is no coincidence that support for racist political movements tends to increase during times of economic hardship.
What we should not do though is look at this through the distorting lenses of political correctness. The bus driver who does not understand what you want is probably running late, the queue behind you is getting soaked and the traffic is piling up. He is not being racist. He is responding to someone who is a bl**dy nuisance. It may not be attractive or polite but it is probably is not prejudice. On the other hand, the youths who are giving the corner shop a hard time for selling alcohol are racists. They are being deliberately provocative.
It also helps to get your terms of reference right when talking on such a sensitive issue. For example, we have been citing the Holocaust as the ultimate manifestation of anti-Semitism for sixty odd years. The Semitic racial group are those peoples indigenous to the Middle East and eastern Mediterranean and includes Arabs and Palestinians. On the other hand, many European Jews who were so terribly treated were not of Semitic origin at all. That was religious and cultural persecution, not racial.
Complain about this comment
threnodio_II wrote:
"You can legislate against discrimination but not against prejudice. Since it must be obvious to any half-intelligent person that to dislike someone simply because of the colour of their skin, their sexual preference or the fact that their sabbath happens not to be Sunday is downright stupid, you are left with the question of why people see it that way.
Usually it comes down to selfishness."
Well said. Although I would say fear is the underlying stimulant for prejudice, rather than selfishness. The fear of being powerless is surely, it seems to me, what drives folks to wish to belong to a tribe. And this business of creating bogus clubs ("We white folks" or "we english folks" or "we national socialist folks") seems to me to be a cry for safety in numbers.
It is widely accepted that religions trawl for new members amongst the most downtrodden and despised folks in any given society. So do political parties. And the army! Good god, the army will take anyone. they have to. The pay is terrible and the job is worse.
The nation state, therefore is ALMOST the club of last resort. When all the other clubs have rejected you, the guys selling nationalism will have you in their club. they'll take anyone with a heartbeat.
But the club of very last resort.... the club you can join even if you are rejected from the army and the patriot crowd.... is the skin colour club. As long as you have the right skin colour, you can join the racist idiot club. Criminals, perverts, social misanthropes.... they are all welcome. All you need to do to fit in is mate hateful noises towards someone with the wrong colour skin. You don't even need to be able to speak. A few negative and hostile grunts, and you have become a member of the club.
And this blog is a club. We are all tribal animals. We have our entry criteria. Threnodio, Mathiasen, Alice and I can be nice, but we can also use words like a whip. We enforce standards, of sorts. All clubs do. If you measure up, you are in the club. If you don't, you are out.
It is for this reason that i truly pity racists and patriots, except when they are doing active violence to other folks. I figure that anyone who is so rejected by their fellows that they have to resort to joining those clubs.... those folks are living terrible, terrible lives. They hate themselves for being weak, and they hate themselves for being stupid. They have been rejected from every social group they have tried to join, probably since kindergarten, and all that is left for them is to join the clubs of last resort.
So I feel the correct way to deal with racist freaks and hyper nationalist scoundrels is to say "There but for the grace of god go I", and to remember that nobody wants to be like that. Everyone wants to be in the cool gang.
And it follows, if you believe in the tribal animal theory, that the best way to prevent hostile hate clubs is to work towards a more inclusive, friendlier society. Rather than seek to promote divisions of ethnicity and class, we ought to promote methods of bringing folks together in useful, productive clubs.
For my taste, this is one of the truly great things about democracy, especially direct democracy. Everyone is forced to participate, everyone knows they are a member of the broader club. Nobody is left behind, to be the butt of every joke and the remainder on every selection list.
Swiss folks and american may be a bit odd, indeed a lot of them are extremely odd, but when they talk politics you get a sense that they believe in their country and that they belong to that country.
Likewise, I would suggest that the growing hostility in European states stems not from some kind of racially based hate, but rather from a broad and growing sense of isolation and alienation within European states. Every time go to the UK, I meet a working person who is full of bitterness towards the country he doesn't want to call his own. Everywhere the story is the same. Nobody has a voice, the nanny state makes decisions for everybody.
people are tribal animals, and they form tribes regardless of whether the tribes are provided for them or not, by the ever loving state. That is why you get street gangs and motorcycle clubs that serve no apparent purpose to either the society or the members of those gangs.
I would suggest that the people of europe are breaking down into their own self created gangs, and that this is hardly a recipe for a happy tomorrow. But that might be reading a bit too much into the way the EU is evolving.
Complain about this comment
So "I kill you", BZ (No. 97)?
You have never heard of a race riot in America? Come to the schools I have taught in and visited in Northern California.
We have had race riots at Thurgood Marshall (highly-rated) High School in the San Francisco Unified District that resulted in police action, ambulances, the use of considerable force and a school-wide lockdown right around 2005 (I may be a year off either way). We regularly have race riots at Mission High in San Francisco. There are race riots at high school football games that leave people with serious injuries.
You do not recall the race riots following the Rodney King events? The very real dangers of race rioting after the OJ Simpson case verdict (LAPD bracing for a "guilty" verdict followed by rioting? The fear of riots during the last set of proceedings against Michael Jackson?
I am not even going as far back as Watts. I have interviewed survivors and witnesses to those events, however.
Did you ever note the trashing of several neighbourhoods by Mexican residents of LA after the Mexican national football team WON an important match (I believe it was against Hungary)? Over ten thousand police had to be sent forth by LAPD, in full riot gear, to contain the "celebration" to the barrios. This was about two World Cups ago.
Did you not notice anything that happened in the aftermath of Katrina?
Have you ever stood in front of a classroom and had an African-American student of about 14 years in age throw a fit because "You can't teach me anything: you're white and that makes you a hater?"
Have you ever stood in front of a classroom and had a Chinese-American pupil of 11 curse at you and throw a fit because "You can't teach me anything: you're a woman?"
Have you ever watched gangs of Chinese students square off against gangs of non-Asian students (usually African-American or Mexican, but on occasion also other mixed gangs) on the campus of San Francisco City College? On the campus of George Washington High School -- in a nice middle-class neighbourhood?
What part of the USA do you live in? Do you read all the papers? Do you believe everything they say? Do you ever speak to parents or teachers about race relations in American educational institutions?
Have you ever interviewed American correctional officers from criminal justice institutions about race riots in their prisons?
I really wonder if you have lived in the same country I live in since 1965. You want abusive, racist, peremptory drivers? Take a ride on San Francisco's MUNI, or better yet the Oakland AC transit system ("Best in the Nation!")
Really, do give it a try sometime. We can even do it together, if you are willing to do some actual research in the field.
You think no one is ever rude to a non-English speaker in America? Let's take a walk through Boston, Mass. or Jamaica, Queens. Check out the quality of race relations all across Los Angeles County... In many parts of California they will be rude to you, and even punch you out, spit at you, threaten you (on public transit, within view of cameras) if you don't speak Spanish.
All is not hunky-dory in America. Although, admittedly, having an African-American family in the White House does say many positive things about how much everything is changing, how racism is gradually fading away in more and more households.
Then again, there is the scandalous bit of "free [hate] speech" being defended by Team Google. That doesn't count as a race riot of course. That's just plain Hate, compounded by complete lack of CPU between the ears.
Complain about this comment
#123 - democracythreat
I agree but something intrigues and worries me slightly. When folks go to the States, they go generally because they want to join the club. I know we can get a bit sniffy about 'Hooray for the Red, White and Blue' and 'Uncle Sam'on this side of the pond but the bottom line is that it's actually quite a good thing. At least these guys want to be American.
By contrast, I get the feeling that many new immigrants don't really want to be British or German or French at all. They just want to be anywhere but Bangladesh, Turkey, Algeria or wherever. That is no basis for integration and it certainly isn't a foundation for citizens' contracts and the like.
Complain about this comment
What can I say? The first few posts sum up much of how I perceive Europe these days, give or take a point or two, after having 'enjoyed' for want of a better word, what it has to offer.
Life is a funny thing. You spend a decade travelling round almost every country to experience Europe's history and culture, then a decade later, after coming to live here, because of the baggage that 'culture' brings with it, you find yourself wishing you'd never set foot here in the first place...life is a funny thing and you learn things on the way.
Unfortunately, to try to explain this to many Europeans seems the equivalent of banging one's head against a wall. Whether through reason, logic, manifest examples of one thing or another, from personal experience or other, it seems that culture and upbringing almost always wins out, and the problem is not 'us' but 'them' and 'they'.
As for planet Flanders, well...I'm more than in agreement with BZ, 110% if you like, as unfortunately it's where I live at the moment. If your name's not Hanneke or Janneke, even if you're white (as I am), then the role of being a second class citizen is there for the taking...
Complain about this comment
maria, if we are going to delve into the past for evidence of who has the bigger race hate.....
I see your race riots, and I raise you several death camps and twenty million slavic untermensch.
Show me your best poker face, now.
Complain about this comment
democracythreat, the recepie , so you say, is to be inviting inclusive and friendly.
I agree except - the balance will not work if the newcomers are not inviting LOL inclusive LOL and friendly.
Like our Chinese - they are clearly on a mission. Expeditionary immigrants. Do with me what you want I can't get scared by ex-USSR muslims. Yes all bad, bad, we fight but I don't fear they want land - to be cut away for themselves - where they've never been - and land is idee fix with Russians.
I don't even feel LOL on a good Sunday day that Mavrelius wants our land just imagine :o))))) It's not in the air and has never been felt once even in utmost USSR times, that's why Russians have always been relaxed about Americans. No, enemies of course :o))) all proper classic enemies if you make an effort to take a grip of oneself :o))) but really not scary ones.
Muslim countries yeah, a popular enemy were for Russians :o))) for a while but not seriously either. The max they'd want - is where they are 90% these days anyway. Muslim world is deeply fragmented, and courtesy of Britain and the USA is being kept sliced up. We also part-took in fragmentation as well as he could :o)))
While about China concerns I am really concerned, that's one monolithic piece, very focused and ultra-nationalist like dear me.
About triades even FBI formally gave up, no one in the world can manage these, accepted fact, means not figured out. These hold narcotics, illegal arms' trade, gambling, game and a bit of show business.
Their "dragon" strategy works in all countries perfect - the "head" /finance, marketing - beyond home, "the body and the tail" - at home - processing of raw materials, money and technical espionage they've got abroad.
I don't know how ab. other countries - in Russia the Chinese never mix up with locals, don't address police, don't address banks. They put together money in own underground trusts, buy raw materials in Russia, pass it from hands to hands - from one own company in Russia to another own company in Russia - like a chain - through all stages (and none of the chain parts includes a single Russian or any other outsider within the "small business" - all own, transportation, "customs' clearance aid" - all 100% own units - so they export goods out to China and there process our metal, our trees, our everything they can get hold of.
It's pretty chain, the dragons, and they work - without a single outsider.
"integration, dt, LOL!" Like hell they need to "integrate" with us.
Likewise China became very active in the Persian Gulf countries - 80% of goods turnover there by now by fact is in Chinese diaspora hands.
Indonesia is Chinese business controlled.
Thailand is taken.
Malaisia - 2/3 of all GMs running all Malaisian businesses are Chinese.
Yep I am worried, when there are open posters in China "We restored Hong-Kong - now let's put a bill to Russia." (don't ask me what for. the only thing I remember is Khrushev once called Mao Tse Dun "an old galosha" :o))) Which was kind of a friendly eh well more or less address, like you old :o))) galosha! but was translated by the hierogliph "old worn out wide shoe" which also has a second meaning of a not exactly very high morally woman :o)))
But that was when Stalin died and good old Mao decided he is now the top dog in the "socialistic campus", asked - no - practically - demanded that Kremlin gives him nuclear bomb! so Khrushev had to cut him short.
Called him that rubber article :o))) and refused in the sheer trifle, the nuclear bombie.
Since that our ways went astray again.
But the West namely Mavrelius's "West" - financed China since galosha day, 1969, having seen a hole for a divide. Congratulations with the work well done MA, thanks a million. In 2 years of your financing start China cheered up so that put Russia territorial claims in writing for "1.5 million km2". This is a big chunk from East to West nearly up to Urals and exactly 1/2 of Kazakhstan.
In 2000 China took a national strategy "to go beyond all other world countries", how to translate, nearby but beyond the traffic, in parallel.
And - "to become world's richest country". Are you even aware, of this official strategy?
I'd say they are very consequitive in that direction.
Combination of US financing and investment for decades, plus Chinese hard-work, plus their cheap underpaid bln workforce, plus their steel one-centre party control of all procedures - gave awesome results.
(btw it doesn't seem to bother the USA, and never did, since 1969, some trifles like "communism", in your dear business partner, freedom of speech, other details and nuances, choking up of minorities and excruciating them, Dalay-lama business is his own problem - this and that, nono? That's alright for the West.
You didn't strive to arrange them a Perestroyka, award with some democracy - none in the least of intentions, dear Europe and dear the USA?
Why aren't your newspapers worried that poor un-liberated Chinese folk still don't have a social support system - of ANY kind?
You know there isn't a thing like - Pension - in China - AT ALL?
That their medical service is all paid, not a thing planned for in their economy for sick and old?
But there is a whole charming institute in Manchjuria formally and officially busy with industrial espionage. State level, central institution, not under-cover or anything.
You finance them, we provide with raw materials, and arm them.
In Komsomolsk-on Amur, for example, in the Russian Far East there is an aviation factory that works exclusively for China. Of the 200 planes they did in the last years, 5 were bought for Russian army, and 195 - by China. :o))))
This is a hilarious policy pursued by all and the fruits of it will come up, sooner or later.
Complain about this comment
"[BZ], What part of the USA do you live in?" - maria-ashot
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't I think you'll find anywhere here that he said he lives in the US. Perhaps he did at one point, but now apparently he is here, in Europe, planet Flanders it seems. And as such I think his view as an 'outsider' of whatever sort has some pertinence.
Nearly 45 years in the US gives your opinion some value. But if that's all you have then it's not too different from a 45 year old Flemish person here who not too long ago told me that discrimation and racism in Flanders is no different from the US or UK, never having lived there.
Complain about this comment
Are these immigrants so "extra" and "un-needed" for Europe?
It can be the case you find them "extra" because nobody tries to grab them from you :o)))
Here is a test: help Russia be more decent - we'l become more attractive - and will gladly take from Europe 20 mln of your immigrants -any day of the next week.
Anything - provided it's a mixture - and not solid China.
Complain about this comment
any country in her right mind must be happy with immigrants like Amgad_S (@121). And - studies, and - works, and pays social security whatever, taxes, and - complains that spouses are not allowed to work on family uniting - which means spouses also want to work!
Spoiled, spoiled Europeans :o) as if you don't know that there are immigrants and immigrants.
Complain about this comment
WA;
You seem obsessed with land. I do not want your land. America does not want your land. We have more than enough land for our country, I've got more than enough grass to cut. What happens to your land will have nothing to do with the US and everything to do with Russia.
"But the West namely Mavrelius's "West" - financed China since galosha day, 1969, having seen a hole for a divide. Congratulations with the work well done MA, thanks a million. In 2 years of your financing start China cheered up so that put Russia territorial claims in writing for "1.5 million km2". This is a big chunk from East to West nearly up to Urals and exactly 1/2 of Kazakhstan."
You won't be needing that land anyway. Russia's population is shrinking, China's is growing. From each according to how much land they have to each according to how much land they need. With all those people, China needs more land. That's communism for you.
"In 2000 China took a national strategy "to go beyond all other world countries", how to translate, nearby but beyond the traffic, in parallel.
And - "to become world's richest country". Are you even aware, of this official strategy?
I'd say they are very consequitive in that direction."
I wouldn't worry. Lots of people sold America short in the past. But over a century ago, John D. Rockerfeller said anyone who bets against American will go broke. Once upon a time people said Germany would pass American. Then the USSR. Then Japan. Now it's between China and Europe. So far they've all been wrong and will be again. To understand way, you have to study the crucial differences between America and all other nations. It's something few outside the US actually bother to learn. When they do (and even often when they don't), they wind up cooming to live here. One President summed it up nicely "the business of America is business." While the US government owes China's government between one and two trillion dollars, Americans have made many times that much profit off of their investments in China.
Complain about this comment
I think in summary we can say that a strong integration contract is an good idea, so long as it is not one of those Blairite wishy-washy multi-faith ideas. Indeed there is a case for saying that all citizens should sign such a document
However I think that Europe is "full" and that immigration from outside the EU should cease with exceptions for non-EU European countries, limited special cases and of course "kith and kin" There has not been a democratic mandate for the tsunami of immigrants from non-EU countries while amazingly Eastern Europeans like Serbs, Ukrainians and Russians have not been allowed. I also think that Islam is absolutely incompatible with European culture. It should be made as easy to remove citizenship from people and "permanent stay status" as it has been easy
to be given such citizenship and status in the past. Illegal immigrants should not be entitled to free housing, children's allowances, free education
Finally government ministers should be made to bear some personal responsiblity for criminal actions committed by immigrants who were allowed in in their term of office.
Complain about this comment
WebAlice
Re #119
I was just pointing out the 'germany' of BZ did not exists at that Napoleonic era.
You should know that: An Imperial Russian army marched all the way to Paris in 1815 to take part in the redistribution of post-revolutionary/post-Napoleonic France. That's where Tsar Alex set-up the Holy Alliance with Francis I (Austria) and Frederick III (Prussia). So, you see back then Russia was committing its forces and political intent fairly much as post-1945!
Yes, there were earlier 'Germanies', you can refer to the Teutonic Knights etc., and true the Hanseatic League of north German towns could afford to ignore German royalty and did control Scandinavian trade. However, that supposed Holy Roman Empire begun with German Otto I was never really effective though Vatican histories like to quote it as lasting to Napoleon's time (in truth it was an excuse for 'princely' war across Europe at the Citizens expense, as ever). For the most part right through to the early modern age the mini-germanies actual influence in Central and East Europe was limited. The predominant 'Germanic' Nation was the Hapsburg's Austria until the emergence of Prussia.
If you take a look at capital cities Vienna was on everyone's visitor's itinerary and Berlin hardly gets a mention in anyone's guide-books until the mid-18th century; most doing the European tour went straight through to Moscow and St.Petersburg.
Complain about this comment
Maria-ashot
Re #124
Not sure if I have seen all you've seen.
However, in Autumn 1969 in a Secondary School in Slough, England I watched around 40 Indian and Pakistani teenagers charge at each other across the school playing field: Their Nations were in crisis (Wow! How times have changed!) and these kids with hockey sticks and anything else they could lay their hands on were 2nd generation, almost entirely all born in England.
Point being that external influences will always play their part and often counter any productive efforts by well-meaning inter-social programmes.
Complain about this comment
MA, thank you, I knew all along you didn't want our land. You only wanted to kill us in the USSR times, but at least you didn't attempt at the most important thing. This must explain the diference in attitude to each other in post Cold war times. You always viewed us seriously and were seriously scared. While we kept being very lightminded about you in the deep of the heart, because - how to say, "twice you won't die and once can't avoid", but, at least, Russian land :o))) - see above.
___________________
Dear Europe please come over. I am unhappy with Mavrelius scenario "The Chinese need it so all reasonable". You won't even have to live in Siberia and the Pacific coast, we can move ourselves - provided there is someone left LOL in the shop! :o)))
It's been calculated that even if we raise up left-over USSR masses who are at the mom. unwilling to re-locate to Russia we still need 20 million surplus in each 20 following years, as the minimum requirement.
What's that 100 people for 100 km2, a joke. It's one multi-apartment house and a 30-40 their dachas around in the "suburbs" :o)))) - and what is the rest?
I know it's nasty to negotiate with Medvedev about gas but it will be nastier with Mao TseDun-3. You will ask for a glass of water from Baikal at the decline of your years :o)))) and no one will be there to pass it to you :)))))
Well, I think I made a good case.
Complain about this comment
I do agree, that people can be ignorant:)
But they are usually nice And ignorant, that is why this blog succeeds for the most part here.
(go to the American blog... and then talk to me about cultural shock..I felt most alienated or ..felt "the outsider"--but they were... nice..dont want to say they are ignorant...they might know where I live :) lol)
Happy Thanksgiving all who celebrate it (most do at some point):)
Complain about this comment
Also, I'm American, so didnt mean offense to Americans (USA...they are very smart ...and nice....there in the USA blog--yes they are ..:)
Complain about this comment
Alice, you don't have to worry about it.
The BBC published some lady saying "This is our last chance to save the world!"
Now the BBC is a respectable source of information, so I figure the game is nearly over.
I gather that the air will get nearly 1 degree warmer, and the sea level will rise by 3mm. You know, sometime in the future.
So, you know, the end of the world is fast approaching. No point in worrying about long term economic problems. Everyone is going to die and suffer and then die some more. It is going to be terrible. This is our last chance to be saved by government, the BBC tells me.
I don't understand why jesus can't save me. After all, if god didn't want us to have a warmer planet, why did he make the earth so we go through cycles of ice ages and global warming? Is he stupid, or what?
So I blame jesus before I blame china. If and when the world ends because or warmist terrorism, I just want everyone to know that I did my bit to help save the world as well.
Just today, I put my name down for a team of mercy killers who want to go out and shoot the remaining polar bears fro helicopters, before they get their sorry feet wet. We plan on shooting some dolphins, too, because the warmer seas will just make their lives even shorter and sorrier. It is all about .50 cals and mercy, this saving the world business. I seen it in iraqk and afpak. I seen this one fella, and he was saving the world with a .50 cal, one terrorist civilian at a time.
I just wish i could do more to SAVE THE WORLD, partly because the world is such a tricky place and partly because it is the fashion just now.
So you understand, saving russia is second on the list after SAVING THE WORLD. We all have to get together and SAVE THE WORLD, just like jesus saved us from ourselves, because human beings are not natural. When god came down from the clouds and made humans, he forgot about the bears and the dolphins. It was all a ghastly mistake. So he had his son impaled on a stake to make things right with the terrible humans (that's you and me), and even then he couldn't stop the chinese from burning coal in the winter time.
The problem just gets bigger the more you think about it, as you can see. A stupid person might die from the effort of trying to work it all out.
Essentially, the way I have it figured, god failed to save us through poor planning, and then jesus died in vain. What a family, nuh? Bad genetics, probably. But if we all hold hands and listen to the BBC journalists we can SAVE THE WORLD from total disaster. Pretty soon they will be telling us how to do the trick, I imagine.
I think... well I guess... everybody has to join hands and find a piece of hot desert. Then we take turns to blow on that piece of desert until it cools down some. You know, like when you blow on a hot cup of tea.
Then the world will be saved, and china can go burn some more coal, and russian women can have more babies.
One problem at a time alice, and we have a real hum doosy of a pig pickler right here with this global hot air thing-a-whatsit.
First we save the chinese, and THEN.... no, i got that all wrong. First we save the world and THEN we worry about the godless chinese communists buying... i mean burning... all the coal.
I'll just get my shooting irons, and we can get to it. Time is a wasting!
Complain about this comment
This for Web Alioe and Democracy Threat,
I like to go to the India Times (don't know where its based but I ..think..its the "big" paper there in India)
And there was a blogger there (like Gavin) who said the biggest threat to the world was to be "Chinusa."
We had forsaken (or never did treat her well) India for China, dividing up the world into parts--never did make the papers in Kansas City, Mo. USA, but,
AND Russia was tossed around as a good bet for being India "new" (again) best friend. "Yes lets all get together and call Russia to help us" Or all...will break loose.
But, I do think Russia is great and necessary (at least for my world) and I was like "ick, I was right, China thinks they have the USA on a string"
In the same paper was a description of the India/USA White House state banquet yesterday (with menu and guest list..shock and awe),
But since I'm an "Obama lover" I read it all very seriously.
Not much point here just the idea(s) that you espouse, Alice, has found other peoples favor--in rising India. :)
Complain about this comment
cool-brush-work, absolutely agree. If there was "Germany" before, someone would have noticed :o)))) here, sang a song about it, a good old ballad, scribbled smth on a piece of a birch-tree, after all, or a proverb or I don't know. when there are German periods there are German words absorbed into Russian at once.
exactly the same memoirs, small fights with small germanies' knights, and, given we were ourselves pretty small back then in the 12th century and consisted of various tsardoms, united by common religion, tongue and habits of life only - and still it was felt like "small germanies" - what was their size then?
we'd get the word "Germany" for sure earlier, into slavic tongues, if there were such a word. as it were, the only way to describe the significant others in the 10th century :o))) was "nem"-tsy - from the root "nemoy", "nem" - dumb.
:o)))))
Once there appears "Germany" you can not not to notice it, how to say!
Besides, the immediate "nemtsy" were not "nemtsy" yet, but sorbs, understandable language, and only beyond the sorbs you have the "silent ones".
1815 granted we remember, Paris a nice place, except army couldn't find a single banya :o)))) bath house in that nice place, and had to build tempo saunas on the Seine river from which soldiers jumped out in foam and smoke right into the river, to the great fun of the Parisiene :o)))
Paris still has a bridge called after us folloing those times, and the word "bistro". Otherwise not much to remember for both sides.
Oh, AlexII during that very visit was also visited by a young architect with a whole album of drawings type a sales brochure "what I can build for you dear Russian tsar", and whisked the promising talent away (that very August de Montferrand) who built us the St. Isaac cathedral and "the house with lions" :o)))) and heaps of things. So, at the end, we didn't go all the way for nothing. With Prussia yes we were bosom friends pre-Waterloo, supported them by all means. You know there is a Blucher prospekt in Leningrad? :o))))
Not after that Blucher, but, in a way, after that one. One Russian land-owner had a side serf boy born and named him after that darling Blucher. He grew up and became a Sov. fieldmarshal, in his turn. As minimum, that was the official version in Soviet media why a Soviet fieldmarshal had a surname Blucher :o))))
While many suspected all along like, oh, not a proper proletarian birth of that fieldmarshall.... whose side-son his grandad was in reality - a very big question :o))) Especially suspicious was Stalin, at some point, especially when Soviet fieldmarshals put together a coup to get rid of them - by the way - in the deal with German field-marchals, who cooked together a coup to get rid of Hitler. And more over - it was a triple coup - Japanese fieldmarchals were also in it - in parallel - a great story - 3 coups were being cooked at once in parallel in 1936.
You might be not aware. Cool story. But your intelligence were aware and British archives hold it. We shared both at that time a spying deal with one party in common - USSR had a deal with Chechoslovakia and Britain had a deal with Checkhoslovakia, in pre-war times. One and the same Czech chap was feeding info to both you and us. And we were feeding feeds back to him, and you were. That's how, in the indirect way, USSR-British intelligence relations LOL developed for a while.
When the Czech chap got hold of German info that Russian marshals are in a deal with German marshals, he was indecisive whether to give this feed to USSR or not. And your British chap advised him - give it to them. Britain didn't like the idea of Germany-Russia-Japan uniting and getting rid of own Stalins and Hitlers etc. That's how Stalin got the news about marshals' coup against him.
But Russian historians don't blame Britain for selling our excellently planned coup down the river to Stalin, because by all documents Stalin knew about the coup before the Chech info was fed to him, on the British kind advice :o)))) And did nothing, waited. Neither he did any thing when he got the ready file. :o))) Waited. Risky man, liked to play cats and mice :o))) to feel omnipotent, over people. Must have been smiling into his moustaches :o)))) one can just imagine.
And only when our dear marshals - of infantry, Navy, aviation, all there were pre war - called "a training" LOL, by Moscow, a military drill :o)))) - then he moved fast, all were arrested overnight, 12 were shot a week after, after a very spectacular court session :o))) when at the end of the judge words - "treason" there ran into the hall KGB with type Ku-klux-Klan white robes with hoods, put them onto marshals ! some medieval show, thaty all were here, how to say, aghaust with, in spite of the hard times - and bundled away into those white robes. 12 marshals and immediate reporters were shot a week after, then Stalin did a raid into the army and fleet deeper, beheading the army - most commander "in treason alliance killed" - and that's how we stayed without commanders pre-war.
The Blucher's son, when father was shot, was adopted by his friends' family, and lived. A cute name :o))) Adolf Vasilievich Vasiliev (Blucher).
Small world.
Complain about this comment
stellarBeloved A Very Happy ? I heartily congratulate you with? And many returns? of the Thanksgiving Day! :)))
Complain about this comment
Russian TV just showed how Obama was? it looks like was blessing some bird, big white one oval in shape, with a prolonged red neck, I saw a glimpse of it but understood that's how turkeys look like, never met one, except in a cut format :o) in a shop.
Complain about this comment
dt you are so light-minded about serious issues. see Stellar-beloved, hurries to bring me consolation in terms of India's sharing of the scare ideas. while you again have that Knut bear theme surfacing :o))) dangerous sign.
anyway my plan is like this.
First come English babushka-s - steel material IMO. Attracted by gardening prospects in Russia, one can do gardening here like there is no tomorrow.
Then come the Dutch with flowers, because what to plant, they bring narcissus those onions, bulbs and all.
Then come the French because all get hungry having worked themselves away in their Russian dacha-s - I think it's good to start from dacha concept in Russia - so that, how to say :o)))) not so much Russia at once. Not everyone can stand it :o)))) We'll start moderately, from summer dacha-s :o)))))
Thus we all get some morsels to eat.
Still the French morsels will be decorative (unless it's the onion soup).
There come the Spanish with real fortifying things type ? those black pigs' big legs. And tomato soup.
Since tomato soup makes one thirsty here come beer people and Brussels with mussels stew thus all are fed. At which point come the Italians and clothe the gardeners.
Finland doesn't go anywhere. It stays at home as a back-up emergency, the nearest escape to civilisation that is medical service. The way my acquainted Americans in Moscow flew there when one got a kidney stone stuck to be dealt with elegantly.
Then naturally comes Poland because things seem to go way to smooth o))) and how without Poland who will Russia quarrel with. Thus we get some nerve and intrigue to the process, otherwise too boring.
The Germans finally say pity to see you all stumbling around through forests and build an autobahn.
Thus we get Russian economy finally getting a grip of oneself, because it is real pituful look to see how all pass, figuratively speaking , like a chain of people formed to pass over buckets of water on a fire, or bricks from hands to hands - especially when that "chain" stands at 1 person away a hundred miles to the next :o)))
With people distances get more lively, and even some production or services may start justifying itself.
We'll call everyone "EuroRussians" and will learn to reply in the bus occasions in all tongues possible. A hundred words in every "eurorussian" language will make a cute dictionary for the dacha owners.
In fact I have nothing against the Chinese either, except they happen to be the last living empire with ambitions to swallow others. By themselves taken separately they may be nice folk, it's simply their mummy have mis-placed their brains in terms uber alles, and they feel on a mission impossible (possible) when in Russia, with a duty to chunk off away their morsel (1.5 mln as said km2). That's no good intentions, to necessarily join it into China in the a-la Chinese style exclusively.
stellarBeloved they do feel the centre of the universe by definition, and it didn't happen recently. the very hierogliph "China" means the middle tsardom, centre of the Earth. the rest are wrong outskirts, irrelevant in the grand scheme of the things.
Well :o)
As far as I know the Chinese hierogliph for "Russia" is no nothing "Russia", but "the unexpectables" :o))) a sadly unpredictable country :o)))))
Complain about this comment
Posts #40 and #65 make me sad.
As someone who tries to keep up with our European chums and their "identity crisis", I find it disheartening that some Europeans feel that Europe does not need immigration and that Europe has nothing to learn from the US (or other melting pot countries) in regards to accepting/adapting newcomers.
While I agree with donut that present day Brits shouldn't be personally held responsible for the past atrocities committed by the British Empire, I believe the Brits (in fact ALL Europeans) need to understand that the world is a vastly different place since they lost their empires. There are lots of melting pot countries. The US is not the only one. Europe should know this. It IS after all the reason these melting pots exist. Societies that successfully adopt/adapt their immigrant populations are the winners in the long run. Multiculturalism simply doesn't work and only allows immigrants to live off by themselves, instead of assimilating to the host country.
Europeans need to wake up and realize that a "France for the French, an England for the English, an Italy for the Italians, etc." is simply not acceptable in today's world, nor is it wise nor practical. In fact, it's downright racist. Immigration, when done properly, enriches a country's people, architecture, history, culture, etc. All things that Europeans hold dear and had no problem "sharing" with the rest of this world.
Complain about this comment
WA;
Look on the bright side. Even if the Chinese take over Saint Pete's and the world comes to an end when water rises 3mm if dt is right, in the interim, you will be able to get some great Chinese take out food. Many kinds and very tasty too. I know you have beer in Russia because one of Russia's true innovations that never caught on was a beer drinker's political party. Cold beer goes particularly well with Chinese food, especially the hot spicy Hunan and Szechuan styles. Personally if they have a dim sum restraunt near you, I'd avoid the chicken's feet and duck feet. Something about what those feet probably step in turns me off.
Complain about this comment
M-B #126
"Life is a funny thing. You spend a decade travelling round almost every country to experience Europe's history and culture, then a decade later, after coming to live here, because of the baggage that 'culture' brings with it, you find yourself wishing you'd never set foot here in the first place...life is a funny thing and you learn things on the way.
Unfortunately, to try to explain this to many Europeans seems the equivalent of banging one's head against a wall. Whether through reason, logic, manifest examples of one thing or another, from personal experience or other, it seems that culture and upbringing almost always wins out, and the problem is not 'us' but 'them' and 'they'."
Look on the bright side. This is our competition. And because they will never learn, they will never be a threat to us, never have to be taken seriously. You can spend the rest of your days laughing at them because they can't change. They are so close minded and dumb they don't even understand how close minded and dumb they really are. It's not just that locals there consider outsiders shouldn't have a real chance in life but that their society is deprived of what they might have had to offer. How can they possibly compete against us? That they are utterly self enthralled is among their biggest weaknesses and vulnerabilities. Their inability to see their shortcomings prevents them from dealing with them. That alone makes their society inferior to ours.
hattrick;
"Posts #40 and #65 make me sad."
Don't be. Just be grateful you are not like them. Only an accident of birth kept you from being one of them. And they are so blind they don't even know, they just don't get it.
Complain about this comment
kcwhattrick
Re #145
Any glance at the square land mass of the United Kingdom and European Union and then at the Population Density figures reveals UK/Europe is already serviously, dangerously over-loaded with Citizens.
Only absurd UK/EU Political Leadership insulated from reality by their venality and unaccountability plus the Politically Correct-Money Making 'Social-integration' theorists, lawyers and do-gooders still believe 'immigration' from all corners of the World to UK/EU is a workable idea!
Yes, of course, there must always be some immigration/inter-change: Anything else is Economic-Social suicidal madness, however, the non-UK/EU Population (according to OECD) had risen by 40% between 1965 and 2004 - - any idea that this very small, crowded land-mass can sustain similar immigration numbers in the future is a blind folly and present threat to the social fabric of European society far greater than Climate Change-Terrorism-NuclearWeapons combined.
When a Pint-pot/Litre-jug is full how many people continue to pour in more liquid just in case the label is wrong!?
Complain about this comment
See immigration in wikipedia:
the EU hosted the largest number of migrants with 70 millions last year while the states "only" 45.1 millions.
A Surprising figure for such racists countries if I refer to earlier post I have read. I really wonder why so many people come over here if it is such a bigot club compared to much more the "open minded" rest of the world.
I still puzzled by those expecting to be understood in their native language abroad by a mere bus driver. Frankly the most basic thing is to learn some rudiment of the official language where you plan to live. Wrote that on a paper for a next time (Dutch is not my native tongue): "Sorry meneer, mijn nederlands is slecht en ik heb nodig van informatie, verstaat u Engels?" (sorry sir, my Dutch is poor and I need information, do you understand English?" And don't forget to use your best smile, it doesn't hurt.
Complain about this comment
@Amgad_S,
Did you apply to get a visa it sounds to me as if you've worked in the EU not as a resident but as been sponsered by a company to be allowed to work here. About paying taxes everyone has to do that, so no one is discriminating against you for been a migrant.
Complain about this comment
democracythreat:
I abhor sharia. How could you even contemplate it could be otherwise?
Studying a subject does not mean one approves of it. All it means is -- of one does the work; and I did -- one has a basis from which to form an opinion. And one knows which authorities to consult, and what the various resources available to the diligent student are.
It was an honour, certainly, to hear some of the most impressive specialists. Wiki Annemarie Schimmler. She was one of our lecturers.
Yes, the course was taught by Islamophiles. It allowed me to hear their point of view, eloquently & elegantly presented. It allowed me to study in detail the history of the Conquest -- as taught by their historians and apologists.
More than anything else, it proved to me Islam needs serious reforming. Muslims are mostly dishonest about their own history, how much suffering they caused -- how much suffering they still cause, within their own community. Simply through sheer obduracy. And yes, especially to women and children.
And even so, some wise ones, some decent ones -- even a few imams (opposition imams in Iran), even a few rulers are indeed attempting to shift into a new gear.
They have read the writing on the wall. Reform or perish.
But they have sown the seeds of their own destruction in clinging to an extremely outdated, untenable culture in all its minute obsessions -- the bizarre garb imposed on women being a case in point -- and having overpopulated themselves via polygamy to a point where the leadership now has to swim against the tide in their own hyper-conservative and under-educated communities... This is an enormous challenge.
With God, all can be overcome -- if you believe. But no one in their right mind could possible imagine God (by any name) favoured violent ways, wars, torture, cruelty. Those were the delusions of truly corrupt and godless men. It is not godly to walk into a city to smash, rape & kill. Ever. It is reasonable to defend yourself, your family, your land: it is not reasonable to attack others'.
And if you don't believe: well, all the more reason to give up clinging to silly customs. All the more reason to stop perpetuating lies about a "glorious conquest" that enslaved & brutalised millions upon millions.
How can anyone call a rape a marriage?
It is going to take a lot of work from a lot of people to push through to a better outcome than the one currently staring at us from across the room.
Complain about this comment
democracythreat, re: No. 127:
Hah! That's like saying someone who has cancer is sick -- but someone who has cholera is probably going to make it.
You won't find a whole lot of Germanophilia here. My father was fond of the Germans, perhaps perplexingly so, having killed a great many of them during the war, and watched a lot of them kill friends of his.
In the curious way chaos in history works, it was Germans who wished death upon both my parents, Germans who caused them terrible traumas -- and also (ironically) Germans who at a couple of key moments, almost accidentally, certainly unwittingly, saved their lives, making mine possible. Even in the middle of some of the fiercest fighting along the Eastern front...
My father came around to the thought, late in life, that Germans & Russians must be fast friends forever.
Then again, he never worked with "modern Germans." I did. For a few years. It left me highly disappointed, greatly disillusioned -- and in disagreement with my late Papa.
Father never studied with Germans, either. I did. A particular German professor, Jurij Striedter, ruined my academic career, made me reconsider teaching in university. I think he could not get beyond my age & appearance. It disturbed him, ultimately, that I was a girl, young, Russian, thought so hard and knew so much. (Not making any of this up.) It violated his German sense of propriety, predictability, Ordnung.
I am still looking for my first German friend, as a result. Yet to find one. Maybe Benedict XVI?
A careful study of Otto von Bismarck reveals the seeds of Europe's (and Germany's) destruction. You can find what I found most intriguing beautifully set forth (though unfortunately truncated by overzealous editors) in a recently published book called Kaiser, King & Tsar.
Setting the past aside, there is still considerable racism out there. However, it is only in the USA that we constantly lay claim to having either "zero racism" or "total racism". Generally, I come across more of the latter type of assertion, for example during the Sotomayor confirmations, or in Holder's first big speech.
There is not "racism everywhere" in America. But there is still too much. And too much bigotry of all kinds -- including knee-jerk Russophobia, even at the level of a Biden.
With regards to American race elections, I shared just a few items I have personally experienced or watched.
They do not include the physical assaults.
America has a long way to go to clean up its own messes. Personally, I would be pleased just to see less lying and pretending about how great everything is. It isn't. We are not "the greatest society in history."
I would like to think the "greatest society in history" is still possible, in some near future. Certainly nothing I have seen thus far in the Western Hemisphere qualifies.
Complain about this comment
maria-ashot, may be newer Germans are "better" in the modern mix and all influencing. you don't always have to meet a classic book one I rather hope :o) from the Russian point of view. that's cultural differences. for example when I worked in the first foreign-managed hotel in USSR/Russia, the management was Swedish but Russian staff unanimously decided "all the same, German" :o))) Close cultures (in our opinion) being the Swedish and the German ones.
There was once a funny thing demonstrating the difference, once upon a time whole personnel was summoned to a meeting room, there stood Swedish bosses :o))) all very grave and seriously looking. They said something like "common announcement bla-bla bla, an outrageous case occured in our company", and presented as with our main cook, a big Russian chap, as he were - in white that gown and the white turban on his head.
All were like "Yeah? what? a case of cannibalism have occured :o)))) or what did he cook staff a dog for a staff canteen may be :o))))))))
Swedes were grave as ? grave monuments. "All look at him!"
We looked; the chap looked genuinely perplexed.
"the Swede XXX YYY over here - was passing through the kitchen, and saw him cooking a pie".
All "Yeah? really? "
- Well Mr XXXYYY saw him, mater-of-factly - which shows it's not the first occasion! - taking an apple from his cutting board and biting a piece of it!"
Russian staff, like, "So, and what happened next?"
Well that's a crime! It is - theft! We have been discussing the outrageous occasion between the managers, and decided to forgive him on the first occasion, given that he is a good cook - but to call you all here - and draw your attention to this outrageous behaviour - which will not be tolerated in future, remember, and we hope all realise the seriousness of the situation."
A silent scene. Apart from - "mad turnips" - you don't think a thing.
Gestapo.
Complain about this comment
BTW I had two own Swedes at the time, my bosses (my property :o))) - and took my time to explain them they are Gestapo.
They were, like "Oh Alice, come on! nobody surely thinks this of us" - "Oh surely everyone does! What do you think you are doing? Shaming the chief cook, in front of all the hotel personnel, collected with brushes and brooms and what not in hands, torn off from work from all floors, because of a lousy green tiny apple - because I went to see those apples! there isn't anywhere to bite one's teeth in it! great ruin to the hotel property! as if he is chewing oysters or caviar!"
but the Swedes were still "oh Alice, come on."
Complain about this comment
#152
You could be right the largest number of neo-nazis can be found in southern California, I don't know why but that's where they are!
Complain about this comment
maria wrote:
"With God, all can be overcome -- if you believe. But no one in their right mind could possible imagine God (by any name) favoured violent ways, wars, torture, cruelty.
....
How can anyone call a rape a marriage? "
well, on this thread we are friends. On another, we are at war. That seems to be the way of this forum.
Threnodio, whom I sure you've met, is often like this. On one thread he will be intelligent and open minded, and then on another he will carry on like a pig missing its bacon. I don't understand him at all, sometimes.
Anyway, I take a quizzical view of this idea that "With God, all can be overcome.", followed closely by the abhorrence of rape in marriage.
Now you probably (surely?) know that rape in marriage was only condemned by law in the english speaking and european worlds. Yes?
You are aware that the pop and his cronies preached the opposite doctrine, and that without the common law declaring that rape in marriage is still rape, the law of the west would still permit rape in marriage.
I mean, you do realize this fact of law and religion? Or no?
Because I meet a lot of women who are dreadfully confused about this point. They want their religion, but they want their law as well. And when one comes into direct conflict with the other, as it does with the issue of rape in marriage, i find that religion is given a pass. And what is more worrying, law is not given any credit.
So my position is not that there is anything wrong with Islam, per se, but rather that there is a lot wrong with Islam as law. Just as there is a lot wrong with catholicism as law, or Tibetan Buddhism as law, or any other archaic system of forced breeding of the lower classes as law.
And it follows that in fact I do have problems with religions, per se, because regrettably religions ARE systems of law. They may have been castrated in modern societies which understand the dangers of religion, and the god fantasy, but nevertheless religions all see themselves as systems of rightful law. The even retain the trappings of the independent state, such as zero liability to taxation, and the power to hear confessions and grant absolution for crimes.
So i cannot get behind this idea that "With god, all can be overcome."
I prefer to think that with reason, human rights and law, all things can be overcome.
With god, the only thing to be overcome is reason and law, and then you have sharia, or the pope as head of state, or worse.
But that is just my view. I see a lot of what we call civilization which is utterly dependent on the rule of law. I do not see people who live without god as a danger to society. Those who live without law, however.....
Complain about this comment
democracythreat, speaking about law - Switzerland should feel free we all hope to proceed through the law at max the 4 Russian chaps who made a race btw Geneva and Lausanna (as we understtod), by the lake, and drove over a Swiss 70-year old pensioner.
TV various wise men with beards :o) only discuss O tempora o mores (mores?) where did the morals go to, now whole Russia will be shamed because of this "young golden youths". We are fed up with our "golden youth" tricks as well. Moscow University , their branch in Geneva has already fired one who was their student "for rude violation of the laws of the host country". They longed to, seemingly, for a long while, as he didn't pass a single test or exam past year. The other 2 chaps ran away by private air jet to daddy in Istanbul, sons of Cherkizovsky market owner, the one that was closed (the market) recently. Which caused a whole governmental delegation from China to come to Moscow sort out relations, as hundreds thousands of illegal Chinese immigrants thus lost their jobs. On the profits from the market its owner built that hotel-palace in Turkey, the richest in the Mediterranean. The 4th chap name is unknown even to the Russian media, only speculations, as your system hasn't made the names formally known yet. Russian embassy is all in expectations, they haven't received the formal notification yet.
Complain about this comment
The lawyer of the young man that Switzerland got hold of spoke to Swiss media, and was translated into Russian. Said "it was no speed race, my client simply happened to be there and he does not know the other men."
All Russia is longing for the 4th name; one is simply a richman son, two are sons of the infamous market owner (out of Putin's favours, mind it. Putin closed the market after the profits were invested into Turkey - in crisis - too daring a step of their daddy's). Thus, 1 Porsche Caienna, 1 Lamborgini, 1 Bugatti and 1 Mercedes something - simply met by Lousanne lake once upon a time, at the speed of 220 km/hr :o))))
Speaker of the Federations' Council Mironov was now on TV saying "I wish to debunk the speculation that the fourth was my son".
Complain about this comment
#156
Not that I'm a law expert or something (just a simple engineer) but I thought it is only western societies that justice (well whatever a society declares justice to be) is not linked to relegion or customs as in japan, china, india, middle east, africa. Now as they get more "westernised" they may use more the Roman approach to law based on Greek philosophy of justice, but it is not something they practiced for long. And for me as a non "god fearing" person I fail to see how an almighty mythical creature should have any influence in how I interact in my daily life with fellow humans. So Sharia laws, tribal customs laws and any other such laws are the type of laws that I would feel comfortable with having here in Europe at least if not in the rest of the world.
Complain about this comment
ChrisArta
Re #159
Think you meant to write, "... Sharia laws... the type of laws that i would feel 'UN' comfortable with having here in Europe.."
If so, I agree with every word you wrote: As do, I strongly suspect, the vast majority of Europeans, including surely many who have fled those lands where the 'mythical creature' infleunces Law.
Complain about this comment
democracythreat, No. 156:
Well, of course. I am amazed I need to spell things out to you. No, I don't see it as being at war at all.
I am in favour of capital punishment for people who commit truly abominable acts of violence, especially at those most vulnerable. I would have personally not hesitated a second to feed those who tortured Baby P to a very hungry crocodile. Seriously.
And it is not about revenge. It is about making it clear to the dunces out there (and there seem to be a few) that there are limits to what society will tolerate in terms of outrageous cruelty. Because a certain type of extremely sadistic person only understands the ultimate penalty.
I seriously doubt Fritzl feels anything but pleasant detachment these days. And he is getting nice food served to him, leading a 100% stress-free life: no bills, no disagreements, no chance of dealing with what decent people put up with daily.
Kindly allow me to remind you, my dear democracythreat, that I am what a modern Russian would look and sound like, to non-Russians, after having had the benefit of having lived an entire life in [almost complete] freedom, surrounded by European culture, and with the benefits of an excellent American education in the days when those were still available, for very little money at the uni level, and no money at all before.
I can thank my parents for the Russian and the culture, but my excellent French was from a proper US high school. That America has long since vanished from the planet. A few wonderful American people still remain, for me to be friends with.
Very few of them are free of all kinds of really peculiar prejudices against ethnic Russians.
And certainly, America, for all my education, has never had any use for me. That you must remember whenever you feel my judgements are a touch on the harsher side.
Now why do you think the US of A would have no use for me, my dear?
Might it possibly have anything to do with the fact that the words "freedom of expression" are understood rather differently in Europe, for example, than in the USA?
Or might it have something to do with how threatened intelligent American males (who after all run America) feel around a no less intelligent woman?
Or perhaps you can suggest any other explanation?
Give the Russians in Russia another 50 years of living more or less the way that I have been allowed to live -- not perfectly, working really hard all the time, but free to chart my own course for much of it, and free to read & interact with people from every other culture -- and all the foolish, unwarranted prejudices & fears about "Russia" will have vanished like a distant memory...
Because Russia is about as much of a "threat" to anyone as I am: a believing, God-fearing, God-loving civilised woman, of precious little means, who abhors cruelty, holds greed in contempt and values superb Music above all else. All we want for ourselves is the right to enjoy Life exactly as everyone else desires to.
Complain about this comment
maria-ashot, may be it's because America these days became more uncompromising? Either you become American or else :o)))
If one wants to preserve own "Russian-ness" - it seems you tend to gravitate towards Europe.
Complain about this comment
democracythreat, you should understand, :o) .
you've also travelled far, before you found your "Switzerland".
that's of course a crime what Russia did to her babies in 1917, to cast away so many people - and look for your fortunes elsewhere - how you please.
And for a Russian to live in Western countries - (and where else? in Saudi Arabia? we don't understand them :o)) - to live, among Westerners, through the 20th century - it's the same as for a German out of nazi Germany fresh in 1945 to live in another country and try to convince people around "how nice my motherland is".
With the fix and square the USSR was squared and fixed in the common notions' field in the USA and Western Europe - just dare to say
"I am Russian and I don't regret it!"
More of Georgiano Bruno kind of statement :o)))
At best you will get:
"yes yes yes, poor darling, but this will pass as a bad dream, you'll eventually forget about it, now, be a good girl and.."
Russians abroad during the glorious 20th century were awful squared and pressed - not by someone in particular, but by the general arrangement of the lay-out.
Many forgot themselves; name of these is - Legion.
Just the other day came across copying old Ansoff marketing matrix.
"Ansoff - the founding father of strategic management".
Written in Russian as "Ansoff" - ff.
American 100% who doubts.
Igor Ansov, born in Vladivostok...in 1918.. smth... emigrated in 1936... bla-bla-bla....
Look at the google's modern "founding father". He won't skip an interview without adding at the end "damn how lucky I am I got out of Russia and cast its ashes off my feet!" :o))))
A pre-requisite for success. the minimum requirement :o))))
Complain about this comment
in other words, dt, maria-ashot pities me, for staying inside Russia (well, me, figuratively, all my family, for example, folk) and I pity her LOL! for the difficulties she had, of keeping Russian-ness in herself - when beyond. And in case you didn't understand what is your position among this crying and embracing :o))) - well, consoling both weeping parties, of course! :o)))))
Complain about this comment
3. Menedemus wrote:
“The problem is that no one person can say that their society is better or worse than another society and whether the immigrants bring or do not bring with them better cultures and behaviours.”
Oh please! That’s this kind of unthinking political correctness which is at the source of all present problems with the rejection of many immigrants in Europe. No one with half a brain can pretend that’s it’s OK to have human sacrifice, or, to stick more closely to the present situation, that it’s OK to mutilate a girl such that she will never know what carnal love is.
13. threnodio_II wrote:
“". . . Eric Besson, said "we must reaffirm the values of national identity and of the pride in being French"
". . . Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that "British people want to be assured that newcomers will accept the responsibilities as well as the rights that come with living here, obeying the law, speaking English, and making contributions".
". . . Nicolas Sarkozy, has said that all beliefs are respected in France, but "becoming French means adhering to a form of civilisation, to values, to morals"
"That is the idea of the Integration Minister, Maria Boehmer . . . The contract would set out basic German "values". . . "
What happened to Europe overnight - did it evaporate?”
Europe is an artificial construction, no more real than an Internet game. How can I feel European, when my father, grand-father and others in the family got killed or injured in the past wars with the neighbors?
Those various officials are doing their best to respond to a situation which is fast becoming explosive. If the French must tolerate being systematically humiliated by immigrants in their mist (who boo the national anthem, demonstrate and vituperate against the French, demand apologies for past wrongs done to their forebears, demand and obtain that school menus do not carry pork which is a staple of many French households, demand that swimming pools have women hours, demand the right to cover their head in school which is traditionally an insolence, burn cars in the streets, etc.), they will see those immigrants as invaders waging an underground war against them and will take action.
British people cannot tolerate that mosques be used as bases for jihad, that immigrants of various backgrounds carry their own little wars and stage outright battles in some neighbourhoods, that they have to worry when they take public transportation that they might be blown up by some maniac. The Germans are just as fed up with the same things.
67. MarcusAureliusII wrote:
“For example, you could have a PHD is economics in France but you aren't even getting an interview let alone a job if your name is Mohammed because one look at your name on your resume, what Europeans call a CV and it goes right into the trash bin. So how would someone of African descent become the leader of France?”
Simple, as Marine Le Pen once said, change your name to Jacques or Michel.
The fact is Mohammed got his name because either he was born in another country and, not having grown up in its culture, he has no business leading it; or his parents did not want to be part of the French society they had moved into and kept old traditions at home, and then he is no more aware of the French culture than if he were born somewhere else.
I don’t think there are many jobs for PhD in economics anyway, so it is not surprising that the people making the decision to hire would rather get someone they will be comfortable with. Women face the same hurdle by the way.
An anecdote here:
If the French president dies in office the president of the senate becomes president of the country for the time it takes to organize elections.
When John Kennedy came to visit Paris as president of the US, he met de Gaulle and various dignitaries, including Gaston Monnerville, then president of the senate, and also grand son of a slave from French Guyana and very black. Making conversation, Kennedy, wandering about the workings of a system without a vice president asked Monnerville who would replace de Gaulle in case something happened. Monnerville answered simply “Me”. Kennedy’s expression was priceless.
But of course Gaston Monnerville had a French sounding name, spoke without a special accent (many Arabs, emulating American blacks, speak with a special accent which sounds aggressive to others), and made no unpleasant comments about the French people, since he was one of them and felt that way. It did not dawn on anyone to apologize to him because his grand-parents were slaves.
98. neuebiene wrote:
“After almost 10 years in Germany, I have the impression that most of society regards even those who were born in Germany, but of an immigrant background, as being from "away" rather than from Germany.”
That’s the way it is everywhere.
145. kcwhattrick wrote:
“I find it disheartening that some Europeans feel that Europe does not need immigration and that Europe has nothing to learn from the US (or other melting pot countries) in regards to accepting/adapting newcomers.
…
Europeans need to wake up and realize that a "France for the French, an England for the English, an Italy for the Italians, etc." is simply not acceptable in today's world, nor is it wise nor practical.”
Europeans feel that the last thing they need is the kind of immigration we get at the moment, hostile people who come to live on the dole and complain about the way their host country treats them. They bring the cause of their problems with them.
Some people are for no borders, which will mean that national organizations such as health insurance, free schools, etc. will become unworkable. Europeans worked hard to set those up, and are putting a lot of money in them. They can’t accept to see them all wiped away by parasites.
In general, the European Union is ill equipped to deal with some of the problems cropping up with an unmanageable immigration. In France, some people died in the still recent past to get rid of the religious stranglehold on the society. In Poland or in Ireland, that influence is tolerated or even welcomed. They can’t respond to the Muslim problem in the same way.
Nordic countries tolerate nudity without any qualms, not so in Greece or Spain. Their indignation at the sight of women wrapped in scarves as in the picture on top of this blog won’t be the same.
Forty years ago, a young girl could walk at midnight in backstreets in the center of Paris without any problem (I know, that was me). Now she would have to be stupid. We could have art in the subway; now it is all tagged and everything has become dirty. We can’t accept that traps be set up for the police, because then they won’t come when they are needed.
We have to get rid of the perpetrators, one way or another.
I imagine the stupid openness which led us there started a long time ago, since already France was giving asylum to Polanski in 1977 (if we accept paedophiles, we will accept anybody).
Complain about this comment
I will take this opportunity to point out to Europeans just how un-multicultural Europe really is. After all, the US takes an endless flogging for a variety of our cultural shortcomings.
We learned how to deal with intercultural strife, often in the form of block riots, among the European immigrants in the 19th and first half of the 20th century. Cities were sectioned off by European ethnic group and religion. That is why we have so many churches of the same religion but different ethnic saints. Dating outside of your parents' or grandparents' country and religion of origin was forbidden and enforced.
What the immigrants had to learn then, and are learning now, is that they have their individual freedoms as long as exercising those freedoms does not harm others, especially physical harm (honor killings and genital surgeries here have resulted in crushing prison terms meant to make an example out of the offenders). And we remind them that if they don't like America, they can go home. And if their native culture is so great, why did they leave?
Lastly, the US was originally an Anglo-Saxon culture in the east, but also a Latino culture in the west in the beginning. But intermarriage and ethnically mixed work places led to a grassroots, natural evolution resulting in the America that exists today.
Europe has to learn that it can't make Europeans out of immigrants, it takes 2-3 generations and not stifling the immigrants' harmless practices, such as burkhas and minarets. It may surprise Europeans but some muslim women actually want to wear them. If they don't and their husband forces them, domestic violence laws exist to deal with the perpetrator.
So again, so much for European multicultural acceptance.
Complain about this comment
In relation to immigration or multi-racialism we should measure our achievements in terms of how different we are from the United States, and the more different we are the better. If some politician or social engineer tries to introduce American "solutions" into Europe we should treat them like paedophilia, underground graffiti or hip-hop.
In this connection perhaps it's better that our gaze should turn to Australia where the people actually want immigration, unlike Europe where the people do not need or want immigration, and certainly not from "outside Europe" (I have to be careful here, for in spite of paying a hefty TV tax, I might be edited out)
This is what the Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said recently. He is certainly not a right-winger. Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.. Separately, Rudd angered some Australian Muslims by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques.
"IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It.. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians."
"This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom"
"We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!"
"Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture."
"We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us."
"This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'."
"If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted."
Can't we borrow this man and make him President of Europe?
Complain about this comment
Multi-culturalism, which I take it to mean the destruction of the culture and history of a nation and its replacement by a hotch-potch of imported unwanted traits in which the natural, spontaneous feelings of a homogeneity developed over hundreds or thousands of years is set aside and replaced by a melange of stupid "multi-faith" activities, politicians and mayors' idea of community, and terror from the religious and knife-culture slums created by immigration.
Multi-culturalism is an alien concept imposed on us. Politicians and media people are now hearing the people's anger because their careers are at risk. I don't think that the existing crop of politicians in Europe can change (with a few exceptions). So out with old, in with the new. And the new parties are sprouting and shooting to the top in many European countries. We can see the future.
Complain about this comment
AliceinWonderland
I have come across and really liked the Russians who say "I am Russian and I am proud of it" Correction. Actually I dislike Russians who do not say it.
Complain about this comment
I can't believe that the countries of Europe,that pride themselves on their championing of human rights and religious freedoms, would even propose such things as to ban the construction of minarets or banning head scarfs because they fear that it will send a message of the Islamization of Europe. Do they fear that muslims will become the majority and take over the country? They don't even understand Islamic sharia law and if they took the time to read it, I'm sure they would reconsider stating comments such as "I have a real problem with Islam, with the Islamic law, with the political and legal aspect of this religion." which is what Oskar Freysinger, a member of parliament in Switzerland said. It's sad to think that there are people who think like this and I hope I can live in a world that is more accepting of other people and their cultures.
Complain about this comment
Avicenna2,
Very good perceptions, IMO: 1st, they are banning headscarves; then comes segregation; and then 2nd class jobs for Muslim communities, IMO. Then hatreds and alienation happens.
One can moan and be proud of ones' cultural inertia (of a nation) like the above earlier "nationalist, yet proud" statements, no offense meant, but this changes nothing about the lack of integration in Euro societies.
Nationalistic sentiments will not solve the lack of integration for minorities or immigrants.
(not preaching) And comparing European problems with American problems will not solve Europe's problems -- the problems facing Europe are emergencies -- unlike America's immigrant/minority problems.
It's very important to support Europe now with progressive suggestions and to not use angry solutions to solve human problems...
I.E., nationalism by anti-immigrant political parties would scare anyone, anywhere.:)
Complain about this comment
To stellarBeloved (171):
Banning of head scarves, in case this is about France, is about the banning of religious symbols in schools in general. In France the state and the religion are separated and the separation is made to involve public schools too. I really don't see a problem with this as people are the freedom to use head scarves and other religious symbols outside the state functions.
It should also be mentioned that people have the right to go into a private religious schools if they so want to. For example Helsingin Sanomat, a Finnish newspaper, just recently did an article about a Muslim religious school in France. The school is like any other state school except they teach religion in there and also allow the display of religious symbols. In case of head scarves, some girls who wear them wanted to wear them, some who wear them didn't want but were forced by their dads, some girls chose to not use it and some girls were forced on not to wear it by their dads.
In case of segregation, there is no segregation based on religion or race, but what we have is socio-economic separation. The immigrants that came and come to day usually have no inherited wealth and no usable education, this sets the new comers to be able to only live in poorer parts of cities and to get only simple work. Now if the state doesn't intervene by education and active use of social policies what you soon get is ghettos of immigrants.
However many people do make it, they go to school, get either a vocational or academic training and blend in with the people. Nobody usually makes any article about these people, the media only does articles about troubles and not about success stories. Also the media doesn't usually report when politicians are actually doing something to solve problems, for example Sarkozy has set to make big construction program to develop greater Paris, and this involves building public transportation to connect the troubling suburbs with a metro track into the rest of the city and especially to its prime business locations.
What we have is a socio-economic problem, not really a problem of cultures colliding, and the remedies to a socio-economic problem is not legislation or modifications to a culture, but investing into people so that they can integrate and get a position in a society. This project however takes generations, just look at the income inequality of whites and blacks in USA, it is still there and it is there because people have concentrated on everything else than on investment of people and on investment of resolving socio-economic problems.
Complain about this comment
I won't comment on the issue of newcomers to Europe being required to integrate. However, I find it interesting that Europeans, Americans and Brits (especially) rarely make any attempt to integrate into the societies they go to.
Visit many countries with any serious ex-pat numbers, and you'll usually find a closed community of Brits (*or insert other culture here) who live in ex-pat housing, have ex-pat friends, eat ex-pat food, rarely speak the language, rarely absorb the culture, rarely have local friends, and generally complain about the parts of the local culture that aren't "as good" as they are back in their homeland.
It seems to be ok for US to go to developing countries, complain about their laws and rights, and try to "improve" them by introducing our views of enlightened society. But when the boot is on the other foot, suddenly it's a threat to our culture, or it's an invasion of fundamentalists bent on destroying our society.
Live in another country and campaign for Freedom of the Press, Free Speech, Jury Trials, etc.. = Progress.
Live in another country and campaign for Sharia Law, Islamic trials, etc.. = Disaster.
Personally I'm in favour of the former.. but that's because of my upbringing. It hardly seems fair to deny others the same actions because of their upbringing. (and because they are poor?)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This must be some of the 'multi-culturalism' that Europe invented that I keep reading about on this thread: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8385069.stm
Nice.
Complain about this comment
I'm a Catholic and I live in a country where there is more than 3 main races and 4 main religions (singapore). The people are generally tolerant here, and I have friends from all the major races and religions here. Yes, tolerance is important to keep this harmony, but equally important is that no race or religion tries to impose their own particular type of law here.
If the Catholic church tries to impose their religion and turn Singapore into a Catholic country, would it be good for me? Yes, as I'm a Catholic, but it would turn Singapore into a totally different country, spoiling its culture as a diverse country. It should definately not be tolerated.
I believe that if a person wants to move to another country to live or work for a substantial period of time, he has to adapt and obey the laws of that country. The country should not change just to please a few people. If you don't it in your new country, and just can't adapt, then you should probably return to your own country to which you are more suited for.
So is it far to make sure an immigrant is able to adapt before giving him a residential status? Yes, I think it is.
Should an immigrant try to change the laws and have their own laws that follow their religion? No, especially if it is not in line with the laws of the country.
You have many muslims complaining about their unfair treatment in Europe. With France banning Burkas, and with their wanting of a Shariah court in England. I have to stress that I have friends who are muslims, but is there a reason to push such rights in a country where you are a minority? I strongly disagree, but its just my point of view. Especially when you look at the treatment of christians in muslim countries, you'll understand that the muslims in Europe are generally not being given a hard time. In some countries, when there is a riot, churches are burnt. Whatever for? I don't know. So before you criticize others, look at your people's treatment of others first.
I might be wrong, but I don't see christians pushing their religious rights in any of the muslim countries. Should there be complains about the Burka ban in France? or the banning of Minarets in Switzerland (depending on the outcome of the vote)? I don't think so. As you might want people to respect your right, you have to respect their rights as well.
Don't see this post as a tirade against muslims, its just my 2 cents worth on the topic of integration of immigrants thats all...
Complain about this comment
I admit that I have been somewhat needling on this thread and flicking noses of that self-righteous superiority that can be part of the European character but CalvinCKY inspires me to try to make a constructive point too.
I agree with Calvin. If a nation wants to enforce their way of life on newcomers than newcomers better just either adapt and go home. However, if that country wants to call itself a bastion of multiculturalism, or the birthplace of a new European Civilization than they need to reevaluate. One cannot have it both ways. One cannot have freedom of religion, except when that religion threatens the symbolic supremacy of your religion or the traditional religion of your country.
Were I to go to Iran and complain about the rules, I would be a boob. Likewise, were I to go to Flanders and complain about the bus driver not speaking English, I would be a boob. However, if the society claims to respect different cultures and eschew racism than I am not a boob for pointing out that it is wrong if a bus driver speaks English to me, but not to a black person 2 minutes later.
All of this discussion is premised on the claim (one that I think is fallacious) that continental Europe has made even the first fundamental baby steps to being a tolerant multicultural society, is less racist than the United States, and has nothing to learn from the American experience in building a multicultural democracy. If, as I would say is implicit in Calvin's defense of headscarf bans, minaret bans, discrimination in employment etc., European states and peoples were prepared to say 'nope, multiculturalism is for the birds. We like our monoculture thanks. If you want to come here, endure and integrate into the majority or go home.' I would be the first to agree with Calvin. But, this violates the premise of the discussion that I summarize above - which is that continental Europe does have pretensions of being a society of multicultural states.
Well, if so than minority individuals need protections for their right to raise religious structures, to practice their faith, to establish schools, or to do anything else within the private sphere that they choose to do without violating the rights of others. Certain forms of rights should be primary relative to others - speech, religion, conscience should be more important than your right to 'not see minarets you don't like'. If you don't have this, you don't really have multiculturalism. You have a minority that exists at the humor of the majority. This is how the U.S. treated its blacks for over a century after the civil war. I think Americans know all about how that works out.
Individual rights, regardless of religion, or personal proclivities is the foundation of a multicultural democratic society.
A private sphere where individuals are largely unfettered to socially transact and a public sphere where individuals transact is 'culturally' neutral territory is likewise critical. Doing so undoubtedly sacrifices some of the cozy intimacy that many continental European countries enjoy - and which the United States lost years ago. While European Union officials don't like to mention it when they talk about integration - there are costs to making a multicultural society work.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS