The Local is not responsible for content posted by users.
2 Pages V  < 1 2   Reply to this topic

What is the definition of integration?

All immigrants need to uphold and obey the law.

Stewie Griffin
post 6.Mar.2010, 05:48 PM
Post #16
Joined: 18.Feb.2009

When you have a situation where people in some parts of the planet die because they don't have food/clean water whilst others try to decide between an iPad with or without 3GS, trying to impose limits on immigration is arrogant, ignorant and pretty much impossible.

Richer nations are so, largely because they exploit the resources of resource rich/money poor countries. This has happened since time began, but the over consumption and greed of those same richer countries has lead to a worldwide shortage of resources (a few thousand years or so ago, who would imagine that some societies would become too successful for their own and the world's good eh?).

It's not surprising that the one-way status quo (northern europeans migrating to the Med and destabilising housing markets, etc good; minarets in Austria not so good) can no longer be ignored by those who are disadvantaged by it through no fault of their own.

When it comes to immigration definitely agree that 'Hmm, interesting, that person looks/sounds different' can very easily lead to 'They don't look/sound like me, therefore they are inferior'. And we all know that 'our way' is always the best way. Yep, some might go about it differently, but sooner rather than later 'they' must realise that 'our' way is superior.

I do understand that to a certain level this is primal instinctive behaviour. But if it becomes accepted as a societal norm instead of the cave man throw back it really is, it can be disastrous (as evidenced by the countless past and present conflicts caused by the USA's inability to not stick their oar in).

For a long time the West has been trying to convince the rest of world that success, evolution and civilisation should be measured by the ability to access material resources. Whilst food and water are definitely essential, the 'broken society trend' would probably highlight that it's not that simple and there's a lot to be said about the advantages of living in an emotionally supportive community (like most of 'them' do).

Irrespective of what supremacists/fundamentalists (of whatever persuasion) would have us believe, if we don't succeed in completely destroying the planet over the next 200 years or so, we will mostly have a pretty homogeneously mixed genetic make-up.

Unless we build 3 meter high border fences to keep 'them' all out (and 'us' in I guess wink.gif ). And we all know how successful this policy has been in Texas... When staying put means you're gonna starve, you might as well risk a bullet or two if there's any chance of a better life (with stuff like a job and some food, you know?) on the other side.

And if you think you have it bad (because of immigration or whatever) you need to think again. Seriously.
A World Without Water
The End of The Line

<falls off soapbox in the ironically humiliating way that only the self-righteous can>
Go to the top of the page
+
CTIDinÅrsta
post 6.Mar.2010, 06:13 PM
Post #17
Location: Stockholm
Joined: 9.May.2009

Just listening on the BBC to "From our own correspondent" about an Uzbeki refugee who came to Sweden five years ago after a massacre there.

listen here, the story starts at 06:15

Things he found unbelievable about Sweden:

Politicians who don't pay the TV licence lose their posts,
Police who say "hej"
Prisoners can choose their own meals,

Now he's got his own business, is opening a cafe and has just met his family for the first time in 5 years.
Go to the top of the page
+
Mib
post 6.Mar.2010, 07:30 PM
Post #18
Joined: 7.Jul.2006

To nic_tester...good post.

However, while what you say is true, we are in a situation where Sweden will need more immigrants in the future to fill the jobs that will be created. Looking at todays situation, I don't see it, but that is what they say. Refugees will not be sent back to their home countries where it's too dangerous to go back. So, you have to find an answer that helps non-Swedes integrate into Swedish society.

Language for me is key. That needs to be one of the first areas to be done properly, which I believe they are looking to improve. We will see. Secondly, get people working and not get used to handouts for too long as it can become a habit and in turn no reason to learn Swedish. If they can work, but the employment situation is dificult, get them to work on a voluntary basis ie. work for their benefits. I'm sure there are many projects that could be started that the private sector cannot or will not touch.

But lets get real here. The Government in combination with the Kommuns do not have the will to do what is necessary as their priority is the voter ie. Swedish. So, unless there is a "light bulb" moment or a leader that is more interested in people than their own political career, don't expect much to change. Then, the sheep will continue to moan about integration and also create the walls that mean it doesn't happen.
Go to the top of the page
+
nic_tester
post 6.Mar.2010, 07:54 PM
Post #19
Joined: 17.Jan.2008

QUOTE (Mib @ 6.Mar.2010, 08:30 PM) *
However, while what you say is true, we are in a situation where Sweden will need more immigrants in the future to fill the jobs that will be created. Looking at todays situat ... (show full quote)

Not true im afraid. The problem with an ageing population cannot be solved by immigration. Because immigrants grow old too. In fact, it makes the problem worse since immigrants consume relatively more of societies resources and contribute relatively less. If the immigrants are not absorbed into the hostsociety it destroys social cohesion, social trust. And makes an extended wellfare state like the one in sweden impossible. This might be good or bad, depending on your political outlook. But alot of people will feel extremely betrayed when they grow old and dont get the support and pensions they were expecting. This might not be a big problem since old people are feeble and rarely cause problems to others.
Go to the top of the page
+
nic_tester
post 6.Mar.2010, 07:55 PM
Post #20
Joined: 17.Jan.2008

btw, im much impressed with the locallers on this thread. If my post had been posted on a swedish forum 85% would not be able to destinguish between prediction and prescription.
Go to the top of the page
+
Mib
post 6.Mar.2010, 08:20 PM
Post #21
Joined: 7.Jul.2006

nic_tester as I said, I can't see why they state they will need mre immigrants to fill the hole in the future, especially as it seems so difficult for many immigrants to get a job regardless of qualifications etc. Sweden also has one of the most generous paternity leave and cheap childcare, which has helped to create a baby boom...so again the research seems to be contradicted by what is happening today. Also, Sweden seems to have survived without such immigration in the past.

But, we are talking about the situation today and what should be done. It also seems that the real right wingers are increasing their support due to the bad integration policies that have been put in place. Of course there are people who will never accept foreigners, but if integration policies were 10 times better, the right wingers would have less support.

The Dutch seem to be on a pth to vote for the blonde guy who created that anti-Islam movie. That can be the only reason as their economy is doing very well with low employment, despite the credit crunch. Maybe it needs a bunch of real right wing Governments to make the opposition parties come up with a real integration policy. Sometimes, it takes something so radical to force the issue.
Go to the top of the page
+
nic_tester
post 6.Mar.2010, 08:30 PM
Post #22
Joined: 17.Jan.2008

Well, im one of them. I have been a libertarian all my life since its the ideology that makes most sense to me. But this election im voting SD, this charade has to end. If the mainstream parties dont even have the guts to face them in a debate, and if their reaction to problematic facts is to stop collecting statistics, and if the government is openly admitting integrationpolicy has failed and the opposition doesnt attack them about it, well, its time for them to go. It wont happen this election but 2014 we will see change.

I said ive been a libertarian and that is true. But ive also always been a nationalist too, just didnt act much upon it. But seriously, what do they expect? They asked me to serve them 10 months, 14 hours a day, for 30 kr a day. And to be ready to kill for them. I mean, seriously, they KNEW i was a nationalist, they even counted on it. So, why shouldnt i vote nationalist this time round?
Go to the top of the page
+
nic_tester
post 6.Mar.2010, 08:34 PM
Post #23
Joined: 17.Jan.2008

And what should be done? I havent got a clue. Stop immigration and start to marry immigrants is my best prescription. Or we will remain "we" and "them".
Go to the top of the page
+
Streja
post 7.Mar.2010, 11:48 AM
Post #24
Joined: 10.Jul.2006

nic, please explain why you want to vote for SD. Your words so far are confusing and naive to say the least.
Go to the top of the page
+
Kaethar
post 7.Mar.2010, 12:07 PM
Post #25
Joined: 28.May.2008

Probably for the same reason I voted against Göran Persson in the last election even though I'm a supporter of S - change. And this is what many people do. Many people vote for SD to cause a reaction or spark a debate - not necessarily because they'd like to see them in power.
Go to the top of the page
+
Craptastical
post 7.Mar.2010, 12:15 PM
Post #26
Location: Stockholm
Joined: 21.Feb.2007

Kaethar: So, I should vote for M because I despise Sahlin and I think that S would be better represented by someone else?
Go to the top of the page
+
Streja
post 7.Mar.2010, 02:33 PM
Post #27
Joined: 10.Jul.2006

That is really stupid.

So my friends should suffer because people want change?
Go to the top of the page
+
nic_tester
post 7.Mar.2010, 06:22 PM
Post #28
Joined: 17.Jan.2008

QUOTE (Streja @ 7.Mar.2010, 12:48 PM) *
nic, please explain why you want to vote for SD. Your words so far are confusing and naive to say the least.

It would be esier to answer your accusations if you qouted something you find stupid and if you qouted something you find naive. Please.
Go to the top of the page
+
nic_tester
post 7.Mar.2010, 06:46 PM
Post #29
Joined: 17.Jan.2008

Well, ill give you a short answer Streja.
In my earlier posts I explained in great detail why i believe that the idea of a harmonious multicultural society is a pipedream. There is only one party in the election that does not confess itself to the multiculturalist ideology, and that is SD.
I dont think you can compare the importance of immigration with other issues. A tax percentage or a rule of some sort or a grant or a subsidy can be undone in the subsequent election. Immigration can never be undone.

And I hope you will add qoutes to explain your insults.
Go to the top of the page
+
Kaethar
post 7.Mar.2010, 11:10 PM
Post #30
Joined: 28.May.2008

QUOTE (Craptastical @ 7.Mar.2010, 12:15 PM) *
Kaethar: So, I should vote for M because I despise Sahlin and I think that S would be better represented by someone else?

When one party is in power for too long they become lazy. It was simply time for change. Next election I'm voting S though since I'm closest to their policies. smile.gif

QUOTE (Streja @ 7.Mar.2010, 02:33 PM) *
That is really stupid.. So my friends should suffer because people want change?

Are your friends criminals? If they're not I don't see how any of SD's policies would affect them. Their policies would only affect potential immigrants and immigrants who commit crimes. Their dislike of muslims will have no effect since freedom of religion is protected in the constitution.

I personally don't see the big deal with SD. If SD is growing in popularity that's clearly a societal issue - not a political one. You need to get to the root of the social problems (of why people are voting for SD) instead of simply trying to oppress peoples rights of freedom of speech. mellow.gif Besides, it's a minority party. Even if they get into parliament they have to cooperate with other political parties.
Go to the top of the page
+

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: