Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Turkey and the E.U.?
Options
Comments
-
-
You just have to look at the problems the Germans have had in assimilating the Turks into their population to get an idea of what we can expect.
This isn't fair, the Germans didn't even try to assimilate the Turks into their country.
Germany gave the Turk guest workers no citizenship rights and put the children in seperate schools (where the kids weren't even taught German). The Germans did not expect the Turks to stay and they made no efforts to help them settle.
Max Frisch famously said "We wanted workers, we got people". This is what has led to the social problems that exist with Turks in Berlin.
unlike Britain and France, Germany has never considered itself a country of immigration. They have had a pretty horrible (semi-racist) view of Turks as outsiders who don't belong in the country, and they did not begin to deal with the issue until the 1990s!0 -
There is a lot of truth in what you say. However many German Turks just do not want to integrate and continue with traditions such as arranged marriages and honour killings.0
-
But you earlier made reference to “hundreds of thousands of low-wage Turkish workers moving to western Europe, the same as happened when we granted the right of free movement to the east Europeans.” That looks like an economic ‘objection’ to me – you’re now abandoning that line of argument?My objection to Turkey's entry into the EU is cultural rather than economic.
And what exactly is our “European culture and identity”? Something that has been conveniently defined to exclude Turkish culture and identity, no doubt.For me, preserving our European culture and identity is as important as preserving our European standard of living.
Considering there are already an estimated 13 million Muslims in the EU, I don’t think another few tens of thousands on top of that is going to have a significant “cultural” influence overall.I just don't believe that we'll be able to admit tens of thousands of non-European muslims into our population and still expect to be as as culturally European in a hundred years from now.
Whereas the more affluent Turks will stay put?It won't be a once-off or short-term process either, granting the Turks the right to free-movement throughout the EU will result in a continuous yearly immigration of impoverished Turks to western Europe.
As has already been pointed out, Germany is not exactly an example to be followed when it comes to integrating immigrants.You just have to look at the problems the Germans have had in assimilating the Turks into their population to get an idea of what we can expect.
Define “many”.mike kelly wrote: »However many German Turks just do not want to integrate and continue with traditions such as arranged marriages and honour killings.0 -
...with no guarantee of success.
One can choose to attempt to create high-value industry, but as with any industrial endeavour, there is no guaranteed recipe for success.
Absolutely - indeed, that seems to have been the problem. Trying something like that compares poorly with the, er, guaranteed returns from property development.
The Irish, as investors, seem to be extremely risk-averse. I suspect that if you look at the structure of the country's personal investments (in 2006-7 say), you'll find that property was, for us, just as for the banks, the overwhelmingly dominant investment.
However, what I'm really pointing up here is that the government made no real effort to encourage business investment as opposed to property investment - there seem to be a lot of tax breaks for property development, and many new ones were added during the boom, whereas the number of business development tax breaks seems not only smaller, but I find it hard to think of any innovations in that area during the boom.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
Advertisement
-
dRNk SAnTA wrote:This isn't fair, the Germans didn't even try to assimilate the Turks into their country.
Germany gave the Turk guest workers no citizenship rights and put the children in seperate schools (where the kids weren't even taught German). The Germans did not expect the Turks to stay and they made no efforts to help them settle.
Why should the Germans have made any effort to help them settle? It wasn't their responsibility. The Germans didn't need or want non-Germans to settle permanently in their country. They needed and wanted workers at a time when they had a serious labour shortage. They wanted them to come to do a job and then return home when their labour was no longer needed.
If the Turks wanted to move to Germany with the goal of settling there permanently then it was up to them to learn the language and make an effort to fit in. If you move to someone else's country then the onus is on you to make the effort to settle and assimilate into the country.dRNk SAnTA wrote:Max Frisch famously said "We wanted workers, we got people".
Very honest and very true. The same could be said of our own immigrants.djpbarry wrote:But you earlier made reference to “hundreds of thousands of low-wage Turkish workers moving to western Europe, the same as happened when we granted the right of free movement to the east Europeans.” That looks like an economic ‘objection’ to me – you’re now abandoning that line of argument?
I'm not abandoning it, I'm just saying that, from my point of view, the long-term cultural impact of mass immigration from Turkey concerns me more than the short to medium-term economic impact.djpbarry wrote:And what exactly is our “European culture and identity”?
As Hilaire Belloc once said, Europe is the faith and the faith is Europe. Europeans no longer have the faith, but they do have a christian heritage and it is from that that their shared European culture and identity springs. If a country was catholic in the century before the reformation then it can be said to have a European culture and identity.djpbarry wrote:Something that has been conveniently defined to exclude Turkish culture and identity, no doubt.
Even if Turkish accession to the EU was not an issue, and even there was no prospect of it ever happening, it would still not enter my mind to include Turkish culture and identity as part of European culture and identity.djpbarry wrote:Considering there are already an estimated 13 million Muslims in the EU, I don’t think another few tens of thousands on top of that is going to have a significant “cultural” influence overall.
I wasn't talking about tens of thousands being added to Europe's population, I was talking about tens of thousands being added to Ireland's population. It would probably be a few tens of thousands a year as well.djpbarry wrote:Whereas the more affluent Turks will stay put?
The more affluent Turks will have less incentive to move.djpbarry wrote:As has already been pointed out, Germany is not exactly an example to be followed when it comes to integrating immigrants.
So which country would be an example that we should follow then? Britain, France, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands? From what I understand all of these countries are experiencing problems assimilating their muslim populations.0 -
Ireland is an open door to new European Union member states so we should welcome the people of Turkey to Ireland. Many of your fellow countymen have been here for years.Why should the Germans have made any effort to help them settle? It wasn't their responsibility. The Germans didn't need or want non-Germans to settle permanently in their country. They needed and wanted workers at a time when they had a serious labour shortage. They wanted them to come to do a job and then return home when their labour was no longer needed.
If the Turks wanted to move to Germany with the goal of settling there permanently then it was up to them to learn the language and make an effort to fit in. If you move to someone else's country then the onus is on you to make the effort to settle and assimilate into the country.
Very honest and very true. The same could be said of our own immigrants.
I'm not abandoning it, I'm just saying that, from my point of view, the long-term cultural impact of mass immigration from Turkey concerns me more than the short to medium-term economic impact.
As Hilaire Belloc once said, Europe is the faith and the faith is Europe. Europeans no longer have the faith, but they do have a christian heritage and it is from that that their shared European culture and identity springs. If a country was catholic in the century before the reformation then it can be said to have a European culture and identity.
Even if Turkish accession to the EU was not an issue, and even there was no prospect of it ever happening, it would still not enter my mind to include Turkish culture and identity as part of European culture and identity.
I wasn't talking about tens of thousands being added to Europe's population, I was talking about tens of thousands being added to Ireland's population. It would probably be a few tens of thousands a year as well.
The more affluent Turks will have less incentive to move.
So which country would be an example that we should follow then? Britain, France, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands? From what I understand all of these countries are experiencing problems assimilating their muslim populations.0 -
How does one integrate into a society in which one is not wanted? Furthermore, why are you focussing solely on the negative aspects of migration? You are quick to point out some societal problems that have resulted from Turkish migration to Germany, but would it not be fair to say that those same migrants made a significant contribution in establishing Germany as a modern economic powerhouse?Why should the Germans have made any effort to help them settle? It wasn't their responsibility. The Germans didn't need or want non-Germans to settle permanently in their country. They needed and wanted workers at a time when they had a serious labour shortage. They wanted them to come to do a job and then return home when their labour was no longer needed.
If the Turks wanted to move to Germany with the goal of settling there permanently then it was up to them to learn the language and make an effort to fit in. If you move to someone else's country then the onus is on you to make the effort to settle and assimilate into the country.
Overlooking your completely arbitrary definition of what constitutes a European culture and identity, modern-day Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, FYR Macedonia, Romania and Serbia, as well as parts of Austria, Slovenia and Slovakia, were all under the rule of the Islamic Ottoman state prior to the Reformation; are they all non-European? Much of the Iberian Peninsula was under Muslim rule for several centuries during the Middle Ages (ever been to Córdoba?) – are Spain and Portugal non-European?Europeans no longer have the faith, but they do have a christian heritage and it is from that that their shared European culture and identity springs. If a country was catholic in the century before the reformation then it can be said to have a European culture and identity.
That’s kind of my point – you have defined Turkish culture to be different to European culture. But of course, no concrete definition of “culture” exists – it is a highly subjective, ever-evolving concept.Even if Turkish accession to the EU was not an issue, and even there was no prospect of it ever happening, it would still not enter my mind to include Turkish culture and identity as part of European culture and identity.
So how come so many well-educated immigrants from various other nations have ended up in Ireland?The more affluent Turks will have less incentive to move.
So we’ve shifted from ‘Turks’ to ‘Muslims’ now – needed a bigger brush for the tar, did we?So which country would be an example that we should follow then? Britain, France, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands? From what I understand all of these countries are experiencing problems assimilating their muslim populations.0 -
anglo_celt wrote:Ireland is an open door to new European Union member states so we should welcome the people of Turkey to Ireland.
I don't think so. We got badly stung the last time we opened our doors to new EU member states. We don't want it to happen again.djpbarry wrote:How does one integrate into a society in which one is not wanted?
You have to be like Tom Cruise in the Last Samurai. You have to try extra hard to fit in.djpbarry wrote:Furthermore, why are you focussing solely on the negative aspects of migration?
We're not discussing immigration and whether it is on balance a good or bad thing. We're discussing the likely consequences of lifting the restrictions on the Turks following their accession to the EU. I think it will result in a massive increase in Turkish immigration to western Europe and I think this will be bad for Ireland and bad for Europe. I think it will increase tensions that already exist between Europe's growing muslim population and it's declining christian population. I don't want the native European population to continue declining and I don't want muslim influence in Europe, along with their share of Europe's population, to continue growing.djpbarry wrote:You are quick to point out some societal problems that have resulted from Turkish migration to Germany, but would it not be fair to say that those same migrants made a significant contribution in establishing Germany as a modern economic powerhouse?
If the Turks contributed to the post-war rebuilding of Germany they did so as temporary guest workers, not as permanent settled immigrants.djpbarry wrote:Overlooking your completely arbitrary definition of what constitutes a European culture and identity
How would you define European culture and identity?djpbarry wrote:modern-day Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, FYR Macedonia, Romania and Serbia, as well as parts of Austria, Slovenia and Slovakia, were all under the rule of the Islamic Ottoman state prior to the Reformation; are they all non-European? Much of the Iberian Peninsula was under Muslim rule for several centuries during the Middle Ages (ever been to Córdoba?) – are Spain and Portugal non-European?
With the exception of Albania and Bosnia, most of the populations of those countries remained either catholic or orthodox christians throughout the period of muslim rule.
Suppose that it could be established beyond doubt that Turkey really is a European country with a European culture, would you then be in favour of excluding those countries that are not European from EU membership? Suppose a country that was unquestionably non-European like Libya wanted to join the EU. Would you try to expand the definition of Europe to include North Africa or would you side with the people who say that non-European countries don't belong in the European Union?djpbarry wrote:That’s kind of my point – you have defined Turkish culture to be different to European culture.
It wouldn't have made any difference if I had emphasised the similarities with European culture. It still wouldn't have entered my mind to consider Turkey a part of Europe.
Japan has a western form of government and a western standard of living and has as much in common with Europe as Turkey has. It doesn't matter how similar either country is to the average European country though, neither one is part of Europe.djpbarry wrote:But of course, no concrete definition of “culture” exists – it is a highly subjective, ever-evolving concept.
That is correct, and in my subjective definition of culture, Europe, and its culture, does not include Turkey and its culture. I think my definition of European culture would be shared by most other people.djpbarry wrote:So we’ve shifted from ‘Turks’ to ‘Muslims’ now – needed a bigger brush for the tar, did we?
You're avoiding the question. Can you point to a single European country containing a sizable muslim population that hasn't experienced problems in trying to assimilate that population?0 -
You're avoiding the question. Can you point to a single European country containing a sizable muslim population that hasn't experienced problems in trying to assimilate that population?
I think that begs the question of what exactly constitutes 'problems', and which problems are particularly attributable to 'assimilation' issues. The UK has had a sizeable Muslim population for decades, and the vast majority of it is well integrated and causes no problems. Equally, there's a segment of the UK's white Anglo population that can't be described as integrated with the rest of UK society.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
Advertisement
-
France.I think that begs the question of what exactly constitutes 'problems', and which problems are particularly attributable to 'assimilation' issues. The UK has had a sizeable Muslim population for decades, and the vast majority of it is well integrated and causes no problems. Equally, there's a segment of the UK's white Anglo population that can't be described as integrated with the rest of UK society.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
Define “badly stung”.I don't think so. We got badly stung the last time we opened our doors to new EU member states.
Suppose the host society try “extra hard” to exclude?You have to be like Tom Cruise in the Last Samurai. You have to try extra hard to fit in.
Well, it’s gonna, Turkish accession or no Turkish accession. The only means of halting the decline is to force native Europeans (whoever they are) to have more children. Somehow, I don’t think such a scheme is going to meet with much success.I don't want the native European population to continue declining...
What difference does it make? Turkish migration to Germany has had positive economic consequences, no?If the Turks contributed to the post-war rebuilding of Germany they did so as temporary guest workers, not as permanent settled immigrants.
European culture and identity: a wishy-washy, ambiguous concept that is often bandied about in discussions on immigration.How would you define European culture and identity?
Nope.Suppose that it could be established beyond doubt that Turkey really is a European country with a European culture, would you then be in favour of excluding those countries that are not European from EU membership?
I would point to the fact that “Europe” is an entirely man-made concept with no solid definition and is ultimately meaningless. Or to put it another way, precluding a nation from an organisation devoted to economic and political co-operation, based purely on said nation’s geographic location, is completely ridiculous (in my opinion).Suppose a country that was unquestionably non-European like Libya wanted to join the EU. Would you try to expand the definition of Europe to include North Africa or would you side with the people who say that non-European countries don't belong in the European Union?
Once again, that is precisely my point; you have decided that Turkey is not part of Europe and then defined European traits accordingly:It wouldn't have made any difference if I had emphasised the similarities with European culture. It still wouldn't have entered my mind to consider Turkey a part of Europe.
Perhaps it is. However, I note that, like many others who consider Turkish culture to be radically different to European culture, you’ve yet to actually describe any of these differences. So, I’m off to Istanbul later this year – what are these vast cultural differences I should look out for while I’m there?...in my subjective definition of culture, Europe, and its culture, does not include Turkey and its culture. I think my definition of European culture would be shared by most other people.0 -
Salam AlikumDefine “badly stung”.
Suppose the host society try “extra hard” to exclude?
Well, it’s gonna, Turkish accession or no Turkish accession. The only means of halting the decline is to force native Europeans (whoever they are) to have more children. Somehow, I don’t think such a scheme is going to meet with much success.
What difference does it make? Turkish migration to Germany has had positive economic consequences, no?
European culture and identity: a wishy-washy, ambiguous concept that is often bandied about in discussions on immigration.
Nope.
I would point to the fact that “Europe” is an entirely man-made concept with no solid definition and is ultimately meaningless. Or to put it another way, precluding a nation from an organisation devoted to economic and political co-operation, based purely on said nation’s geographic location, is completely ridiculous (in my opinion).
Once again, that is precisely my point; you have decided that Turkey is not part of Europe and then defined European traits accordingly:
Perhaps it is. However, I note that, like many others who consider Turkish culture to be radically different to European culture, you’ve yet to actually describe any of these differences. So, I’m off to Istanbul later this year – what are these vast cultural differences I should look out for while I’m there?0 -
To be honest I'd be worried about the Islamicisation of Europe and Ireland...I know that not all Muslims are religous or strict....most are decent people...But I'd be wary of the type of Muslim Myers describes, uncultivated and ignorant......As a gay person I don't feel our state promotes equality enough and I'm worried about the homophobia endemic in Islam.....are my worries legitimate?0
-
To be honest I'd be worried about the Islamicisation of Europe and Ireland...I know that not all Muslims are religous or strict....most are decent people...But I'd be wary of the type of Muslim Myers describes, uncultivated and ignorant......As a gay person I don't feel our state promotes equality enough and I'm worried about the homophobia endemic in Islam.....are my worries legitimate?
I'd be wary of any person of any religion, or with no religion, who are uncultivated and ignorant. Who does all the so-called "Gay bashing"? They are the people you need to be worried about, not Muslims.0 -
The Jews and the Catholics can and have for many years worked and lived in Ireland Europe as well untill the Great Evil came amongst us Muslims.irishconvert wrote: »I'd be wary of any person of any religion, or with no religion, who are uncultivated and ignorant. Who does all the so-called "Gay bashing"? They are the people you need to be worried about, not Muslims.0 -
anglo_celt wrote: »The Jews and the Catholics can and have for many years worked and lived in Ireland Europe as well untill the Great Evil came amongst us Muslims.
That's absolute nonsense.0 -
anglo_celt wrote: »The Jews and the Catholics can and have for many years worked and lived in Ireland Europe as well untill the Great Evil came amongst us Muslims.
And now you're permanently banned for racist trolling.
moderately,
Scofflaw0 -
To be honest I'd be worried about the Islamicisation of Europe and Ireland...I know that not all Muslims are religous or strict....most are decent people...But I'd be wary of the type of Muslim Myers describes, uncultivated and ignorant......As a gay person I don't feel our state promotes equality enough and I'm worried about the homophobia endemic in Islam.....are my worries legitimate?irishconvert wrote: »I'd be wary of any person of any religion, or with no religion, who are uncultivated and ignorant. Who does all the so-called "Gay bashing"? They are the people you need to be worried about, not Muslims.
I witnessed a gay bashing incident on a busy Istanbul street last year.
The first thing that struck me about it was the demeanour of the two attackers - they could have easily been Irish, British... they were instantly recognisable as scumbags first, and (presumably) Turkish second.
Having said that, it would be naive not to think that conservative ideology played some role in legitimising this violence in the minds of these two.
But I feel that this fear of anything outside strict social norms comes more from traditionalist parts of Turkish society, rather than Islam itself.0 -
I would point to the fact that “Europe” is an entirely man-made concept with no solid definition and is ultimately meaningless. Or to put it another way, precluding a nation from an organisation devoted to economic and political co-operation, based purely on said nation’s geographic location, is completely ridiculous (in my opinion).
So you would have no objection to inviting the USA, Canada, China or India to join the EU then?0 -
Advertisement
-
Obviously I would have objections; for example, China’s human rights record leaves a lot to be desired. However, I would not rule out political and economic cooperation with those nations on the basis of geography, no. No reason why the European Union could not be renamed at some point in the future, if necessary.So you would have no objection to inviting the USA, Canada, China or India to join the EU then?0 -
djpbarry wrote:I would not rule out political and economic cooperation with those nations on the basis of geography, no.
The EU is far more than an organisation for political and economic cooperation though. The EU is a single market with ambitions to become a single economy and a fully integrated political union. To pretend that admitting new members to the EU is just a matter of improving the level of co-operation with other countries completely overlooks the real goal of European integration.
European countries are already cooperating with the Turks and other Asian countries through their common membership of the OECD. I don't think anyone would object if OECD membership was expanded to include other non-European countries. A new member joining the EU is a completely different matter though. It's in the same league as the Americans adding a new state to their union.0 -
…which makes it an organisation intent on political and economic cooperation, no?The EU is far more than an organisation for political and economic cooperation though. The EU is a single market with ambitions to become a single economy and a fully integrated political union…
Which is?To pretend that admitting new members to the EU is just a matter of improving the level of co-operation with other countries completely overlooks the real goal of European integration.
Cue conspiracy theories.
No, it’s not. The US is a federation of states, the EU is not.I don't think anyone would object if OECD membership was expanded to include other non-European countries. A new member joining the EU is a completely different matter though. It's in the same league as the Americans adding a new state to their union.0 -
The US is a federation of states, the EU is not.
It might be interesting to lay out in what ways the EU resembles the federal government in the USA, and how the EU countries resemble the states of the USA.
One of the main differences is that the EU laws are implemented via the member stated countries governments (the individual countries governments have no option but to implement the EU laws), making it a "local" government law, whereas in the USA there are federal laws and state laws, and all laws are describes as one or the other.
In the USA there are signs everywhere saying "It is a federal offence to.....", and if we had signs all across the EU saying "it is an EU offence to..." the EU would be even more unpopular than it appears to be now.0 -
It might be interesting to lay out in what ways the EU resembles the federal government in the USA, and how the EU countries resemble the states of the USA.
One of the main differences is that the EU laws are implemented via the member stated countries governments (the individual countries governments have no option but to implement the EU laws), making it a "local" government law, whereas in the USA there are federal laws and state laws, and all laws are describes as one or the other.
In the USA there are signs everywhere saying "It is a federal offence to.....", and if we had signs all across the EU saying "it is an EU offence to..." the EU would be even more unpopular than it appears to be now.
Well we will have a european public prosecutor soon who can prosecute you initially for fraud against the union budget but there is a flexibility cluase to extend the scope of his/her remit.0 -
BetterLisbon wrote: »Well we will have a european public prosecutor soon who can prosecute you initially for fraud against the union budget but there is a flexibility cluase to extend the scope of his/her remit.
Which is not the same thing - the EPP can have his/her remit extended to serious cross-border crime, but the definition of serious cross-border crime is not made by the EU, but by decision of the Member States according to their various legal systems:4. The European Council may, at the same time or subsequently, adopt a decision amending paragraph 1 in order to extend the powers of the European Public prosecutor's Office to include serious crime having a cross-border dimension and amending accordingly paragraph 2 as regards the perpetrators of, and accomplices in, serious crimes affecting more than one Member State. The European Council shall act unanimously after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament and after consulting the Commission.
In the US context, that would be equivalent to all the States agreeing that certain categories of crime, as defined by State law, could be prosecuted by an inter-state prosecutor. That is entirely different from federal law-making, which is what jacaranda has drawn attention to.
regards,
Scofflaw0 -
irishconvert wrote: »I'd be wary of any person of any religion, or with no religion, who are uncultivated and ignorant. Who does all the so-called "Gay bashing"? They are the people you need to be worried about, not Muslims.
I'm more worried about people who strap bombs to themselves and blow up crowded trains, buses and fly 747's into a sky scrapers.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
Based on the national political statistic of Turkey that is their most recent general election, Islamic extremism has virtually no support among the populace. The largest far-right Islamist party, The Felicity Party, commanded just 2.3% of the popular vote. Contrast that with the typical polling of, for example, Sinn Féin in this country. In that context, your worries with regard to terrorist attacks are largely unfounded."There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics"0
Advertisement