Very interesting times ahead for Germany

Backstreet Moyes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122599745#Comment_122599745

This has been going on for decades and it has not worked at all.

It is getting rapidly worse and we are seeing far right parties gaining popularity in the EU.

It is likely going to lead to end of the EU and wars, as countries start looking after themselves.

Can you tell us why this will eventually happen and give us a rough timeline?

Saying read a history book and things happened in the past is no proof that something will happen in the future.

That is not much of an argument towards why you are confident it will work eventually.

batman_oh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122599907#Comment_122599907

I mean a quick look back through human history will show you that people have always sought cohesion and everybody from different religions/cultures have always sought to hold hands and live in diverse wonderlands. Oh wait no, it's mostly war, conquering and awfulness

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122599921#Comment_122599921

People literally have sought exactly that as they realized there was more to gain from doing so.

At every level of human interaction, it has followed the same pattern, fear and conflict first, then realization leading to engagement and interaction.

Why are all if you ignoring reality and pretending we're still living in the past? What could be the motivation, I wonder?

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600089#Comment_122600089

I don’t believe reading history books will lead one to conclude that peace, cooperation and brotherly love is the natural human progression.
In fact we have seen many, many examples of societies living in relative peace and harmony that have ultimately imploded in internecine violence.

Syria, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc.

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122599669#Comment_122599669

Lol.

Hungary is playing hardball with the EU on this, it's very firmly against the extreme neo liberal approach to migration that has defined European politics in the last few decades.

What Russians will come in will be a rounding error and let's be blunt. They'll be culturally closer than the others. Be skilled and educated. Have a work ethic.

I disagree with Orban in regard to Ukraine but he has been on the right side of history in relation to the refugee industry.

thatsdaft

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600273#Comment_122600273

The poster complained about German border checks

Didn’t Hungary erect border checks themselves at one stage?

It’s a bit hypocritical to be moaning on about migrants and other countries trying to do something about, while celebrating the opening the door wide open to Russian criminals and Russian criminal gangs to import migrants via Hungary

Backstreet Moyes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600089#Comment_122600089

Where in history have Muslims moved to somewhere with different values in large numbers and integrated without issues?

This has been going on for decades and has not been a success anywhere and is getting worse.

If you can give us these examples of where this worked then we can discuss it, I am not ignoring reality, I am just not aware of the reality you are talking about.

Can you give us the details of when this happened before and it was a success.

We can then look into the likelihood of this eventually working out like you are telling us it will.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600266#Comment_122600266

This is not complicated, humans are predominantly inclined towards safety and prosperity. And a big part of building spaces where this is possible is being open to interconnections and engagement.

But that doesn't mean that 'everyone' is inclined in this way, I haven't said it does or even implied that this is the case.

And the fact that you have listed places in which there was different communities co-existing which then saw violence break out should be taken as evidence that it is not solely because of outside influences or new engagements that lead to such events.

Which suggests strongly that immigration is in itself not the only or dominant source of conflict.

There's always going to be individuals or groups who gain popularity power through force who can initiate a more violent environment, that also is an element of human nature. But these people and groups have historically been in the minority even if at time it can appear that an entire group o community is evil.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600291#Comment_122600291

Ok, there's a few things particularly significant about this post.

One, the direct reference to Muslims indicating you think that people of that particular background is problematic. Secondly, when you say, 'without issue', what do you mean? Does the native population in these areas you are thinking of have zero or very few issues, or, does it need particular attention when someone from one particular community has an issue but not someone from another community?

Thirdly, what do you mean by large numbers? Isn't that relative? The suggestion has been that the Muslim population in Germany, France, Netherlands, Sweden, the US, the UK etc is challenging the native populations but in all cases it is below 10%. In most it is below 5%. And if you factor in Muslims moving to reach these figures, it is obviously much less. Fourth, it is not-uncommon for 'natives' in countries to form barriers against what they perceive to be large numbers of people moving in to their territory for as long as until they don't feel threatened. It happened with the Irish in Boston, Italians in New York, Mexicans in the US, etc etc in the same way and for the most part (definitely with the Irish in Boston) and Italians in NY, that is in the past and the former threat is seen as a valued subset of the community. Surely you are aware of that reality.

Next, your implication is that it is the Muslims arriving to a community that are the source of the problem. That suggests that the country to which they moved bears no responsibility for the experience of them being there. Whether that is with respect to formal integration steps or for a community or individuals to be welcoming towards or at least not aggressive or off-handish with how they interacted with the new people they are meeting. I don't think it is fair to put all the responsibility on one side of the discussion as to the success or otherwise of their integration.

If you look at a pie chart of the major societies/countries in much of the western world, you will already see multiple slices of different backgrounds and religious affiliation why is it the idea of one particular slice is so problematic for you?

fly_agaric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122599921#Comment_122599921

That's just going to the other extreme though. History is a mixed bag of both (fear and conflict and [peaceful] engagement and interaction).

I think people generally are much more interested in the wars incl. the civil ones, violent struggles, the invasions and conquests etc.

They are more obvious pivotal moments (vs periods of relative peace and stability) and more exciting to read about f.e.g., not live through of course.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600466#Comment_122600466

You present a noble premise but one that is entirely at odds with reality.
People are inclined to seek safety and prosperity and to do so, they seek out others like them.
Everywhere, even in diverse societies, we see groups choosing to live with people like themselves.
We see ethnic groups abandoning certain areas as they become more diverse, in favour of living in areas of less diversity. We certainly do see areas where diverse groups live together but usually where individuals can choose, they choose to live among people they identify with.
Even those who score highest in favouring diversity, themselves tend to live in non diverse communities.
You claim that humans are predominantly inclined to seek safety and this will result in diversity and cooperation.
Prisons are some of the most dangerous places modern humans can find themselves outside war zones. What we see in reality, in prison, is that individuals gravitate towards inmates like themselves rather than to other groups to seek protection and safety.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600896#Comment_122600896

We see ethnic groups abandoning certain areas as they become more diverse, in favour of living in areas of less diversity.

Examples that support this statement please.

The growth of cities versus the decline of rural occupancy over the last 100 years completely counters your point.

And the Prison argument is a completely irrelevant given the continued presence of risk/danger that exists within it. In such climates yes, people do seek out their own, but that is not reflective of how societies act. It's actually pretty revealing that you had to use such a tense environment to find examples of ethnic groups sticking rigidly with each other.

Remember when you were a child, I'm sure your early friends were identified first by living in the same street, or townland, or village etc as you. And you viewed others as outsiders, then when you went to secondary you no longer identified by street/village but maybe parish/region. When you went to University, you identified at first by your home county or town maybe, and now when you go abroad you identify by country. My point here is that until you (or me, or most people) experienced people from different communities, you naturally identified with those close to you but as you grew and experienced more interaction (and saw that it was safe) the need to stick close to your original boundaries was not felt as necessary.

My point with this is we are wired to see danger first and to not put ourselves at risk, but as a species we have consistently shown that as soon as we see that the danger does not exist, or is of an acceptable level, we look to go further.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122601117#Comment_122601117

People leaving areas as they become more diverse is a thing.
Take Brick Lane in London, made famous in the novel by Monica Ali as an example. The area was inhabited by mainly Irish and Jewish immigrants. Then Bengali migrants arrived. The prior inhabitants moved out to such an extent that by the mid 1970s the Great Synagogue had become the Great London Mosque.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight

Have you ever heard of an Irish neighbourhood or an Italian neighbourhood or a Jewish neighbourhood? It’s a thing.

Look at settlement patterns of migrants to Ireland. Why is there clusters of Asian and African communities?

Your example of identifying by one’s street, town, county then country is a red herring. One can identify as being from Shop Street, Galway and Ireland simultaneously. Obviously no one travelling abroad is going to identify themselves as being from Shop Street because in that context the reference would be meaningless.

My point, in direct contradiction of yours is that the more people interact with those unlike them, the more they gravitate to those who are like them.

You dismiss the example of prisons but the point stands. In times of fear and danger, people gravitate towards those they identify with.

Not only is it a real phenomenon it is also a growing phenomenon.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1276372

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122601337#Comment_122601337

Some people will leave

My point, in direct contradiction of yours is that the more people interact with those unlike them, the more they gravitate to those who are like them.

You dismiss the example of prisons but the point stands. In times of fear and danger, people gravitate towards those they identify with.

Not only is it a real phenomenon it is also a growing phenomenon.

People gravitate to those who are like them in times of fear and danger. Such as prison environments That was literally my point. They do not do so at anything like the same rate when there is not fear and danger. Of course they will still likely spend more time with people who they have cultural and historic ties with for various reasons but that is not the same as saying they seek out their own 'because' of having interacted with others.

And as for Irish or Italian neighborhoods, these have existed as largely a prominent identifiable culture rather than being exclusively of that group of people. And its explainable. When any of us go somewhere new, we look to settle and find our feet, and if you have someone who can give you a bed, or a start, or whatever, naturally you're going to go towards a friend of a friend or a relative and so end up within such a community which is going to lead to that community growing.

And as for the White flight concept, I think that its a bit disingenuous to suggest that this was an outcome specifically because of an inability for people of different ethnic groups to engage with each other rather than as a consequence of class differential that would have existed within such communities to a large degree. Not to mention that again, instances of White flight are largely coupled with an environment of particular social unrest or conflict such as was the case in the US and also in other places. And for every instance of White flight that can be documented, I would guess there are at least ten instances of communities that saw an increase in integration over a similar timeframe. Not to mention the growth in interracial relationships and marriages.

So, as we both agree, fear and danger is a significant driving factor in leading to people of different ethnic backgrounds seeking to withdraw, and this is where the rhetoric of the likes of Nigel Farage, Tommy Robinson, Donald Trump and the pound shop knock off imitations in Ireland specifically seeks to make people think fear is an appropriate response. These people are not responding to fear, they are stoking it so that they can encourage division and non-integration so that they can then claim multiculturalism etc is a problem.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122602098#Comment_122602098

Good contribution my man.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122602039#Comment_122602039

And as for the White flight concept, I think that its a bit disingenuous to suggest that this was an outcome specifically because of an inability for people of different ethnic groups to engage with each other rather than as a consequence of class differential that would have existed within such communities to a large degree.




You think it’s disingenuous to suggest that white flight is driven by people of different ethnicities not wanting to live together and not those of different classes not wishing to live together despite research clearly showing this to be the case.

https://news.iu.edu/live/news/24906-research-ties-persistence-of-white-flight-to-race

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122602146#Comment_122602146

I'm saying that it's disingenuous to suggest that this was in any way a widespread and defined outcome of integration that was solely down to race. There were a lot (A LOT) of factors at play when the term emerged.

bloopy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122602341#Comment_122602341

Can I ask if you have examples of where it has worked as successfully as you claim.

You also alluded earlier to conflict before we get to this perfect stage. What type of conflict do you envision. And for how long.

There are many many examples of people of the same ethnic background concentrating into the same areas when they migrate to a different country. I don't understand why you think this is an aberration rather than the norm.

I ask these questions because what is happening now is a massive experiment in demographics and the results of it so far around Europe do not play out what you are suggesting will happen. If we are to run this experiment through to the end, then it would be nice to see that the supposed end result is based on data, and not belief or faith.

If there is data to show, please provide it, or point to the direction to look in.

Mr. teddywinkles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122591983#Comment_122591983

Some1 has to be in government. Just because people have no alternative. Should people not vote en mass at all? Politics is a joke in ireland at the min.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604054#Comment_122604054

The Irish have a huge amount of choice and keep plumping for the same parties. Therefore, they must be reasonably satisfied. There is objectively an alternative but people don't want snarling, white supremacist Nazis or other crackpots.

Mr. teddywinkles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604071#Comment_122604071

Dont agree on the choice aspect at all. And yes no to lunatics but what happens when the others run amuck and ignore the wishes of their electorate and act omniscient and all knowing whats best. Exactly whats going on in Germany.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604129#Comment_122604129

Voting for Nazis destroyed Germany last century. It'll do the same again. People are responsible for how they cast their vote.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604147#Comment_122604147

the nazis are running in germany, I wasnt aware , I was there last week, didnt see any brown shirts lol

twinytwo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604071#Comment_122604071

Huge amount of choice? Either FF/FG, the lunatics on the left or Aontu. Not really much of a choice.

If you think MLMD, Holly Cairns or Paul Murphy would run the country any better you are seriously deluded.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604288#Comment_122604288

Where did I say that? Quote please.

Mike Murdock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604504#Comment_122604504

You did say the Irish have a "huge amount of choice". We don't, really.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604562#Comment_122604562

You do. It's beyond the scope of this thread so I won't go any farther but in the UK, it's basically Red v Blue.

thatsdaft

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604562#Comment_122604562

we actually do with our PRSTV system, where you pick from a large lot of people/parties you don’t like, choosing the least terrible options in a proportional manner

Compared to US or UK where the choice is between exactly two terrible parties and impossible for independents or small parties like Greens to get a foothold and representation

On flip side it allows likes of these neo Nazis in Germany to get a foot in, I believe they also have a form of proportional representation

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604288#Comment_122604288

The thing is, the public have no appetite for an extreme party so they don't get elected. Nothing is preventing anyone from forming a political party.

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600466#Comment_122600466

I have no idea where this world view comes from, but history shows very clearly that multicultural states can only be held together by totalitarian strongmen. Otherwise, the usual result is war or one group ultimately dominating the others.

Joseph Stalin drew the borders of the former Soviet Union in such a way that the Republics could never function as independent states due to a lack of the cohesion that a single-culture state brings. And he was successful - Azerbaijan/Armenia, really weird borders in the Central Asian "-stan" countries. The British and the French did the same with the Sykes-Picot agreement carving up the Levant into two fundamental misconstructions, the artificial states of "Iraq" and "Syria" that were designed again to ensure they could not function normally: since then they've only been held together by strongmen like the Assads, Saddam Hussein etc.

Yugoslavia, Myanmar/Burma, Northern Ireland, Cyprus, South Africa (where they barely even have electricity) are all further examples.

The kind of things being pushed in the West today are the kind of things that are usually imposed upon peoples by force by their enemies.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604023#Comment_122604023

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606409#Comment_122606409

Lads, the multicultural states are all around you. Ireland, England, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Australia etc etc etc.

Joseph Stalin butchered between 6 and 10M people to only try to create by Force what Europeans created by choice. And the European project has been a success. A massive one. The longest period of peace and stability in the region coupled with the most significant period of economic growth for any of the countries involved in their history (broadly speaking).

I don't know what sort of Star Wars / Star Trek (I'm not sure which is which) world you guys think is needed to demonstrate successful integration of people of different cultures but it doesn't need to be as stark as that for a merging of sides to exist.

Mike Murdock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606581#Comment_122606581

Well we had a protracted Ethnic war in Europe less than 30 years ago.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606754#Comment_122606754

And….. How many have they had within the confines of the old USSR within the same time?

bloopy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606581#Comment_122606581

6 of those countries are currently seeing rising tensions between ethnic groups and/or a rise in far right political influence with immigration as a primary reason.

The other had its original culture and people essentially destroyed by immigration.

Tell me how

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606824#Comment_122606824

So rising tensions after decades of safety, security and prosperity means the whole thing as a disaster? Nah, try again.

That's a simplistic narrative the likes of Farage and Tommy Robinson push for their own end. Or more to the point, pushed by the likes of the Daily Mail, the Telegraph and Rupert Murdoch.

And just to remove doubt for some who think such tensions happen solely because of the immigrants, the other side, the natives, the governments bear at least some responsibility where such tensions can emerge and increase.

Is the tension in Ireland because of immigrants, or because of the people sticking phones in their faces accusing them of all sorts?

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606927#Comment_122606927

in fairness if there is any country that ought to be neutered by multiculturalism and replacement its Britain, they never really got past their fondness for empire unlike the Germans

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606927#Comment_122606927

Specifically a UK example but I think a lot of the tensions are due to poverty caused by decades of failed neoliberal ideology twinned with cruel austerity measures designed to ruin the lives of the most vulnerable people in British society.

Scum like Yaxley-Lennon and Farage can lie all they want but their actions always tell the truth. Farage wants to dismantle the NHS and build prisons, knowing full well that it'll be mostly working class black men who end up in them due to police racism and predation. The Mail is headquartered in the Bahamas and was full of praise for one Adolf Hitler back in the day.

We got told over and over again that immigrants must integrate but it's somehow fine for the far right to break the law in a violent way repeatedly. This gives the lie to the "genuine concerns" trope that gets trotted out ad nauseam almost as much as "both sides".

It always comes back to racism with the rags and grifters. Always.

ArthurDayne

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600291#Comment_122600291

Is it not just as easy to say here that it is the West who (right up to today) has performed military invasions of Muslim countries, aerially bombed or facilitated the bombing and wholesale destruction of Muslim cities, sought to destabilise regimes in Muslim countries, and continuously exploited volatility in certain Muslim countries to push Western interests ?

I love how we have these conversations about the dangers posed by Muslims to us when any quick glance at any statistic about who kills more of the other (including children) and who is the bigger aggressor towards the other would very clearly demonstrate that Muslims have far more to fear from the "Christian" West than the other way around — and it's not even close. Not to mention the fact that the West is a participant in some of the factors — including war, destruction and political destabilisation — that actually leads to Muslim migration and refugees.

One of the other problems with the narrative on Muslims is that it disproportionately focuses on less common things. There is no focus on the fact that the majority of Muslim migrants are simply law-abiding people seeking quiet enjoyment of life and who go about their day-to-day life causing no more problems for society than any other person.

rogber

Another Syrian who entered the country as a refugee arrested after planning attack on German soldiers using machetes.

Another few votes for the fringe parties guaranteed

thatsdaft

Germany now wants to import a quarter of a million Kenyans

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/14/europe/germany-kenyan-workers-migration-deal-intl/index.html

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122616060#Comment_122616060

that will end well lol

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122606581#Comment_122606581

Yes, multicultural states are all around us. Has multiculturalism directly led to peace and prosperity in these countries? Would Sweden be as peaceful and prosperous today without the multiculturalism it has enjoyed in the past decades? I think it would be difficult to argue that multiculturalism has made Sweden both more peaceful and more prosperous.

Likewise you claim European integration and multiculturalism has seen the most significant period of economic growth for any of the countries involved? What do you base this on?

Of the 25 countries which have enjoyed the highest economic growth over the past 50 years only one is in the European Union. Ireland.
Europe’s relative wealth, share of trade etc is diminishing.
The European project is a success you say , yet growing numbers of Europeans are untrusting of the EU and supporting eurosceptic political parties. Why don’t Europeans increase support of the EU as multiculturalism, prosperity and peace increases?

Headshot

Another election happening on Sunday in Brandenburg

https://www.euronews.com/2024/09/21/brandenburg-braces-for-regional-vote-that-could-determine-fate-of-national-government

AfD is on track to come in first place with SPD expected to come in second

Could spell the end of Scholz

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122616271#Comment_122616271

"directly led" is doing some heavy lifting there

lumphammer2

Why are terrorist groups like AfD, MAGA Republicans. etc. even allowed to be political parties ??? …. how come these pass the threshold … but ISIS, Al Qaeda and Jundullah would not be allowed to run as a political party in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, etc …..

OneEightSeven

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122638845#Comment_122638845

Mega Republicans aren't a political party and there's no mechanism to expel people from US parties.

What's stopping ISIS, Al Qaeda and Jundallah from contesting elections in those countries?

thomil

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122638845#Comment_122638845

I can only speak for Germany here. For rather obvious historical reasons, the bar to banning a political party is extremely high in Germany. Political parties enjoy special protection under the Grundgesetz, the German constitution, and only the highest bodies in the country, namely the federal government and the German parliament can table a request to start the process of banning a party. For a party to be deemed illegal, either it, or its members must be found to be actively working in a concerted effort to endanger or eliminate the tenets of the rule of law and democracy, or must form a direct threat to the continued existence of the state.

The actual determination is done by the Bundesverfassungsgericht, Germany's Supreme Court, and the presiding judges must make their ruling with at least a two-thirds majority for a party to be banned. The same thing can happen on a state level if a party suspected of fulfilling the criteria above is only active in one of Germany's 16 states.

In Germany's post-war history, this has only occurred twice. The first was in 1952, when the Sozialistische Reichspartei, SRP for short, was banned. This party was essentially a recreation of the NSDAP, which itself had already been banned by the Allied Control Council in October 1945. The second, and so far last successful banning of a political party was in 1956, when the KPD, the west German communist party, was banned. An attempt to ban the far right NPD in the early 2000s failed on constitutional grounds, when it became public that key members of that party's leadership were undercover agents of the Verfassungsschutz, Germany's domestic intelligence agency.

With regards to the AfD, the Verfassungsschutz is actively monitoring the party, as are its state-level counterparts in several German states, including Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia. This has been going on for several years, but so far, the government has decided not to move ahead with a request to outlaw the AfD. From my perspective, it looks like the authorities want to avoid a repeat of the early 2000s experience with the NPD and make sure they have an absolutely watertight case before they bring this to the Supreme Court. I tend to agree, especially given the size of the AfD. There's only one chance to get this right, as a failure would only increase the party's popularity.

thatsdaft

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122616140#Comment_122616140

Schulz is in Stans now looking for migrant labour agreements

It’s like these guys want to deliberately pour oil on the fire

rogber

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122641713#Comment_122641713

They need cheap foreign labour to do care work and other jobs Germans and Europeans don't want to do, just like here in Ireland. If these important professions were paid better and had better working conditions it would help attract local people and migration could focus on more highly skilled workers instead