Denmark introduces border controls; EU ministers to reintroduce passport controls

[stuge]

Hasn't it always been mandatory to show some kind of ID when crossing borders between Schengen countries? This is reactionary, but it won't mean visas or long checks at the borders.

Denmark went for it because "Eastern Europen criminals" is one of the new things to be afraid of.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Denmark went for it because "Eastern Europen criminals" is one of the new things to be afraid of.

Wow, that's so nineties...
The rest of europe has long since moved on to the musselman.

 

[Tahuti]

@Kaiserguard:
You've wrongly attributed your latter quote to Lillefix.

Thx for pointing out, in case you're wondering, I've attributed it to AL_DA_GREAT.

And I'm sorry Lillefix; hope you can forgive me!

 

[zjl56]

The U.S has the same bogeyman with Hispanics and other immigrants even though there education/ working levels are equal or greater than natives. If our incredibly tame and hard working immigrants can conjure up so much disgust, its no wonder Danes might have an even stronger reaction to hordes of lazy Turks and Gypsys.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Well, it sounds like the EU's planning to revitalise border controls so Denmark won't face any action. Talk about good timing!

Though what would the EU do if it wasn't planning the same? Economic pressure? I know that'd be about it but... it would feed the fires of anti-integration so well.

I see no problem with border controls if there's a wealthy zone next to a much poorer, unstable one. As for between the countries of the EU, the problem I see is simple: using Schengen, if someone manages to sneak into say, Italy, they're home free. But, if there's individual border controls, they'll be kept in each country they immigrate to. Very useful if you're up north for sure.

Combating illegal immigration =/= racism, at least in my opinion.

Controlling legal immigration? Unless your country is full to the brim and literally can't support anymore people, it probably is racist.

 

[Arwon]

Congrats Denmark!
This Eurozone thing is a mess created by Brussels and does not help the ordinary person. Cheap labour and "refugees" should not be let in en masse.

Cheap labour and refugees not being ordinary people, apparently.

 

[Leoreth]

Well, if Denmark breaks a treaty like Schengen, it'll face sanctions in the end, but it looks like they won't go that far.

Afaik you're only free to travel within the Schengen zone if you've got at least a visa for one Schengen state, border controls or not. So you'd still be an illegal immigrant if you illegally entered your first Schengen country (anything else would be absurd anyway). The plans for reintroducing border controls was only because Italy was planning to grant visa rights to each African refugee on their soil, so that they leave and Italy doesn't have to take care of them which they must according to EU legislation.

So as long as the "border states" of Schengen do their job properly (for which they get subsidies, by the way), there's no problem with cheap labor immigration of lazy stereotyped Muslims or whatnot.

For the Roma, they are EU citizens and will be granted full freedom to move within the EU in a few years. That's one of the reasons I was of the opinion Romania's entry was a bad idea, but now they're a member and it's the Roma's right.

And on a related note: if states are afraid people immigrate into their social systems, they have to adapt their laws so that you're not entitled to social security after only a few years of unemployed stay. The social system is still within national sovereignty after all.

 

[Verbose]

So how does this work without violating Schengen, then?

They will be checking more people out when passing their borders, but no requiring visas or asking for people's passports or anything of that sort, apparently? The official Swedish comments now seem to be that, ah well, done like that the Danes are perfectly within their rights. (There would seem to be other things more rotten in the state of Denmark after all.)

 

[Patroklos]

It is. Other than some smug Europeans would like Americans to believe, this crap happens on our side of the ocean as well.
:

I am sad to see hate speech demagoguery is alive and well in Europe too

Question: Is it possible to be for more restrictive immigration and not be racist?

 

[Bill3000]

I am sad to see hate speech demagoguery is alive and well in Europe too

Question: Is it possible to be for more restrictive immigration and not be racist?

If by racist you mean xenophobic, then no.

 

[Tahuti]

Question: Is it possible to be for more restrictive immigration and not be racist?

Yes, but only if it is not motivated by racism. Although it would leave little space to explain non-racist motivations for immigration reducation, since strict immigration policies are horrible from an economic point of view and immigrants generally seek to integrate provided it is worthwhile.
I bet the US wouldn't have become a superpower, had it shut its doors for newcomers shortly after its founding.

 

[aelf]

Headlines should read: EU countries surrender their freedoms to some refugees and immigrants. Official EU flag to be bleached white.

 

[innonimatu]

Headlines should read: EU countries surrender their freedoms to some refugees and immigrants. Official EU flag to be bleached white.

Well, I happen to very strongly believe that the freedom to control a country's own borders are fundamental to that country's sovereignty.

 

[Leoreth]

Question: Is it possible to be for more restrictive immigration and not be racist?

I'd say yes. There are valid economic reasons to control immigration; it's when economic considerations are ignored in favor of ethnic ones when the issue gets unjustified, i.e. an accomplished Turkish (or insert any other "dangerous" ethnic here) scientist gets refused just because "all Turks are lazy".

The matter with Denmark is somewhat different, though. Its fellow European neighbors aren't just some foreign countries - their cities are guaranteed their right of abode by treaty. Denmark doesn't have to face economic immigration from its direct neighbors (Germany and Sweden) either. So it's really all about mistrust into the Schengen countries with borders to non-Schengen states.

 

[Bill3000]

I'd say yes. There are valid economic reasons to control immigration

No, not really.

 

[aelf]

Well, I happen to very strongly believe that the freedom to control a country's own borders are fundamental to that country's sovereignty.

Sure. Similarly, people's freedom to make bad choices are fundamental to their sovereignty, but it doesn't make those choices less bad.

 

[Leoreth]

Depends on how your social security system synchs up with your immigration legislation. I could elaborate but you seem to be into assertive posts.

 

[Bill3000]

That's a financial problem as a result of a poor welfare system, not an economic problem. Besides, considering the pay-as-you-go system of most social security systems, the youth and birthrate of immigrants, and the low birth rate of the native-born, it results in the exact opposite argument, as you need immigrants to pay for your precious welfare state.

 

[Lillefix]

That's a financial problem as a result of a poor welfare system, not an economic problem. Besides, considering the pay-as-you-go system of most social security systems, the youth and birthrate of immigrants, and the low birth rate of the native-born, it results in the exact opposite argument, as you need immigrants to pay for your precious welfare state.

Depends on the immigrants. Some immigrant groups have become burdens because they are very hard to integrate.

 

[Bill3000]

Depends on the immigrants. Some immigrant groups have become burdens because they are very hard to integrate.

I believe the goal was to not bring in simplistic, xenophobic arguments and have only economic arguments only. False, anyway; immigrants of all kinds lose any genuine sense of foreign identity by the third generation.