Why Islam is a problem for the integration of immigrants

[RomanKing]

LOL...if you think people who are "mad with rage" will just type at you perhaps you need to put down the big lists o' links and get out more.

Do you really expect anyone to believe you're not mad with rage when you just made another ad hominem post?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Do you really expect anyone to believe you're not mad with rage when you just made another ad hominem post?

Sure, because most people here know me well enough to have some idea how I respond to provocations. So in this community there is probably no one who doesn't recognize that I am mocking your big lists o' links and having a heck of a good time doing it, and that you would be hard pressed to even get me irritated, much less "mad with rage"...well, except you of course. You apparently are letting your ego get the better of your judgement and think that you are far more important than you are.

 

[RomanKing]

Sure, because most people here know me well enough to have some idea how I respond to provocations.

Research and links are considered "provocations" to you...

Oh, my.

So in this community there is probably no one who doesn't recognize that I am mocking your big lists o' links and having a heck of a good time doing it, and that you would be hard pressed to even get me irritated, much less "mad with rage"...well, except you of course.

That sounds an awful lot like trolling and flaming to me and last I checked that is against the form rules.

You apparently are letting your ego get the better of your judgement and think that you are far more important than you are.

Considering you just openly admitted to breaking the rules here, it might be wise for you to take your own advice.

 

[Synobun]

Moderator Action: A little less debate over personality, please. Let's steer this back towards the thread subject.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Research and links are considered "provocations" to you...

Oh, my.

LOL...no, big lists o' links are considered jokes. People who think making (or more likely cut and pasting) big lists o' links constitutes "research" are even funnier.

The pretense that by not going along with this ridiculous definition of "research" is a provocation, but under the circumstances it is worth letting it slide so I can have more fun with you.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Cross post...my bad.

 

[Traitorfish]

Only liberals are naive enough to be so child-minded to think that millions of muslims from 3rd world countries can successfully integrate into Western Society.

Aren't you from Chile?

 

[aelf]

You know what's a problem for the integration for immigrants? Trumpists and Brexshiters who want to kick them out and/or make war against an entire religion. They've infested social media lately with their filth and they don't give a damn if people are dying.

 

[Broken_Erika]

It's like trying to argue with a certain poster in the apolyton OT forums.

 

[Ryika]

You know what's a problem for the integration for immigrants? Trumpists and Brexshiters who want to kick them out and/or make war against an entire religion. They've infested social media lately with their filth and they don't give a damn if people are dying.

That's ridiculous.

I can only speak for Germany, but here people who are against refugees have virtually no influence on them, aside from the odd attack against them - which is bad, but really nothing compared to the number of crimes committed by the lowest individuals among the refugees, and something that doesn't happen often in the grand scale of things. Germany has created tons of opportunities for refugees, starting with courses where they can learn German and courses where they can get familiar with German Culture, to actual job opportunities. Their availability depends heavily on the area, and the coverage isn't ideal yet (hardly surprising, given how many refugees we've taken in without really being prepared for them), but even in the areas where they are available in abundance, many refugees still don't take that offer and don't want to integrate, instead are setting themselves up to be unemployables living in a parallel society.

These problems need to be tackled, not only for the "native" population, but also for the refugees themselves, and later down the line their children, and the children of their children. After all, we have just seen what happens when you don't help (and/or softly force) people to integrate with the Turks who stayed here after helping rebuild our cities after WW2, and are just now getting to a point where large parts of the last 1-2 generations of Turks begin to be fully integrated, after living separated, and in relative poverty for decades.

Deflecting and attacking people who are against immigration instead neither serves the conversation, nor the people you're trying to "protect" by not being willing to face reality.

 

[Broken_Erika]

A lot of those refugees are holding out on the hope that they might one day be able to go home.

 

[Ryika]

Assuming that the Turks would return home is the main reason why nobody cared about making sure they integrate into society.
I agree that it's one of the reasons for why they don't care about integrating, but the problem is still the same.

 

[El_Machinae]

In general, answers to "most violence is because" [single answer] isn't going to be very insightful. I'm sure it's a factor, it likely is. But it doesn't usually offer insight or a prescription.

And here I was thinking you were asking an honest question in order to get an honest reply...

I was. Is snide denigration going to be a more useful way of not answering my question?

I am not sure why you don't care if a significant portion of the muslims express support for suicide bombings. It's why I asked if there was some percentage that would bother you. I also explained why certain trendlines bother me, since above 2% acceptance is more of a cultural trend rather than mental illness.

Or are you just downplaying that acceptance? I mean, a reasonable number of people who would self-identify as 'Christians' in the West also express support for widescale war in the Middle East in order to 'solve' the problem they imagine. We dislike their support, but it doesn't freak us out. We're used to such verbiage, and merely think it's a sign of being pathetic rather than a wild threat to our future well-being.

Do you envision a liberal society that has a tolerance for the tolerance of suicide bombing civilian targets?

 

[El_Machinae]

(hardly surprising, given how many refugees we've taken in without really being prepared for them)

As an aside, this is why I am pro-help-take-refugees.

Outside of our moral and legal obligations, we also have NATO allies that have taken on a greater burden than they could handle. Now, I happen to think that 'too many refugees' is actually a national security threat. Integration is a numbers game. If you do it wrong, the risk is exponential, not linear.

Defending our allies has caused us to sacrifice our own safety before, and it will again. I think this is a fact of the universe. Any fraction of relief we can give to german will create more safety than it loses.

 

[Senethro]

Anti-immigration folks as shirkers of duty of cooperation with our strategic allies. I like it.

 

[aelf]

That's ridiculous.

I can only speak for Germany, but here people who are against refugees have virtually no influence on them, aside from the odd attack against them - which is bad, but really nothing compared to the number of crimes committed by the lowest individuals among the refugees, and something that doesn't happen often in the grand scale of things. Germany has created tons of opportunities for refugees, starting with courses where they can learn German and courses where they can get familiar with German Culture, to actual job opportunities. Their availability depends heavily on the area, and the coverage isn't ideal yet (hardly surprising, given how many refugees we've taken in without really being prepared for them), but even in the areas where they are available in abundance, many refugees still don't take that offer and don't want to integrate, instead are setting themselves up to be unemployables living in a parallel society.

These problems need to be tackled, not only for the "native" population, but also for the refugees themselves, and later down the line their children, and the children of their children. After all, we have just seen what happens when you don't help (and/or softly force) people to integrate with the Turks who stayed here after helping rebuild our cities after WW2, and are just now getting to a point where large parts of the last 1-2 generations of Turks begin to be fully integrated, after living separated, and in relative poverty for decades.

Deflecting and attacking people who are against immigration instead neither serves the conversation, nor the people you're trying to "protect" by not being willing to face reality.

Do you need to improve your English comprehension skills? People who are against immigrants are obviously a problem for the integration of immigrants... Unless, of course, you're saying that anti-immigration types are a tiny, insignificant minority, which would make you as delusional as the worst of them.

What you are perhaps getting at is that anti-immigration types have not really had much influence on the numbers of immigrants being accepted into countries like Germany. But that's not an issue of integration. You can accept immigrants without integrating them, which seems to be what you're complaining about - but then again, in reality, those who are anti-immigration are very unlikely to advocate or support measures that will actually help to integrate immigrants, so maybe your complaint is better directed at them?

But, wait a minute... Why am I trying to make sense of Ryika's argument? I should know better. I've never seen he/she come out for anything except conservative, right-wing positions, despite the long, meandering and pointless debates where he/she pretends otherwise. If FB isn't a concern troll, this poster most certainly is. I thought he/she left because most people stopped trying to reason with him/her, but I guess the state of the world encourages such types to come out of the woodwork. I'm certainly not going to bother engaging any further.

Moderator Action: This last paragraph is not acceptable behavior, especially in light of the modtext earlier on the same page directing people away from getting personal. Infracted for flaming and disregarding moderator action. - Bootstoots
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[RomanKing]

You know what's a problem for the integration for immigrants? Trumpists and Brexshiters who want to kick them out and/or make war against an entire religion. They've infested social media lately with their filth and they don't give a damn if people are dying.

The problem is liberals who are bringing in bloodthirsty incompatible people who hate native Europeans, their religion, and their cultures to commit terrorist attack after terrorist attack.

And people are already dying - The native Europeans who are being attacked, raped, and murdered in their homelands. The people who the left is more than willing to sacrifice on the altar of diversity. Oh yes, before this conflict is over many more people are going to die and they can thank the utter failure and delusion of leftist policies, but it's not going to be the people the left is more than willing to sacrifice for their "cause."

 

[aelf]

Crazier Domination3000 with worse English is not really a cool bloke either.

 

[RomanKing]

Your ideology is dead. The left is in it's final death throws as a political movement. The liberal world order is being dismantled.

American Liberalism has been nothing but a colossal failure and it's proponents are deluded. It's over.

 

[Ryika]

Do you need to improve your English comprehension skills? People who are against immigrants are obviously a problem for the integration of immigrants... Unless, of course, you're saying that anti-immigration types are a tiny, insignificant minority, which would make you as delusional as the worst of them.

You're missing an important thing, namely that most people who are taking an "anti-immigration" stance on the flood of refugees that came, and to a lesser extend still come in, aren't actually "anti-immigration on principle", they're scared of the masses of strangers that enter our country. Integration would obviously solve that issue in the minds of many. We have many Immigrants, lots of them of Islamic Faith, who have never faced much backlash before the immigrant crisis began.

What you are perhaps getting at is that anti-immigration types have not really had much influence on the numbers of immigrants being accepted into countries like Germany. But that's not an issue of integration. You can accept immigrants without integrating them, which seems to be what you're complaining about - but then again, in reality, those who are anti-immigration are very unlikely to advocate or support measures that will actually help to integrate immigrants, so maybe your complaint is better directed at them?

If we were talking about the USA, sure, I'd agree with you. The many people who are "against immigration" in Germany are not "against immigration on principle" though, they are against this particular wave of immigration, because of how it has been handled, and how problems have been ignored.

Well, at least the majority of people who are speaking out against immigration are, you do of course always have a group that is "against immigration on principle" (and most of those people are found in more rural areas in East- and South-Germany, where refugees aren't generally "settled" anyway), but Germany in general was very liberal when it came to immigration before this whole thing started.

You're just taking what you know about the USA, and think it applies similarly to Germany. That's stupid of course, Germany is very different from the USA.