Steyn’s an idiot. He’s witty and fun to read, check out the obituaries he used to do for The Atlantic some time, but the whole central thesis of his book has a massive problem. The number he used for Europe’s Muslim population is off by a decimal point, he was presumably using an article from The Scotsman (a paper he’s syndicated in) which messed up the original statistic, which came from the CIA. “Eurabia” is a right-wing fantasy. Europe will not be demographically overrun by Muslims. Whether it capitulates to them spiritually is a slightly better question, but also highly unlikely.
As I think others have said, check out Iran’s demographics. That’s the direction the Muslim world is headed in, not Yemen’s.
Do we have any posters here from Scandinavia?[/quote]
That article was indeed disturbing and I am curious to hear any people from that areas opinion. If the piece is accurate that a is a dangerous and growing immigration crisis.
I found this especially disturbing:
Swedish laws prohibiting “hate speech” against racial minorities have been vigorously enforced. There have, for example, been a number of gang-rapes of Swedish women by Muslim immigrants. But Swedes must be careful what they say about them. On May 25, neo-Nazi Bjorn Bjorkqvist was convicted and sentenced to two months in prison for writing, “I don�??t think I am alone in feeling sick when reading about how Swedish girls are raped by immigrant hordes.” [“Jag tror inte jag är ensam om att mÃ¥ dÃ¥ligt när jag läser om hur svenska tjejer har vÃ¥ldtagits av invandrarhorder”]
Sorry, I just read the thread and caught up to the rest of you.
My question is, when did the mass immigration really start? In central Europe, as well as the Scandinavian countries? I’m assuming the bulk of it came after WWII, but what was the real trigger for a country like Sweden?
Did it come about after they implemented their welfare system?
Do we have any posters here from Scandinavia?[/quote]
The problem is localized to a particular town where - by any standard - there is really a problem of integration. Ghettos filled with low-income immigrants from the Maghreb, the Balkans, the M.E., etc. are bound to create trouble.
The situation down there is quite appalling, but there is no solution in sight (short of following HH’s mass deportation scheme). I’ve been around Europe, and the Muslim stigma is much less pronounced in Scandinavia than it is in, say France or Britain.
The important question here is: What’s the faith of the perpetrators have to do with anything? Besides referencing Robert Spencer, I don’t see anything in that blog that makes the case for a correlation between Islam and those rapes. Yes, criminals are more likely to be immigrants, but that’s a truism which I don’t think anybody’s debating.
The problem is localized to a particular town where - by any standard - there is really a problem of integration. Ghettos filled with low-income immigrants from the Maghreb, the Balkans, the M.E., etc. are bound to create trouble.
The situation down there is quite appalling, but there is no solution in sight (short of following HH’s mass deportation scheme). I’ve been around Europe, and the Muslim stigma is much less pronounced in Scandinavia than it is in, say France or Britain.
The important question here is: What’s the faith of the perpetrators have to do with anything? Besides referencing Robert Spencer, I don’t see anything in that blog that makes the case for a correlation between Islam and those rapes. Yes, criminals are more likely to be immigrants, but that’s a truism which I don’t think anybody’s debating.[/quote]
It’s more than an issue of faith. Race mixing is also involved. It’s predicted that naturally blond people will be extinct by 2220. It seems that the white race, as a whole, is in decline.
From what I read, there is almost no national discussion about immigration in Sweden. This, despite the fact that ethnic Swedes are growing increasingly apprehensive about immigrants. The whole situation seems strange, and I lack the historical basis to sort it out. I was hoping you could contribute some information. Are you an immigrant? If so, when did you emigrate and what was your reason for coming to Sweden? Would be interesting to hear. On another note, I was told by someone here in the states that Sweden grants academic scholarships to pretty much anyone who emigrates there and fulfills some basic requirements. This person was, in fact, intending to study art there, and suggested I do the same for my own education. Do you know if what I’ve heard is true?
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
It’s more than an issue of faith. Race mixing is also involved. It’s predicted that naturally blond people will be extinct by 2220. It seems that the white race, as a whole, is in decline. [/quote]
That is quite funny. I remember reading a book making the case for the disappearance of the Kabyl ethnic group at the time of the French occupation of Algeria. Didn’t even come close…
I never heard of that prediction, but I’m interested in reviewing whatever evidence might support it. That is, if you have any. It may be a plausible theory, but there’s no way in hell anyone can stop - much less reverse - the tendency.
From an aesthetics point of view, one might be tempted to think that it’s a pity. Well, until you see some of the offspring of interracial couples around here…
There most certainly is a national discussion about immigration in Sweden. In the last elections, that was the central aspect - along with income taxes.
You have to understand that the Left (socialists) have been in power for decades around here. The chambers didn’t alternate (from Left to Right) as much as elsewhere. That created a pretty lax system for immigration which has been abused quite often. Despite that, the population is pretty much stagnating. Besides, Sweden is the least dense country of Europe. There are plenty of jobs (don’t compare to you or Japan!), and the country really profits from the influx.
I’m no expert on the matter, but I’ll venture that the Northern immigration wave all started towards the end of the 80’s. When the situation started deteriorating in the traditional host-countries for the Maghreb/M.E. Spain started getting saturated. France already had its “banlieue” trouble and the subsequent rise of the extreme right. However, in contrast to the “everybody’s the same” basis of the French republic, Swedes were a lot more pragmatic, kinda like the Germans. They mainly let in highly skilled individuals, and from time to time, a huge wave of refugees (think Kosovo, Iraq, Somalia, etc.)
I came to Sweden to get my degree. Period. I don’t plan on staying here any longer. I picked the place because what of the amount of money universities put into the field I’m pursuing (molecular electronics). They are arguably world leaders in the field and that motivated my decision. So no, I am not an immigrant. Now, I met a good deal of Americans immigrants here. Many picked the country because of the lack of tuition fees in schools. Some because of the government’s neutrality. Others because of the hot chicks. I don’t know about you, but I can guarantee that getting a grant is not as easy as you might have been told. It’s no different than getting a scholarship in the US or elsewhere. The only advantage I can think of, is the free (and, by most standards, excellent) education. I should also add that many holes have been plucked in the system since last year’s elections. It was about time if you ask me…
All in all, I would have to say that it is much easier for me to emigrate to America than it is to stay here. That talk about Sweden being an open place is a myth. You’d be less likely to be discriminated against in true “countries of immigration”. But the quality of living, nice folks, and astounding nature make it a brilliant place to spend some time.
I don’t know if I’ve covered all of your interrogations. PM me if you need any more info.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I came to Sweden to get my degree. Period. I don’t plan on staying here any longer. [/quote]
Welcome to America. Here, you’ll finally find the last best hope of humanity. Here, people actually take morality and right/wrong seriously and back it up with troops.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Welcome to America. Here, you’ll finally find the last best hope of humanity. Here, people actually take morality and right/wrong seriously and back it up with troops.
America, the true land of Testosterone.
[/quote]
I hate the make the comparison, but America has a scary amount of parallels to just-Pre-Nazi Germany. We have a largely soft and apathetic populous who still thinks of themselves as prideful and just warriors. Cowboys and frontiersmen in this case. (Disclaimer: Bush is not Hitler, America is not Nazi Germany, I was making an isolated comparison, please treat it as such).
We do take morality seriously. But we need to start convincing the rest of the world of that. By passing international agreements and wishes and continuing to ignore the comments of our allies don’t make us look moral. We need to reclaim our world standing. HH, I will admit this; we SHOULD be involved in the world.
We should help the Middle East become stabilized and free. Our values ARE better than the values of the extremists. But military operations are not the key. Peacekeeping operations using an actual international coalition, negotiations between Israel and Palestine (They have to give up Jerusalem, period) and other such things are key to the minimization of terrorism and Islamic extremism. Muslims don’t want an Islamic state, they’ve made that much pretty damn clear. With the right push, things will happen on there own.
Oh, and saying war with Iran will be an aggressive one specifically to rape Iran for oil doesn’t exactly make us look moral, ya know.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I hate the make the comparison, but America has a scary amount of parallels to just-Pre-Nazi Germany. We have a largely soft and apathetic populous who still thinks of themselves as prideful and just warriors. Cowboys and frontiersmen in this case. (Disclaimer: Bush is not Hitler, America is not Nazi Germany, I was making an isolated comparison, please treat it as such).
[/quote]
I think the comparison is faulty. It would be much easier to compare Russia under Putin to pre-Nazi Germany(though, Putin is no Hitler and Russia is no Germany.) The Russian Federation could be compared to the Wiemar Republic, etc.
Or take China for instance. China is on course to gobble up all the oriental nations much like Nazi Germany. They started with Tibet, are encroaching on Mongolia, took over Hong Kong and now are craving Taiwan. They are also arming at an alarming rate. This can be compared to Nazi Germany taking back all of the Germanic territories lost in the first World War and re-arming.
So you can always make comparisons. Whether they amount to anything is something else.
We do take morality seriously. But we need to start convincing the rest of the world of that. By passing international agreements and wishes and continuing to ignore the comments of our allies don’t make us look moral. We need to reclaim our world standing. HH, I will admit this; we SHOULD be involved in the world.
We should help the Middle East become stabilized and free. Our values ARE better than the values of the extremists. But military operations are not the key. Peacekeeping operations using an actual international coalition, negotiations between Israel and Palestine (They have to give up Jerusalem, period) and other such things are key to the minimization of terrorism and Islamic extremism. Muslims don’t want an Islamic state, they’ve made that much pretty damn clear. With the right push, things will happen on there own.
[/quote]
Not a bad plan. We should get other countries involved to try to snuff out terrorism, but first the nations of the world need to actually define what terrorism is. They can not seem to get over this first hurtle.
The other problem is the Islamic ME countries need to WANT to change. With the exportation and exploitation of extremism, level heads need to rise to the fore front, but it seems an impossiblilty in a situation where any rabble rouser can become an important political-religious leader and weak willed individuals blindly follow his every whim.
Not a bad plan. We should get other countries involved to try to snuff out terrorism, but first the nations of the world need to actually define what terrorism is. They can not seem to get over this first hurtle.
The other problem is the Islamic ME countries need to WANT to change. With the exportation and exploitation of extremism, level heads need to rise to the fore front, but it seems an impossibility in a situation where any rabble rouser can become an important political-religious leader and weak willed individuals blindly follow his every whim.[/quote]
We need to convince them that our morals are not just “another choice” but are essentially the civilized and human choice. Foreign Affairs just had a few great articles on the subject, one was by Tony Blair I believe.
Anyway, I don’t believe raping Iraq and Iran for oil (as a few have already admitted to that being what our purpose is) and allowing our contractors to benefit for little and shoddy work is going to convince them of that. As well, Israel needs to give up Jerusalem. Now. As in right now.