This idea that all cultures and all groups are born equal or are equally capable of doing evil things is moral relativism at its worst. Muslim communities are special for the inherent rules and axioms that they live with, which have been polarized and radicalized quite a lot the past decades. There's a **** ton of articles about this written by muslims themselves who have been recognizing and diagnosing the problem for years now.
AFAIK, the "problem" is not the ghettization of these muslim communities. It's not Islam itself. It's not the grievances of middle east islam countries being torn apart by global superpowers. It's not the sheer volume of wealth being distributed towards radical views of islam by Saudis and Iranians throughout the last 40 years and throughout the entire world. It's not decreased identification of muslims as being part of the social contract of their own country.
It's all of these happening at the same time. But this is merely the fuel. The fire is spread by extremists that go and light all these fuels by convincing young angry muslims that their problems all stem from western ideals and paradise is awaiting in the form of the Caliphate. These muslim ghettos are not the spark. They are not the agents. They are merely resources available to be used by the extremists.
But is the solution to this entire thing to revoke the citizenship of anyone praying to Mecca and send them away? Or to shut the borders and not admit anyone with the wrong skin color into the country? Would doing so do anything to make the situation better, or is it just grand-scale NIMBYism?
Personally, I don't believe so. I don't think that we can get to a better status quo by slamming our doors shut and denying people opportunities because they share superficial traits with the international boogeyman du jour.
P.S. Just wondering. Did you read Heisigs book yet? Please do if not.
No, I haven't, and no, I won't.
Don't want to read a firsthand observation of a youth criminal judge in Neuköln?
Not really, no. Don't get me wrong, I actually agree with the general direction of her argument (that argument being that justice should be swift and that state authority should take a more active hand in shaping communities).
I keep referring to this book specifically because I really wonder how you would rationalize some of your opinions after reading it.
But if you don't want to then I guess that's that.
Because, again, I am an optimist. We can and must do better when it comes to bringing immigrants into the fold, as it were. But the problem areas we do have are not going to take over our country; we're not going to wake up one day and find that the Reichstag has become a mosque.
I also believe that our country is stronger for having the amount of immigrants we do have.
You'll also have to forgive for my sarcasm in this instance, but I am starting to be a bit amused by the fact that the guy who is always yelling for citations is refusing to look at the sources. Frankly ... as I read your earlier reply I briefly had to wonder if you even read the linked article in this thread.
Because this is a case where I do not need to look at your sources. Heisig's book isn't the only thing about her and her methods; there is plenty of discussion about it to be found in other places that paint a complete enough picture of what she was doing that I don't feel like reading about her case studies would improve my understanding of it.
And to be absolutely clear, there should never be discrimination because of anyones ethnic or religious affiliation as far as I'm concerned. And that is not what this is about, but rather the contrary. What we appear to have indulged up to now is a blind or at least soft spot for crime if only it was committed by members of certain ethnicies/religions that are uh ... "easily offended" is the word I guess. And that too is discrimination, i.e. basically against everyone not belonging to this "partially exempt" group.
Interestingly enough, we just had a decently-sized razzia against muslim criminals in Berlin
That said, there are plenty of voices (some in this very thread) who claim that muslims are basically incorrigibly evil and unable or unwilling to integrate into western society. Those voices, I feel, are at least as (if not more) dangerous than the islamic terror they want to protect us against.
And this stuff now coming to light is naturally fueling right wing hate in turn while at the same time giving religious extremism free reign as long as nothing is changed. If religious/ethnic affiliation becomes a de facto free out of jail card in many (court) cases, in a supposedly constitutional state, you have a problem, no?
And here's where I would ask for statistics. What's the basis of that claim? Are muslim criminals getting softer sentences because they are muslim
? Are they getting softer sentences in general? Are they more or less likely to be prosecuted?
You see, it's when you make general statements like that that make me ask for your proof.