[Grizzly]

Will reply in more depth later but Maroccan waves are just as old as Turkish ones due to foreign worker programmes. Secondly, would love you to back your statements in the first paragraph (which countries, links?)

[Mikes]

You are assuming these people will be evenly spread out, which will simply not be true, there will be very strong clustering, you will get many areas where they form a local majority, effectively taking over the area.

If you think the existence of various Chinatowns, traditionally Jewish districts, Russian or Irish ethnic enclaves, etc. has had some kind of long-term political, legal, and moral effect in the history of America as a whole, I'd love to see you justify it. The only case where this kind of thing has done so has been with the South and former slaves having been ghettoized for a hundred years or more, and this had much to do with the fact they were majority.

Your argument here is defiant of reality, as demonstrated by historical precedent.

Well this is happening in the "Ghettos" of Berlin already: http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article154174175/Berlins-Unterwelt-ist-verloren-an-die-arabischen-Clans.html

Organized Clan structures forming some kind of family/religion driven Mafia structures which are happily recruiting in front of refugee centers.

Yeah, so basically what Heisig has been warning about 6 years ago already, as no one wanted to hear it yet. Now you can read it in mainstream news.

Coincidentially this also shows that backwater Muslims (not meant as an insult but to differentiate those ultra religious "giant f amily" structures from more secular minded Muslims that respect the country they live in and its laws, which of course also exist.) don't integrate at all even in 3 generations.  Rather they they take what territory they can with no respect at all towards the country, its laws or its inhabitants, directly opposing the official justice system with threats and bribes and establishing their own Sharia based law with justices of peace.

I.e. Pretty much Mafia 2.0 with a religious twist and the will to destroy/take over the state they live in.

I'd say that's just a weee bit different from Chinatowns or other ethnic districts, no?


And the real tragedy is of course that instead of cracking down on those proven criminal structures politicians are still pu**yfooting around the issue, not wanting to offend anyone because they may have a different culture.

[NGTM-1R]

I'd say that's just a weee bit different from Chinatowns or other ethnic districts, no?

You've just described Little Italy from the late '40s to the '70s and the mob, you've even been making that explicit comparison, this whole time, and yet you're pretending you're not.

A fascinating capacity for doublethink.

You think that having their own organized crime groups isn't pretty much the norm for this? The Russians bring theirs. The Italians did; even got famous for it. Asian enclaves tend to have their own gangs, many of them of a frighteningly high level of sophistication in comparison to the normal Latino and African-American suspects. The Irish did this, they even had a damn movie about it starring Leonardo DiCaprio, and the New York Draft Riots of 1863 are the largest single civil and racial disturbance in the history the United States, triggered by the perception of Irish immigrants they were being unfairly targeted by the draft for the Civil War.

Unless you've beaten them down so utterly they have nothing and can have nothing, like the Jewish Ghettos in the '30s, or US blacks through most of the history of the South, then this is not only totally normal, but expected. And if you wish to follow either of those examples then you are going to create much bigger problems abroad, in addition to being morally bankrupt and far more likely to trigger civil unrest on a large scale.

You've failed utterly to prove your point with this digression because you never bothered to study the proposition you were trying to argue against.

[The E]

The point is, these ghettos are a somewhat expected and, above all, transient effect. They do not last all that long.

[Mikes]

The point is, these ghettos are a somewhat expected and, above all, transient effect. They do not last all that long.

You realize we are talking about Ghettos who have formed over the last 20 years with people who live here in 3rd generation and who have only ever grown bolder in outright opposing the authorities and establishing their own society and legal system in direct opposition to the official one?

Because somehow it doesn t sound like it. Those people are capitalizing on the current refugee crisis ... but they have been entrenching themselves for the last decades already.

And in both the article and especially in Heisigs previous work you can see clearly the part that their culture and religion plays in their dominance and success in the current crime scene and why it is so hard for our legal system to pin them down.


And all you can say is "yeah yeah nothing new, it's only transient, no worries?". Really? To the point ... did we have a Mafia like crime group yet that shares major ideology with bomb wearing maniacs who see it their god given right to behead and kill otherwise as many infidels as they can find? Or are you going to tell me the way this group despises and disrespects anyone not of their own has nothing to do with that ideology? And that they will somehow magically integrate after all when they show not a single sign of that after three generations?

Coincidentially, what do you think Italy would look like if the Italian government would treat the Mafia with the same kids gloves as our government is treating those large arab clans?

If only I could have your positive outlook, but I really can't see how the facts we got agree with it in any way. I mean ... you kinda have to agree at least on that last point, don't you? Or do you really see nothing wrong with the way the government is avoiding action against known criminal groups to the point of even denying the problem exists for the last couple of years? Cutting police budgets further and further and ignoring any cry for help from police personnel and judges alike?


P.S. Just wondering. Did you read Heisigs book yet? Please do if not.

[The E]

You realize we are talking about Ghettos who have formed over the last 20 years with people who live here in 3rd generation and who have only ever grown bolder in outright opposing the authorities and establishing their own society and legal system in direct opposition to the official one?

Because somehow it doesn t sound like it. Those people are capitalizing on the current refugee crisis ... but they have been entrenching themselves for the last decades already.

I have lived in a regional hotspot for neonazi activity. I have also lived in what an alarmist like you might call a closed turkish community. Guess where I felt safer.

That's right. There wasn't any difference (I did get more verbal harassment from the neonazis, though). Because what you do not seem to understand is that most of the people living in these places? They're just people. At least according to my experiences, they aren't any more likely to be violent or criminal than the rest of us.

So pardon me for letting my personal experience colour my perceptions here.

And in both the article and especially in Heisigs previous work you can see clearly the part that their culture and religion plays in their dominance and success in the current crime scene and why it is so hard for our legal system to pin them down.

And? You do know that that exact same rhetoric was once brought to bear against irish, jewish, italian communities in the US? That these groups, which are now so much part of America, couldn't possibly be integrated, that they were inherently violent and prone to disrespecting authority?

Do you not realize that this song and dance is old? That there's nothing inherently different between your rhetoric here and those pamphlets back then?

And all you can say is "yeah yeah nothing new, it's only transient, no worries?". Really? To the point ... did we have a Mafia like crime group yet that shares major ideology with bomb wearing maniacs who see it their god given right to behead and kill otherwise as many infidels as they can find? Or are you going to tell me the way this group despises and disrespects anyone not of their own has nothing to do with that ideology? And that they will somehow magically integrate after all when they show not a single sign of that after three generations?

Yes. Because I'm an optimist that way. And because I refuse to punish entire ethnicities for the behaviour of a few individuals, which seems like a foreign concept to you.

Coincidentially, what do you think Italy would look like if the Italian government would treat the Mafia with the same kids gloves as our government is treating those large arab clans?

You... are not really familiar with italian politics, are you.

If only I could have your positive outlook, but I really can't see how the facts we got agree with it in any way. I mean ... you kinda have to agree at least on that last point, don't you? Or do you really see nothing wrong with the way the government is avoiding action against known criminal groups to the point of even denying the problem exists for the last couple of years? Cutting police budgets further and further and ignoring any cry for help from police personnel and judges alike?

I have my share of disagreements with the federal government and its tendency to ignore social issues, yes. But ultimately, I always come down on the side that doesn't demonize entire ethnicities or city districts or whatever.

P.S. Just wondering. Did you read Heisigs book yet? Please do if not.

No, I haven't, and no, I won't.

[Luis Dias]

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.

[NGTM-1R]

Did you read Heisigs book yet? Please do if not.

Please don't. It's a waste of time and mental effort. His work is overwhelming rejected outside of any circle of science that isn't also pushing racial holy war of some variety. He is beloved of people like ACT! for America, who are fond of calling Europe "Eurabia" because they think it makes them smart and more importantly they think it already describes a reality where Europe is secretly under Sharia Law right now.

Heisig is a moron and a bigot and an enabler of morons and bigots. If he speaks to you, you need to check yourself.

[666maslo666]

Ghettos and unassimilated enclaves are not necessarily a transient effect. For all the Irish, Italians and Jews in the US who assimilated well after some period, I can point to black people, gypsies in Europe or for example Albanians in Kosovo, where the assimilation wasnt so successful. Will current muslim immigrants in Europe belong in the former, or the latter group? I suspect its the latter and I sure as hell wont experiment with the future of my country by betting on the former. 40 years of socialism was enough experimenting.

[Mikes]

Did you read Heisigs book yet? Please do if not.

Please don't. It's a waste of time and mental effort. His work is overwhelming rejected outside of any circle of science that isn't also pushing racial holy war of some variety. He is beloved of people like ACT! for America, who are fond of calling Europe "Eurabia" because they think it makes them smart and more importantly they think it already describes a reality where Europe is secretly under Sharia Law right now.

Heisig is a moron and a bigot and an enabler of morons and bigots. If he speaks to you, you need to check yourself.

His? Kirsten Heisig is a her... and that appears to be hardly the only misconception in your post.

P.S. Just wondering. Did you read Heisigs book yet? Please do if not.

No, I haven't, and no, I won't.

Because?

Don't want to read a firsthand observation of a youth criminal judge in Neuköln?

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.


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.

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.

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?

[The E]

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.

Because?

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.

[666maslo666]

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?

Oh yes, it would actually make this situation vastly better. But at the same time, I agree that such extreme isolationism and discrimination would be unethical and could have some other negatives.

However, it is not necessary to go that far, thats just a strawman on your part. Because you dont need to send anyone praying to Mecca away to solve this issue. You just need to have strict immigration policy, and one that is actually enforced. A limited number of regulated, college educated, background checked and economically productive muslim immigrants is fine. A random bunch of two million muslims coming into Europe as happened last year, is not. Thats a recipe for ethnic trouble and a deeply divided society. And one that may or may not be only "transient". A huge gamble.

[Bobboau]

and dismantle Islam the same way Christianity has been in western nations. If Islam was treated with the same scepticism and disdain Christianity has been for the last 40 years, that would help things immensely, or it would have if we had started 10 years ago. It shares a huge overlap in apologetics with Christianity, and it's basic theology is the same just with more political and cultural stuff mixed in.

[Mikes]

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.

Mh ... looks like we're going in circles now, aren't we?

Hint: I did have a quite specific book in mind that outlines the problems and methods that lead to people from a very specific ethnic group being an incredible tough nut to crack, if not an impossible one. It takes a pretty objective view, on the basis of the actual crime statistics and addresses several groups of criminals, hardly singling out the one discussed here. The only thing that makes this specific group remarkable is how our legal system appears to be pretty much helpless when confronted with the methods of this specific group.

Yet... sadly this is the same book/source you don't want to read for some reason because you know it all better already or something. ;-)

Police Razzias are also pretty meaningless when there is pretty much a complete failure of the legal system waiting in court.

This isn't about good or evil or such nonsense ... this is about an utter inability of our legal system to effectively police a specific group of people for the last couple of decades and the consequences that are now manifesting.

The refugee crisis of course is kind of a catalyst, but the problems now surfacing are the results of decades of failed integration and policing policies.


The point however really is .... now that the refugee crysis is here we really can't go on as we did. We can't. The existing criminal structures are bad enough. Now enter the refugees, we are basically adding a huge amount of "angry young men/poor" with little perspective for the future.

Seriously... we really don't have a snowballs chance in hell to integrate them. Those large arab clans, those however are already busy integrating them perfectly into their criminal structures. They speak the language, they share the culture, and they offer easy answers for desperate people.

Those clans already have changed the face of several districts in major cities and if you think they'll stop here I frankly don't know what to say except I think that's naive.

And yes, I lost my optimism a while ago watching this crap unfold.

[Luis Dias]

Personally I have no solutions. I think it's a really wicked problem. I'm pretty sure the most basic, simple populist solutions are terrible, history shows this, fascism has failed. And that whatever the political solutions that have been made so far haven't worked out at all as well: Multiculturalism has failed. Worse than this, I think most politicians have no good ideas nor even good political frameworks (and parties) to work this out. I'm all ears for solutions, but every single thing I've heard or read so far is not convincing me. And even when good ideas are pointed out, it seems they are absolutely ignored by everyone involved.

So my best guess is that this is the new normal now. For a good while at least. I just hope this long storm passes through without any group gathering a WMD or something along those lines.

[GhylTarvoke]

Emphasis mine:

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.

Sadly, that factor is larger than most people will admit. Some issues surrounding it (e.g. extreme sexism) go straight to the core.

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.

I agree completely. Of course, the standard response would be that you're an Islamophobe, end of discussion.

[Luis Dias]

Only in stupid forums, like say, twitter. Or wider media politics. I don't expect that treatment here, so that's not the point. Even Obama is pointing all of this out in a very detailed manner:

… in private encounters with other world leaders, Obama has argued that there will be no comprehensive solution to Islamist terrorism until Islam reconciles itself to modernity and undergoes some of the reforms that have changed Christianity.
(...)
Obama described how he has watched Indonesia gradually move from a relaxed, syncretistic Islam to a more fundamentalist, unforgiving interpretation; large numbers of Indonesian women, he observed, have now adopted the hijab, the Muslim head covering.
(...)
[him:]
It is very clear what I mean, which is that there is a violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic interpretation of Islam by a faction … within the Muslim community that is our enemy, and that has to be defeated.
(...)
There is also the need for Islam as a whole to challenge that interpretation of Islam, to isolate it, and to undergo a vigorous discussion within their community about how Islam works as part of a peaceful, modern society.

My argument was this: Let’s all stop pretending that the cause of the Middle East’s problems is Israel. We want to work to help achieve statehood and dignity for the Palestinians, but I was hoping that my speech could trigger a discussion, could create space for Muslims to address the real problems they are confronting—problems of governance, and the fact that some currents of Islam have not gone through a reformation that would help people adapt their religious doctrines to modernity. My thought was, I would communicate that the U.S. is not standing in the way of this progress, that we would help, in whatever way possible, to advance the goals of a practical, successful Arab agenda that provided a better life for ordinary people.

So there. Even the so-called "pro-muslim US president" (by idiots of course) lays it all out correctly. I've yet to see anyone calling him an islamophobe for those comments. So while I do recognize what you are complaining about, I do think there's much more recognition of the problem than you think.

[Dragon]

Islam needs to modernize, but how exactly would you go about it? The refugees are lower class, which has historically been the last to change and the most conservative in terms of religion. Middle class in Arab countries is already getting better about this and the upper classes can be outright progressive. Except for the current Saudi king (a detestable old goat, if you ask me), Arab royalty and business leaders seem to be pretty reasonable. It's the rabble that causes most of the problems. Lower-class Catholics from Poland are capable of things usually associated with Islamic extremism when riled up enough. People like this are usually unable to even comprehend the harm they're doing and usually really bloody hard to reason with (and even if you do succeed, they'll revert right back once they hear a sermon reinforcing their original position).

I'm pretty sure the most basic, simple populist solutions are terrible, history shows this, fascism has failed.

Doesn't stop people from trying again, though. Sure, it's no solution, but if nobody comes up with anything, this is what we'll eventually fall back to. Cue 2034 rehashing 1934... And we all know how that ended up. Even hardline islamophobes should be wary of that outcome, as fascists have a tendency to expand the scope of their bigotry should they start running out of their original targets, so it isn't in anyone's interest in the long run.

[Luis Dias]

"it's the rabble that causes the most problems" yeah the rabble, if only they ate cake instead of complaining about bread amirite

[Dragon]

Say what you will, but I didn't see many sheiks, college graduates or corporate managers among the refugees. Their behavior so far has definitely qualifies them to be called rabble, at least as far as I'm concerned. It might sound like a certain outdated rhetoric, but it was just a statement of fact.

The point was that those who fail to integrate are mostly unintelligent, simple people. They cling to their religion and customs because they're too narrow-minded to see any other way of living. I've dealt with that kind of people before. Reasoning with them is pointless, even if you completely dismantle their stance using logical reasoning, they just shout "No, screw you!" and go on their way. This is why it's so hard to reform them.

The only way that I saw sort-of working is to dilute them and expose their children to enough "different ways" that they rebel against their parents (as children tend to do) and adopt the "local" ways. It's important to create a situation in which their kids will either conform to other, local kids or be lonely. Then you wait for the children to grow up and for the parents to die. However, if you allow them to form a large enough community (which is what's currently happening), they'll never change, since they'll be able to form social groups of "comfortable" size among themselves. And the problem will be getting worse, too.

With "native" minorities that don't integrate (and you're not enough of a prick to forcibly resettle them, or simply don't have enough space for that), the usual solution is to let them form their own state. The refugees are not natives, though, this is not their land, so I wouldn't consider that much a solution.