[Mustang19]

Now that might be a valid explanation. But it's still a toss up between mores versus economy/immigration, in the absence of evidence either way.

[The E]

Just to interject here, but this statement:

even in ones with minimal non-European immigration until recently (like Germany)

is just flat out wrong, given the large number of turkish (West Germany) and asian (East Germany) immigrants. Germany's economic turnaround in the 50s and 60s was largely enabled by actively inviting millions of immigrants, and it was only recently that the immigration laws were made more strict. After WW2, Germany became an immigration country, and is attracting people from all over the place.

Also note that the official crime statistics show that, while immigrants as a whole make up a disproportionately large slice of the criminal population, that same slice is getting thinner every year.

[Mustang19]

Just to interject here, but this statement:

even in ones with minimal non-European immigration until recently (like Germany)

is just flat out wrong, given the large number of turkish (West Germany) and asian (East Germany) immigrants. Germany's economic turnaround in the 50s and 60s was largely enabled by actively inviting millions of immigrants, and it was only recently that the immigration laws were made more strict. After WW2, Germany became an immigration country, and is attracting people from all over the place.

Also note that the official crime statistics show that, while immigrants as a whole make up a disproportionately large slice of the criminal population, that same slice is getting thinner every year.

Turks still made up merely 2-3% of the population until 1980.

[BlueFlames]

Haha look at this ****ing heatmap

Yeah those crime hotspots are clearly related primarily to the breakdown of family values. Must be all those radical leftist immigrants.

Woo!  Look at Tennessee!  Guns don't kill people, but they sure as hell help!

[The E]

For the purposes of this discussion, I do not give a flying **** about stuff that happened before I was born. I mean, I can understand why you would not understand that stance, given that you're just 12, but hey.

I would have to remind you, then, that a) Germany isn't America, b) our total population is just a bit more than a third of the US, c) that a fifth of the 80 million people currently living here have non-german ancestors, and d) as I have pointed out, Germany only became a centre of immigration AFTER WW2.

[Mustang19]

c) that a fifth of the 80 million people currently living here have non-german ancestors, and d) as I have pointed out, Germany only became a centre of immigration AFTER WW2.

Yeah, but most of those immigrants are Europeans and I don't think they are particularly responsible for any crime waves. You would be the one to enlighten me if they are.

[Luis Dias]

There are many historical factors that we may not even be thinking about. GB talked about immigration and drugs, someone mentioned abortion for the recent decrease in murder rates. We could also mention that there's a big history lurking before the sixties. Perhaps, as you said, there were tougher moral doctrines imposed on everyone, and so the thought of shooting people was supressed more efficiently. Perhaps the hippy times did unleash unpleasant hidden violent drives that suddenly stopped being so suppressed.

But it could also have to do with the second world war' long term effects on the population (perhaps the violent people of that generation were most likely killed or traumatized during the war, perhaps many other explanations). Or it could have to do with the sheer optimism in the 50s that the crime rates in that decade were so low then. The seventies were very pessimistic, by contrast. We had peak oil, mad max scenarios to look up to, usa had vietnam, the cold war, etc. Blacks also started to make a fight for their rigths and that involved a lot of violence too.

Idk, I just see so many variables, that to try to pin it down to a simple explanation of the thing really needs a ****ing brilliant mind.

[Nuclear1]

c) that a fifth of the 80 million people currently living here have non-german ancestors, and d) as I have pointed out, Germany only became a centre of immigration AFTER WW2.

Yeah, but most of those immigrants are Europeans and I don't think they are particularly responsible for any crime waves. You would be the one to enlighten me if they are.

Why do you think they're not responsible for crime waves?

[Luis Dias]

Why do you think they're not responsible for crime waves?

They are white. 

[Mustang19]

I assume that they're less discriminated against and can fit into society, like the difference between living in the US as an Australian versus living in the US as a Mexican or Ethiopian. In other words, because they're white and they're given a warmer welcome.

[The E]

Only a 12-year-old american could say that. Yep, geographically speaking, turks, poles, russians, all of them are europeans. Culturally speaking? Not so much. The german government didn't actually do anything to help them integrate into german society for quite some time, causing a ****load of social friction, unhappiness, disenfranchisement, all the nice things that make it easy for subcultures to form that encourage antisocial behaviour. So yeah, crime waves. There's a reason why people with immigrant background are overrepresented in the prison population. Oh, and then there's that little insignificant thingie that happened around 1989, you know, that wall that was broken down? I mean, you can't remember it from personal experience, since you were just born then, so ask your parents. Maybe they can explain it to you. Let's just say that there's a good reason why the crime rate peaked in 1991.

I assume that they're less discriminated against and can fit into society, like the difference between living in the US as an Australian versus living in the US as a Mexican or Ethiopian. In other words, because they're white and they're given a warmer welcome.

Wrong. Wrong, wrong wrong.  Look up american history, and how irish immigrants were treated. Same mechanism, only with less overt racism.

[Mustang19]

Point conceded. But immigration doesn't explain the entire crime trend; even the native population, in the US at least, is committing more crimes.

[Nuclear1]

Pretty much anyone who wasn't a white Protestant from Western Europe got the butt end of some discrimination in American history.  Of course now we look back on a lot of those groups and wonder why we ever hated them in the first place.

even the native population, in the US at least, is committing more crimes.

1)  Economic downturns
2)  Perceived threats to American society and values

Two simple explanations for a lot of native crime in the US.

[Mustang19]

Crime rate's been going up even in Japan, minimal immigration, low unemployment, still a net exporter. Hm.

edit: Yes I know the Japanese economy sucks, but unemployment is still 5% like it was before things got ****ed up.

2)  Perceived threats to American society and values

Wait... people feel their values threatened, so they're going to commit more crimes? That's a novel theory. Explain.

For 1), there are no more downturns today than there were any time in the past, and one of the remarkable features of the 2007 GFC was that crime rates remained almost unchanged.

[The E]

There are a few more factors to consider. One would be reporting rate. Not all crimes get reported, but as people get more and more connected and more able to communicate, reporting rates go up. Two, number of acts termed criminal. Three, shift towards a more urbanized society (If you're living in a small village getting away with a crime is infinitely harder than using the anonymity of a big city as a cover).

[Mustang19]

The difference is pretty big- an over fivefold increase. As we've discussed earlier a rise in urbanization alone probably can't account for the increase and there would have to be pretty massive under reporting for it to be a data collection error.

[General Battuta]

Now that might be a valid explanation. But it's still a toss up between mores versus economy/immigration, in the absence of evidence either way.

It's not a toss up because a complex explanation that jives with similar historical explanations for national or global trends is simply more probable than a univariate explanation which has never worked for any phenomenon I'm aware of.

I can't think of a single thing in history that can be explained by a change in mores alone.

Also I just want to address that Amish thing. If you made the entire country Amish it would either turn into a system exactly like what we have today or explode in flames and starvation death. It's not comparable.

[Luis Dias]

That story is not well told, mustang. Japan has, according to the link you gave, a completely backwards story to the western countries.

In the sixties, crime soared in the west, and not in japan. Now it is soaring in japan and decreasing in the west.

But frankly, how can anyone look at this picture:



... and say that the "degeneration" of our culture is the prime suspect?




.... and then there's this ghastly picture I found in the nets....



...which makes little sense to me, since america is one of the bloodiest countries, and also the country with most incarcerations. So what works as a negative correlation inside the country, is simply not true if we compare it to the rest of the world.

[Nuke]

war and violence is what we do, were the new rome. now i want mah gladitorial combat and mah torture-executions.

[Mustang19]

Luis, Japan has always been a collectivist culture - it has in the past and continues to have a low crime rate compared to the West - and this helped it buffer the 60s spike, but by the 90s people were losing interest in the work ethic, the prestige of the Sarariman was falling, people were saving less, and this all might point to some loss of cultural values.

It's not a toss up because a complex explanation that jives with similar historical explanations for national or global trends is simply more probable than a univariate explanation which has never worked for any phenomenon I'm aware of.

It's not univariate, there is a lot involved in the formation and transmission of "social mores" beyond a single concept. And there is no more evidence of drugs/immigration/economics "working for any phenomenon" to a greater degree.

Also I just want to address that Amish thing. If you made the entire country Amish it would either turn into a system exactly like what we have today or explode in flames and starvation death. It's not comparable.

 The Amish aren't against all technology, just ones which disrupt their lifestyle. They still have a light manufacturing industry, use some aspects of modern agriculture, and so on. You wouldn't have video games anymore but there wouldn't be any flames or starvation either. Of course this is assuming everyone voluntarily decided to live Amish, you can't force something like this.