Brussels Terror Attacks: Islamist Jihadist Terrorists Strike Again

502 posts in this topic

EI: are you really optimistic about the undocumented young Francophone North African men roaming around Germany right now? I refer here to economic migrants not refugees. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

The majority of American Muslim communities are highly integrated, economically successful, and mostly cooperative with the authorities, and have followed a development path similar to that of the Irish, Italians, etc.  By the way, some of these communities were blamed for all manner of social danger in their day, and integration of them wasn't immediate but took decades.  It took decades for Italians to be considered just plain "white" and desirable neighbours and all that.  The US situation now is not comparable to (a few of the) Paris suburbs; the extent to which US society is "inclusion-oriented" for immigrant communities (if flawed) can't be compared to the problems in France.  I am much more optimistic about the possibilities for the current refugee influx than for the original North African francophone influx.

You know why?

I would guess because the system there is not 'come in, we will accommodate you', but 'welcome, now fit in'.

 

Maybe that kept the numbers down and allowed integration - integration also involves working - it is hard to find work for 1 million people in a country with 2 million unemployed.

 

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, john g. said:

EI: are you really optimistic about the undocumented young Francophone North African men roaming around Germany right now? I refer here to economic migrants not refugees. 

 

Their problem is bad incentives.  If they go home, they'll never get back in again.

 

But people would have the same complaint even if we were talking about actual Syrian/Iraqi/Afghan/Eritrean refugees, because there's quite a lot of them too, don't forget.

 

2 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

You know why?

I would guess because the system there is not 'come in, we will accommodate you', but 'welcome, now fit it'.

 

An ocean helps.  You get the geography you get, not the geography you want.

 

2 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

 

Maybe that kept the numbers down and allowed integration - integration also involves working - it is hard to find work for 1 million people in a country with 2 million unemployed.

 

 

That is another story.  There's no reason other than political why Europe is not at full employment. There can always be employment -- it's not like there isn't an infinity of things that need doing.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps integration of Muslims in the USA has gone relatively well...due to the low numbers...an ocean as E.I puts it?  

 

There is power in numbers...and THAT is the concern.

 

I am already infuriated that there is allowable call to prayer anywhere in the U.S.A., as there is in large population Muslim communities.  It should never been alllowed to happen...feel free to use an app, but religion has NO right to be broadcast throughout a community. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

 

Might be a good time for Impulse to tell us which Muslim cultural and religious practices he is personally opposed to but thinks Western societies should accomodate.

 

You may have once heard (I think) Metall and I commiserate about the (comparatively recent) hijab fad?  Yes, I even find the hijab popularity somewhat problematic and remember when it became something that young Muslim women started wearing to declare their identity and rebel against their parents or whatever rather than something that old grandmothers did. But, I also once had a coworker in a professional environment who had made a little goatee out of pointy chin piercings *shudder* and it was his perfect right to do so as far as I'm concerned.  ie, people have the right to do all kinds of things in their personal space.

 

In Canada, many years ago, I had a haircut at a hairdressing academy, and a tightly hijabed middle-aged woman walked in, not a teenager this time but a recent immigrant.  She timidly asked if she could register with the academy, and then asked if she could do so without having to cut men's hair.  The academy owner agreed.  I don't agree with her desire not to cut all kinds of hair as a hairdresser, but on the other hand, she was doing something with her life, taking steps to financial independence, and maybe her daughters would get university degrees...who knows?  All I know is that that hairdressing instructor did the world some good by not insisting that that woman leave her comfort zone.

 

But I don't get the point of your question or what it's supposed to prove.  I told you months ago that liberal societies ought to accommodate people's quirks insofar as they remain in their own personal spaces, even if the motives for those quirks aren't that liberal.  It's a relatively simple principle and doesn't require an anthropological tour of the Annoying Things That Those Weird People Do.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gemini said:

Perhaps integration of Muslims in the USA has gone realiatvely well...due to the low numbers...an ocean as E.I puts it?  

 

Well it's still several million concentrated somewhat into particular areas.  I don't think you can ignore the general legacy and rhetoric in many parts of the USA of simultaneous active inclusion and minding your own business that seems to be more absent in Europe. 

 

11 minutes ago, gemini said:

 

There is power in numbers...and THAT is the concern.

 

I am already infuriated that there is allowable call to prayer anywhere in the U.S.A., as there is in large population Muslim communities.  It should never been alllowed to happen...feel free to use an app, but religion has NO right to be broadcast throughout a community. 

 

That's free speech for you.  You couldn't have e.g., a nationwide minaret ban in the USA, because it would be struct down under first-amendment grounds.  Likewise, you couldn't prevent communities from deciding to ring church bells, calls to prayer, etc.  There's lots to criticize about the USA, but this letting people do things attitude is one of its better points.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always worth remembering

 

On days like today to remind everyone that the guys blowing up Brussels are THE PEOPLE THE REFUGEES ARE RUNNING AWAY FROM!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already stated this is a previous post E.I...but there is a HUGE difference to me between church bells...that are a melodical sound (and yes I know there is a Christian connotation even with that sound though it is mostly used to denote the time at this point) versus actual "call" to "God" in a language.  Which is unaccepible to me under the separation of Church and State.  

 

I have no issue with Mosques being built...therefore Minarets.   

 

I do expect people to assimilate without having their hands held. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Alcala said:

@Eupathic Impulse so are the Pakistanis in UK integrated? Or can we group them in with French problem children?

 

I don't know, there seems to be some similarity there. It's hard to get reliable statistics on France as they forbid, apparently, identity-based official statistic collection, so a comparison is difficult. 

 

However, here's a France-USA comparison: http://www.ibtimes.com/why-do-american-muslims-fare-better-their-french-counterparts-2189449

 

Quote

 

Pluralism Breeds Integration

Experts say the ethos of American society -- which favors pluralism but does not squash individual identity or religion -- is also conducive to integration. France, on the other hand, prizes the concept of laïcité, or a strict sense of secularism that aims to keep religion out of public life. It’s that principle that has led France to ban French schoolgirls from wearing the headscarf in school, for example, that often makes French Muslims feel as though they must give up their Muslim identity to assume a French one.

“Unity in France is achieved at the expense of the affirmation of differences. As long as French does not solve its larger identity crisis, religious minorities -- especially Muslims -- will always be seen as a threat to French unity,” says Rim-Sarah Alouane, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Toulouse who studies French Muslim youth and religious freedom.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SpiderPig said:

Always worth remembering

 

On days like today to remind everyone that the guys blowing up Brussels are THE PEOPLE THE REFUGEES ARE RUNNING AWAY FROM!!!

It didn't work then...

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

The majority of American Muslim communities are highly integrated, economically successful, and mostly cooperative with the authorities, and have followed a development path similar to that of the Irish, Italians, etc.  By the way, some of these communities were blamed for all manner of social danger in their day, and integration of them wasn't immediate but took decades.  It took decades for Italians to be considered just plain "white" and desirable neighbours and all that.  The US situation now is not comparable to (a few of the) Paris suburbs; the extent to which US society is "inclusion-oriented" for immigrant communities (if flawed) can't be compared to the problems in France.  I am much more optimistic about the possibilities for the current refugee influx than for the original North African francophone influx.

As usual, the Impulse has glossed over or ignored a number of key differences. First of all, a large portion of US Muslims are African-Americans rather than immigrants from the Middle East or their descendants (you'd have to check the actual percentage, but it may be as high as 30-40%). Second, a very large portion of Muslims with refugee status in the US are Somalis, who are not, as a group, highly integrated and economically successful. Third, it is certainly true that Muslims in the US are more economically successful than those in Western Europe, but you'd also have to control for educational levels, the large proportion of African Americans (who are part of the native population), and greater flexibility in the US economy (plus it could be that the US attracts the more enterprising Middle Eastern Muslims). I imagine that US Muslims may well be more cooperative with law enforcement than their European cousins, and it would be interesting to explore why; however, the larger point remains- the Impulse has overstated the integration of US Muslims, particularly those who came as refugees (especially relevant to the current situation in Europe), hence it cannot be used as an analog for his open borders demands for Western Europe, much less Eastern Europe.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, airwave said:
1 hour ago, Alcala said:

@Eupathic Impulse so are the Pakistanis in UK integrated? Or can we group them in with French problem children?

In terms of wider cultural underpinning Pakistanis are same as Arabs. However

- British Pakistanis are slightly better than North Africans in terms of socio-economic stand.

- British Pakistanis are visible minority, unlike Caucasian (White) North Africans. They find it tougher to camouflage than Arabs. Contentious topic, but true : Arab men fit very much into European masculine beauty norms. Arabs would perhaps feature as the top of the chart among European women in relationship with non-European men. Many enter Europe as love-rats and toyboys and exploit the inane "right to family life" laws

- Pakistanis are lower rung in Muslim World for being later convert and darker skinned. And Qatari-Saudi funded Liberal rags are less likely to do rabble rousing for Pakistani's "rights" as much they would do for Arabs.

- Pakistanis are physically weaker, numerically fewer and less connected than their Arab counterparts.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gemini said:

I have already stated this is a previous post E.I...but there is a HUGE difference to me between church bells...that are a melodical sound (and yes I know there is a Christian connotation even with that sound though it is mostly used to denote the time at this point) versus actual "call" to "God".  Which is unaccepible to me under the separation of Church and State.  

 

The separation of Church and State in the USA is merely that the government doesn't pick favorites among religions or actively work to implement religious law.  It isn't freedom from exposure to the presence of religion in public.  I think it works.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll interrupt this conversation to say that Himself just heard on TV that ISIS is now claiming responsibility for whatever it was we were talking about.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

The separation of Church and State in the USA is merely that the government doesn't pick favorites among religions or actively work to implement religious law.  It isn't freedom from exposure to the presence of religion in public.  I think it works.

Worth also noting that the separation of church and state should also mean religious types are not in charge of passing laws.

 

If you do not have that, you get the situation you have in some Islamic countries (women not allowed to drive, segregation in class etc).

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

You may have once heard (I think) Metall and I commiserate about the (comparatively recent) hijab fad?  Yes, I even find the hijab popularity somewhat problematic and remember when it became something that young Muslim women started wearing to declare their identity and rebel against their parents or whatever rather than something that old grandmothers did. But, I also once had a coworker in a professional environment who had made a little goatee out of pointy chin piercings *shudder* and it was his perfect right to do so as far as I'm concerned.  ie, people have the right to do all kinds of things in their personal space.

 

In Canada, many years ago, I had a haircut at a hairdressing academy, and a tightly hijabed middle-aged woman walked in, not a teenager this time but a recent immigrant.  She timidly asked if she could register with the academy, and then asked if she could do so without having to cut men's hair.  The academy owner agreed.  I don't agree with her desire not to cut all kinds of hair as a hairdresser, but on the other hand, she was doing something with her life, taking steps to financial independence, and maybe her daughters would get university degrees...who knows?  All I know is that that hairdressing instructor did the world some good by not insisting that that woman leave her comfort zone.

 

But I don't get the point of your question or what it's supposed to prove.  I told you months ago that liberal societies ought to accommodate people's quirks insofar as they remain in their own personal spaces, even if the motives for those quirks aren't that liberal.  It's a relatively simple principle and doesn't require an anthropological tour of the Annoying Things That Those Weird People Do.

Let me give you one situation I've encountered, and maybe you can suggest a way to ameliorate it. A decade ago, I was a student at a university in the US that had a very large number of Muslims. One day I happened to need a book in a part of the main campus library which had been commandered by male Muslims as a prayer area (they had all sorts of prayer rugs on the floor and would pray there after washing their feet in the adjacent bathroom). Three of their enforcers cornered me and told me that I had to leave because they were about to pray (it was time for the third prayer of the day). I made it clear to them that I would file a complaint against them for harassment with the campus police if they did not leave me alone. They sort of backed down, but hovered impatiently nearby as I browsed the stacks and they watched to ensure that I would leave.

 

That's not a quirk, that is intimidation. The only other time I went to that part of the library I made sure to have two other people with me.

 

In some cases, it won't be a problem to accomomodate some  Muslim religious or cultural practices, but that isn't the case for all of them (and, yes, gender separation is among the most problematic). To give one example of the difficulty in accomodating some practices, there are currently some cases of Muslim factory workers in the US insisting that they be given breaks to pray during their shifts despite the disruption it causes.

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are just so many unchecked assertions here, it's hard to know where to begin, and exhausting to check every single one of them.

 

4 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

As usual, the Impulse has glossed over or ignored a number of key differences. First of all, a large portion of US Muslims are African-Americans rather than immigrants from the Middle East or their descendants (you'd have to check the actual percentage, but it may be as high as 30-40%).

 

Wikipedia will tell you that at last count 28% are black, but not tell you how many of them are actually "African-American" in the sense that they have ancestors of many generations in the USA.  (hint: not all of them)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_States

 

4 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

Second, a very large portion of Muslims with refugee status in the US are Somalis, who are not, as a group, highly integrated and economically successful.

 

With refugee status, we are talking about recent communities (starting from the 90s, and some even more recent).  No one claimed that any of the refugees  (aka people who are more likely than otherwise to start with few resources) would get rich immediately.

 

4 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

Third, it is certainly true that Muslims in the US are more economically successful than those in Western Europe, but you'd also have to control for educational levels, the large proportion of African Americans (who are part of the native population), and greater flexibility in the US economy (plus it could be that the US attracts the more enterprising Middle Eastern Muslims).

 

45% of immigrant Muslims in the USA have 50K$+ incomes, which is well higher than the US average.  There's nothing specially enterprising about Middle Eastern Muslims---many of successful ones in the USA are *drum roll* Pakistanis.

 

4 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

 

I imagine that US Muslims may well be more cooperative with law enforcement than their European cousins, and it would be interesting to explore why: however, the larger point remains- the Impulse has overstated the integration of US Muslims, particularly those who came as refugees (especially relevant to the current situation in Europe), hence it cannot be used as an analog for his open borders demands for Western Europe, much less Eastern Europe.

 

My open borders idea is not a "demand", dude -- a "demand" would require that there be some possibility of implementation, which there isn't.  I merely point out some of the bad incentives and moral dilemmas created by a violent border enforcement regime and suggest that many of them are actually avoidable.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

Let me give you one situation I've encountered, and maybe you can suggest a way to ameliorate it. A decade ago, I was a student at a university in the US that had a very large number of Muslims. One day I happened to need a book in a part of the main campus library which had been commandered by male Muslims as a prayer area (they had all sorts of prayer rugs on the floor and would pray there after washing their feet in the adjacent bathroom). Three of their enforcers cornered me and told me that I had to leave because they were about to pray (it was time for the third prayer of the day). I made it clear to them that I would file a complaint against them for harassment with the campus police if they did not leave me alone. They sort of backed down, but hovered impatiently nearby as I browsed the stacks and they watched to ensure that I would leave.

 

That's not a quirk, that is intimidation. The only other time I went to that part of the library I made sure to have two other people with me.

 

In some cases, it won't be a problem to accomomodate some  Muslim religious or cultural practices, but that isn't the case for all of them (and, yes, gender separation is among the most problematic). To give one example of the difficulty in accomodating some practices, there are currently some cases of Muslim factory workers in the US insisting that they be given breaks to pray during their shifts despite the disruption it causes.

 

This is why we have separation of religion and state - so that intimidation does not become law...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@rohit_2543, I did not say any of that.

Would you mind fixing your message/quote?

 

Thanks!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now