Most “Muslims” in Sweden are irreigious: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Sweden#Demography
Not only that but 20% of Swedes are not muslim. 10% of Swedes are immigrants and I severly doubt that the largely atheist white population has been converted to Islam.
I always laugh at these estimates of muslims/arabs/spanish/catholic/irish/italian/german/black etc will be the majority by this date because they are coming or giving birth at this rate etc etc etc.
Yet what seems to happen time and time again? The germans came to america, and only spoke german at first. The even had their own german newspapers. It was believed that Americans would all eventually be speaking german. Yet oddly enough, even though a majority of whites in America are of german descent, only a minority actively still speak german. Cultures/people naturally get assimilated.
No shit. Like all the people freaking out about “Eurabia”. History has shown that if the people are allowed to integrate, they will learn the language, mix with the local populations, probably throw in a few words from their mothertongue (for things like food) and everyone lives happily ever after.
My mother’s side of the family is like that. They sure had some “encouragement” to assimilate during WWI, however…
Exactly. It would be incorrect to state they have no influence, the “standard/def facto” culture will influenced, in that either things will be changed or be added or some perhaps even disappear e.g language, customs, traditions etc But the vast majority of its current structure will remain unchanged (in terms of analyzing the effects of growing minorities).
Yes, unfortunately, that was both the state and the people, although if the state had avoided its mass propaganda, they may not have felt that “encouragement”.
I’d hate to be the party pooper, but …
I don’t think the development of Muslim communities in contemporary Europe is comparable to other, intra-European migratory processes of the past.
First of all, there is an astonishing tendency among this group to immigrate directly into the welfare system of those European nations which harbor most of them today. One of the most pressing factors when it comes to cultural assimilation is the need to learn the new language to get along in one’s job - a factor that has been mitigated, if not completely eradicated by generous welfare payments of European governments. Add to that the fact that welfare payments often adjust to the number of children in a family, and you have an incentive structure that promotes a whopping growth of locked, separated communities.
Additionally, the gap between the liberal Judeo-Christian culture (yeah, I know how objectionable this term may be, but it conveys best what I mean) of Europe and hierarchical Islamic societal structures is way, way bigger than the differences between a German immigrant in the US and his US-born neighbors. It leads to grotesque scenarios, such as liberal Europeans bending over to make their Islamic guests feel at home while conservative Muslim daddies consider it a disgrace for their daughters to socialize with said Europeans.
You know, it may all be a product of the welfare state, but what you have is a growing community of dependent, yet condescending Muslim citizens who are certainly not afraid to use the electoral system against the hand that feeds them once their numbers are large enough. I don’t mean to say that all European Muslims are like that, I personally know a number of very kind and congenial Muslims, but it’s a tendency that cannot be denied, in my opinion. So, just idly waiting for our Muslim friends to become like us may be Europe’s first-class ticket down the primrose path …
Is it only tendancy among that group? Or all groups? I think the difference of todas welfare system is a point worth noting.
However, I want you to show me a source which shows how many muslims claim welfare as opposed to other immigrants and the domestic population. Also how many do you think work, but also claim benefits?
I don’t believe you read through my post properly. I noted the german immigrants in america. They spoke german, had german newspapers, didn’t speak english. I think your mistaken in attributing the welfare state to the establishment of an islamic community. That is natural all over the world. The domestic population does this. Rich live/associate with rich, gated communities, religious small towns etc etc etc. Yet over the years they are all still able to interact and communicate in the market place.
I also severely disagree with your point about muslims working and speaking the language. I see them speaking english, danish and swedish in each relative country. I see them working. And don’t think that I have only had limited contact. I used to go to a school in england that had an extremely large Pakistani community
.
I believe the point your making is the gap is too large to bridged? But what of the gap chinese and japanese immigrants to america? Catholic Hispanics? Tribal blacks?
It seems they have all been assimilated, some better than others. Even given the differences, I still don’t think it matters. Look at hindu indians in Britain. They work and speak english.
Sometimes they have cause to be pissed off. They don’t start ever fight.
Overall however, your arguments are not arguments that the state should intervene against immigrants. But that instead the state should refrain from acting. Still even with state intervention, I’m just not worried. If I one day must speak spanish to get what I want, or speak english but pay a “higher price”, then so be it.
I think we agree that welfare statism promotes a general tendency to become dependent. As for specific sources, there’s the classic What Does Muslim Immigration Cost Europe? by Jihad Watch which claims that
An estimated cost of immigration of 225 billion Swedish kroner in 2004, which is not unlikely, would equal 17.5% of Sweden’s tax income
, among other things.
Yet over the years they are all still able to interact and communicate in the market place.
And it remains to be hoped that the same will be true for Muslim communities; yet there have been historic precedents where an initially small group of secluded Muslim conquerors slowly, but steadily enslaved domestic populations, making them dhimmis in the process.
I don’t mean to say there is a Muslim conspiracy to achieve this goal; but it may eventually become a tendency, perhaps one pursued only by single individuals, but enforced through the dynamic of Muslim social structures.
I see them speaking english, danish and swedish in each relative country.
Especially among women not born in Europe, knowledge of domestic languages seems to be very superficial, if existent at all. But my personal experiences may taint my general observation here.
But what of the gap chinese and japanese immigrants to america? Catholic Hispanics? Tribal blacks?
Asian immigrants are often living in their own ethnic communities as well, but seem to fare well in competitive markets which earns them respect. Hispanic and European culture are somewhat intermingled. As for tribal blacks, I don’t really know.
The bottom line, I think, is still that forced redistribution in welfare states impedes productive exchange between peoples and cultures. It creates an “us vs them” mentality instead of a system of mutually beneficial exchange.
Sometimes they have cause to be pissed off. They don’t start ever fight.
Yeah, I definitely dislike how the “anti-Islamists” in Europe totally overlook US military penetration of Arab nations and brush it off as “a necessary measure against terrorism” which, of course, has no conncection whatsoever to the perpetuation and even intensification of religious and political violence around the world. It’s frustrating.
Overall however, your arguments are not arguments that the state should intervene against immigrants. But that instead the state should refrain from acting.
Yes. I believe that with drastic cuts in the welfare state, many problems concerning immigration could be solved without employing “kick-them-out” methods. Then, we’d see whether I was misinformed by anti-Islamists about the nature of our Muslim friends or whether it’s all been a scam indeed. 
I guarantee it’s the welfare state that is to blame. Compare American and Canadian Muslims with European Muslims. North American Muslims are quickly integrated (out of economic necessity, if nothing else), in contrast to European Muslims.
This is unfair. Muslims in America are invited economic immigrants, skilled middle-class professionals from the elite in their country. Muslims in Europe are just migrant laborers who managed to stay in place and keep bringing in more of through smuggler rings along the Mediterranean. They are lower-class.
The equivalent to America is the Latino.
This isn’t entirely the case. There are Muslims in America that are lower class as well. And not all Latino’s are poor lower class in America. I can guarantee you that isn’t the case at all. If you look at all the people who live in Latino Ghetto’s, the common thread is that they fail to integrate into our society. A large portion of them can’t even speak the native language. People who fail to integrate into a society are of course stuck being supported by the welfare state of whatever country they live in. They can’t find jobs because of lack of education, language barriers, and the inability to make social contacts outside their own communities. Furthermore, if you look at the poor education system in America, a free guaranteed education doesn’t help at all because there is no actual attempt to help lift people out of their welfare dependency.
You have describe Europe’s muslim underclass.
I wonder if it is really helpful to think in terms of Muslim immigration. Muslim immigrants in Western Europe come from a variety of cultures and while I claim no knowledge on the subject I can not imagine the outcome being the same for all.
How many of the “hardworking Asians and Indians” are in fact Moslem? Do Bosnian Muslims and Turks live comparable lives? How about Albanians and Algerians? Africans and Pakistanis?
Fair enough, but Latinos get integrated quickly, with the third generation often knowing English far better than Spanish. Sure, they keep their Catholicism and other minor aspects that hearken back to Latin America, but for all intents and purposes become “American” very quickly.
Isn’t the issue we are talking about though? You said in a previous post that it is unfair to blame the welfare state for that. I have just made the argument for how it is at least in part a problem with the welfare state. What I am saying is that the people who immigrate to other countries and cannot themselves integrate into the native population, have no hope of getting out of lower class social status. And, you have that just as much in any part of a migrating culture here in America.
The point, they choose not to integrate themselves into a culture. They are not turned away at the gates and told they are not allowed to be a part of it. As it is here in America with Latinos, it is thusly like that in Europe with the Muslim Population. An argument has been made here that they are thrust into the underclass of a society. But why not all of them then? Why not just turn them away, a nation doesn’t need poor dependent non native members to push it forward. Like Latinos in America, there are Latino politicians, business owners and entrepreneurs. I am sure Muslim versions of these people exist in Europe as well. All of these successful immigrant people are such because they didn’t limit themselves to only staying within their cultural norms, but expanded themselves to include the new culture they have chosen to exist in.
So, there really is no hope of Muslims “taking over” in any place they decide to immigrate to, if for no other reason than if they choose to not integrate, they will live as poor underclass state dependent citizens.
Sorry, I thought you argued that the absence of a welfare system lead to Muslim integration in America.
You guys sound confused on a chicken and egg analogy between immigration and welfare, as if the two are intertwined. A very typical republican argument.
We don’t have welfare because of immigrants. We have welfare because we culturally accept socialism and as a result vote such measures in. Many immigrants don’t even vote on the matter. We voted on welfare first. It can not be concluded in absolute that we have immigrants souly based on our welfare status.
Recent studies show that our immigration issues were a result for high labor demand in addition to increasing minimum wage laws. It’s a form of convenient outsourcing for local business’s really. More specifically it’s been the housing industries boom that may have been the culprit of heavy Latin American immigration. We had the jobs and they were willing to fill that need in the market. The fact that our country fosters better living conditions comes after the fact that immigrants come here for work. Conversely since the housing bubble burst we now observe that immigration from Latin America has dropped sharply, correlated with a steep drop in demand for labor in the housing industry. (There was a reason why illegals flocked to hardware stores to get work, Lowes, Builders Square, ect…) I’d like to point out that as a country, you would rather have immigration issues as opposed to emigration issues.
Back to the sidetopic at hand. Some theorize that a certain type of invasion occurs based on heavy quantities of immigration. The issue however comes with how people, being a social animal, creates various connections with supposed ‘illegals’. It doesn’t take but one or two generations for those ‘illegals’ to quickly become legal natives bread into the nation.
How can you invade a country by massive immigration? Do the immigrants burn and pillage or are they offering some economic output? Is it still an invasion after 1 or 2 generations? At which time breading has already heavily resulted between the two culturs. Are the half native/alien children also a part of that invasion?
What are you scared of, that a mass influx of immigrations will jeopardize your freedom? Are you scared they will vote disastrous political policies? Well is that not an argument against a stupid governmental system and not the supposed ‘naive’ immigrant himself? The intellectual and economic result of voting always results the lowest common denominator, thats not the immigrants fault. Especially if he/she didn’t vote.
Why is it that people void the application of economics from the peripheral view of immigration and treat it as a special exception?
Read the Law Comparative Advantage
This is a good post. Ghetto’s happen to all majority and minorities alike. Despite a cultures intellectual history a ghetto will always foster a state of despair. This is the result of governmental welfare. This is why you usually see these conditions around ‘projects’.
A good cinematic example appears to be district 9. Where a super race from space, able to construct inter-gallactic space devices, fall subject to the same consequences of living in a state run concentration camp. Fiction I know but a nice parallel.
Not at all, we tied social welfare being given to immigrants and that is a system that keeps them state dependent, ultimately making it harder for them to integrate into foreign societies.
I know we have social welfare systems because societies always seem to accept socialized ideas. No one said there is immigrants because of social welfare at all. We have immigrants because people grow unhappy living where they are and want to go to some place better. People most likely choose to move to a foreign land because they see opportunity where no such opportunity may exist in their homeland. Your right, most immigrants don’t even vote on the matter. I wouldn’t mind seeing what would happen if they themselves voiced their opinions and they didn’t have some politician telling everyone what this or that immigrant minority wants or needs.
I can’t agree more with you on this point. The fact is, migrant workers are the only sector of the American working class that is willing to take wages competitively. It’s not minimum wage that flocks them here, at least not entirely. You have no legal right to minimum wage if your not a citizen, you don’t even have a right to work here some would argue. I don’t totally agree with either side, but the fact that immigrants come to America and take jobs that no one here wants but need to be done says a lot about whatever culture they may in fact come from. Also, I agree with you again, if poor immigrants from poor countries do not see opportunity here, what chance do the rest of us have. Immigration problems are welcome, but as you said, immigration is down, but no only is it down, emigration is up.
I don’t know if it’s possible to invade or conquer with immigration. When a land conquered another land in ancient Greece for example, they would often wipe out a portion of the population, insert their own government, salt a portion of the farmland so the native people of that land becomes partially dependent on the inserted government, and often times outlaw the native tongue. You don’t see that this way. It essentially doesn’t matter how many Latino’s “invade” America. You only end up with a mesh of the cultures, which is nothing like invading and conquering another land.
I don’t think anyone is afraid of that per se. But, there is definitely an issue with expanding the welfare state even larger in my opinion. Can an expansion of such a state jeopardize someone’s freedom and rights? I think so, any apparatus that grows a central government will not be increasing freedom at all, but will only end up requiring more money from it’s citizens. I don’t think anyone has voided the application of economics when it comes to immigration, but when you insert an ever growing ignorant and under educated class of people into an already overtaxed and mostly broken system, how is this aiding in economic growth necessarily? I know there is growth potential, massive growth potential in fact, but by them taking part in the welfare systems of the country they emigrate to will not allow any of that potential to grow to fruition.
I thought that despite District 9 being complete fiction, it made a very good statement about unwanted immigration. Here you have the alien race, in so many ways superior to humans, but also, so much alike. They were stronger and some of them were smarter and very advanced planners. But, they were also addicts kept down by their addiction to cat food, they were horders of junk (my father is such a man and that is a real problem), they fought constantly among themselves too. This is a social problem on two fronts I believe. It is a problem within their own social hierarchy and also a problem with how the city government of Johannesburg handled these unwanted immigrants. I think it’s a movie a lot of people should watch simply because of the social statements it does make.
That being said, is this not the truth about immigration in real life as well? And by that I mean there is a problem with both the system immigrants move to in America for example and problems from their native cultures they bring with them.
Peter Jackson surely did a fine job on that movie.
I like to think of it as growing cancer cells. Perhaps the state wants people in that position of helplessness. Perhaps they will vote accordingly to further grow the size of the welfare state. It’s entirely analogous to how cancer cell’s grow throughout a body.
Unfortunately though for this analogy it’s not the welfare dependant that vote for these socialized application, it’s the legal average Joe. Now if that welfare continues to grow things may change but as it stands currently welfare projects are not voted in by a ‘majority’ of voting welfare dependants. Rather these socialism programs are just being voted in by everyone in general. Still I agree with you, we need to fight the cancer now before it grows to big. One thing is for sure, the State is not a benign cancer.