Languish.org

Forgot to make a pre-election poll.

Massive win for Wilders based on exit polls. I feel sick.

Seat projection - not sure what the workable coalitions are here?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F_kE-pMW4AAcr60?format=png&name=medium)

Just read about this earlier and was sad and angry we didn't get a traditional picture poll.

So. The Netherlands aren't cool anymore?
How does culture warry fascism work in a land already beneath sea level?

Wilders would probably prefer NSC and VVD. NSC has repeatedly stated they don't want that. Plus, that coalition will have a very small minority in the senate.

If Wilders can't make it work, PvdA/GL + VVD + NSC + D66 might work but will ask big compromises of all parties.

Then there's BBB, holding a massive numbers of seats in the senate but seemingly doomed to lose them at the next elections. Still, it's a big bargaining chip for now.

Quote from: Josquius on November 22, 2023, 03:27:01 PMJust read about this earlier and was sad and angry we didn't get a traditional picture poll.

Sorry 😔

QuoteSo. The Netherlands aren't cool anymore?
How does culture warry fascism work in a land already beneath sea level?

The worst thing is we don't get to gloat about other countries' horrendous elections anymore  :sleep:

could have been worse

Quote from: Maladict on November 22, 2023, 03:30:44 PMThe worst thing is we don't get to gloat about other countries' horrendous elections anymore  :sleep:

:lol: Sad to say no-one's special in a good or bad way. We're all being buffetted by the same forces - and I don't see much reason to think it'll stop any time soon :ph34r:

Again I can't help but think of all the talk about PASOKification and the collapse of the European centre-left, which was true. But they're now (with exceptions) changing, stabilising and even recovering (even PASOK is back ahead of SYRIZA, which is in turn now led by a former investment banker because plus ca change...). But the Netherlands is on a growing list of European countries where the radical right have overtaken the mainstream traditional centre-right. I don't think anywhere near as much attention has been paid to this as was to the collapse of social democratic parties. Don't think we've had the PASOK moment yet where it really lands and people spot it.

Thanks on coalitions. Makes sense - any possibility of getting BBB in a coalition because of how well they did in the Senate and provincial elections?

I wonder if the NSC might have done better if they'd been upfront about who they wanted as PM. Or maybe not but from a UK perspective that whole approach seemed very odd.

Quote from: Maladict on November 22, 2023, 03:30:44 PMSorry 😔

Did we miss any hotties?

Quote from: SheilbhI wonder if the NSC might have done better if they'd been upfront about who they wanted as PM. Or maybe not but from a UK perspective that whole approach seemed very odd.

Well he is a bit of an odd figure. But yeah, maybe.

It's mostly VVD catastrophically overplaying their hand. Calling early elections to get right wing coalition partners. Instead they're going to be one.

And you're probably right about the left. Here's to Labour turning the tide

Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 22, 2023, 03:43:03 PM

Quote from: Maladict on November 22, 2023, 03:30:44 PMSorry 😔

Did we miss any hotties?

(https://nuactueel.noordhoff.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/lijsttrekkers-2023.png)

 :shutup:

Quote from: Maladict on November 22, 2023, 03:52:32 PMIt's mostly VVD catastrophically overplaying their hand. Calling early elections to get right wing coalition partners. Instead they're going to be one.

And you're probably right about the left. Here's to Labour turning the tide

I think the Timmermans PvdA-GL project is quite interesting. I could be totally wrong but I read that as doubling down on graduate, public sector worker style left, pro-European, not particularly radical, focused on climate - or to frame it more negatively not focusing on the old, traditional PvdA vote. As I say that could be nonsense - but if it's not, I'm not sure it's the right choice but I'm also not 100% sure it's wrong :ph34r:

I think the VVD result is interesting because I think they've said they're open to a coalition with the PVV (but not a Wilders premiership, I think). Because I think if the PASOKification story of Europe's left has been about the centre-left heartlands crumbling and often going to the radical right, I think the story on the right - in Sweden, in Italy, in France, in Switzerland) - has been opening the door to the radical right and then getting overtaken. And apropos of nothing, I'd just add that on the European level there are factions in the EPP who want to work a lot more closely with Meloni, often with the argument that she's not populist (she is, I would object, neo-fascist :lol: <_<) - and I don't think they could be more wrong. I think that's a big part of what's happening on the right.

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 22, 2023, 05:00:01 PMI think the Timmermans PvdA-GL project is quite interesting. I could be totally wrong but I read that as doubling down on graduate, public sector worker style left, pro-European, not particularly radical, focused on climate - or to frame it more negatively not focusing on the old, traditional PvdA vote. As I say that could be nonsense - but if it's not, I'm not sure it's the right choice but I'm also not 100% sure it's wrong :ph34r:

I like Timmermans a lot but I thought he would be too divisive, too elitist. Too unable to draw votes from the right, or even the centre.

QuoteI think the VVD result is interesting because I think they've said they're open to a coalition with the PVV (but not a Wilders premiership, I think). Because I think if the PASOKification story of Europe's left has been about the centre-left heartlands crumbling and often going to the radical right, I think the story on the right - in Sweden, in Italy, in France, in Switzerland) - has been opening the door to the radical right and then getting overtaken.

Yeah, that seems to be what happened. The new VVD leader has just stated she doesn't expect Wilders to be able to build a coalition. But it's his job now to try.

Sheilbh - so the centre left is losing to the radical right, and the centre right is being eaten by the radical right as well.

I guess the radical right is inevitably going to triumph, then?

Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2023, 06:03:27 PMSheilbh - so the centre left is losing to the radical right, and the centre right is being eaten by the radical right as well.

I guess the radical right is inevitably going to triumph, then?

I don't know if traditional left-right is really applicable. It's more a massive populist win, not all of it is radical right.

:lol: :ph34r: No. But maybe Yes in Italy - and maybe Italy's just a little ahead of the rest of Europe :ph34r:

I think it's more that all over Europe traditional left and traditional right (and maybe the liberals) used to win something like 80-85% of the vote. That vote's fragmented - now they'll do well to win 60-65%. And that vote share might still be falling. But I don't think it's all happening at once everywhere.

More that all through the 2010s the talk was about the collapse of the centre-left across Europe. Which was a thing. And often the parties winning those votes were on the radical right in "left behind" areas. But not everywhere - there was SYRIZA, Podemos and, in the Netherlands, the Socialist Party. As well as the rise of the Greens which I think is another big story. And possibly another story could be the rise of a radical (and it is very radical) left with conservative social/cultural policies depending on how Sahra Wagenknecht in Germany does because I think others will look to follow that (not sure if they can).

In a lot of Europe I think that's stabilised and the centre left either has or is recovering. But I think that's still the frame of a lot of analysis. And it hasn't happened everywhere - tough to even imagine a route back for the mainstream left in France or Italy, and in Germany they're incumbents which is not great given everything. I think you could argue that maybe France and Italy are examples where it did happen all at once?

I've seen fewer analysis or explainers of the collapse of broadly Christian Democrat Europe than we did of the collapse of social democratic Europe. So I don't know if it's true but my theory is that it's because they're opening the door to them - which I think is a different challenge. So I think (but this is really just a guess) the response/challenge from the radical right is different for the mainstream left and right.

Practically I think a big part of it is just fragmentation (which is maybe irreversible?) and the radical right are now a force across Europe capable of winning 20-30% in an election.

Of course my explanation would be fundamentally material: "left behind" post-industrial communities have had bad results economically, in esteem, in education etc; immigration is challenging because it's not been accompanied by sufficient public investment (and I sort of do think Anglo-Saxon views on this are right/more likely to work); and I don't think people feel empowered from the way our democracies are working at the minute. None of those are easy issues to fix but I think if you do, then you undercut the material and political base of the radical right.

Edit: And I think stemming their growth is about delivering. I don't think you'll stem their growth by trying to "understand" or "empathise" or by trying to steal their clothes - I don't think it's a problem of rhetoric and style.  But I am a very crude materialist so...:ph34r:

Thinking randomly about it. The rise of the populist far right is interesting in that it is specifically targeting an uneducated group.

Though the traditional left back in the days of mass industry gained a lot of their support from low education manual workers, the lack of education wasn't integral to their identity. Rather it was often a bone of contention :they had been denied all the opportunities of the elites afterall.

With the modern far right though... They're so desperate to be called stupid. They troll their opponents into hinting that's what is thought of them. They get off on it.

Where in the days of mass industry and the working class as a political force voting for the left you did get some well read and clever people as part of the group, indeed these people often rose to the top levels of politics, under the populist right it's the opposite - typical highly educated MPs dumbing themselves down to say the crazy shit your racist uncle comes out with. This is how they signal we are on your side.

Anyway. More relevant the recent rise of the far right in the Netherlands is linked to the shit with farmers being upset about the laws against not using quite so many chemicals right?

It does really make me wonder whether the future of politics not lie in the let it burn loony right vs the greens. Just when mainstream conservatives are becoming sane on the environment.

Quote from: Sheilbh...a radical (and it is very radical) left with conservative social/cultural policies

What does that look like? Radical left as in anti-capitalist, collectivist, and redistributionist? And conservative social/ cultural policies being anti-woke and anti-liberal-progess-since-the-60s (abortion, gay marriage, not beating your children)?

... or something else?

Quote from: Jacob on November 22, 2023, 07:58:01 PMWhat does that look like? Radical left as in anti-capitalist, collectivist, and redistributionist? And conservative social/ cultural policies being anti-woke and anti-liberal-progess-since-the-60s (abortion, gay marriage, not beating your children)?

... or something else?

It's not a million miles away. She was until now a senior figure in Die Linke.

She is very much from the genuine radical left. She is from East Germany, I believe she joined the party in the late 80s. I think I've read somewhere that she was a student in Berlin when the wall fell and basically locked herself in her room for several days - it was such a profound shock to her and her worldview. And I think went on to do her PhD (compulsory, I believe to enter German politics) in Hegel and Marx.

In unified Germany she moved into the post-communist party where she was on the hard, Marxist-Leninist left. She was controversial even at the start of her career for being fairly pro-Stalinism. And that party then became part of Die Linke (with the split of the SPD). She's now launching her own party which I think seems - like Melenchon or Macron in France - to be quite personalist and around her personality and leadership rather than a traditional formal party. I think Die Linke has now dispanded as a parliamentary party as she's taken 1/4 of their MPs with her and the rest are very internally divided. At the minute she's polling around 10-15% (hypothetically because she doesn't yet have a proper party).

To an extent she's doing what others have tried but most of those parties have ultimately come from the right and scratch the surface and there's just pure libertarian economic policies. But, while I think her economic views have moderated (although that's not difficult from doctrinaire Marxist-Leninism :lol:) she does very much come from a radical left tradition. From an English language article on her (by former Economist Germany correspondent):

QuoteMuch else about it remains uncertain, however. At the press conference Wagenknecht issued familiar criticisms of "unchecked migration", sanctions on Russia and ideological "eco-activism", but no finer detail on the party's platform. And she has launched an initiative on these lines before: a movement called "Rise Up" founded in 2018. I interviewed Wagenknecht around that time for the Economist. "If you concentrate more on hip, urban sorts of voters – on identity and lifestyle debates – you don't speak to the poorest in society," she told me in what even then was a clear criticism of her own Left party. "They no longer feel properly represented." Wagenknecht gave me a copy of her book Prosperity Without Greed, a 2016 treatise against the free market economy.

Her writings, including her 2021 book The Self-Righteous, provide perhaps the best early guide to the policies of any BSW party – and a sense of the barriers that stand before it. Reading them, it quickly becomes clear that there are two Sahra Wagenknechts – distinct, and mostly but not always aligned. The prospects of her political project lie somewhere in the interaction, synergies and tensions between the two.

First is Wagenknecht the Theorist, who sets out a broadly ideologically consistent vision of what she calls Linkskonservatismus (left-wing conservatism). This starts from an analysis of what she calls a "feudalisation of society", drawing on established left critiques of capitalism. Particularly influential is the French historian Fernand Braudel's idea of a fundamentally "unequal exchange", favouring big conglomerates over a swathe of groups ranging from workers and pensioners to artisans and small business owners. Wagenknecht writes, citing Braudel: "The early capitalist was a merchant who maintained trade relations with India, China or Arabia... not the shopkeeper in the centre of Madrid." She marries this with the American economist Mancur Olson's theories of how small elites entrench their interests in what he called an "exclusive distributional coalition".

This economic credo – which leads her to the conclusion that limited liability corporate structures should be abandoned in favour of alternatives such as cooperatives, forms of state capitalism and social enterprises – is mirrored in Wagenknecht's cultural-political vision. She sees political and societal power as working in a similar fashion: small Olson-esque elite coalitions wielding a sort of monopoly when it comes to setting and policing cultural codes and norms. In this related "unequal exchange" between the ruled and the rulers, that elite is the university-educated urban class forged by decades of globalisation and Europeanisation (and in Germany the contemporaneous process of reunification). Wagenknecht's cultural conservatism is closely entangled with her scepticism towards the Atlantic alliance and preference for alternative partners to the east, notably Russia and China. It all amounts to a soft Poujadisme, a 21st-century echo of Pierre Poujade's reactionary anti-establishment call to arms on behalf of the lower and lower-middle classes of 1950s France.

But her second political avatar is Wagenknecht the Opportunist, a more fluid and adaptive political player who follows the anti-establishment mood in Germany wherever it leads her. The last few years, and especially the double whammy of the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia's war in Ukraine, have seen a flourishing of what is known as Querpolitik, "diagonalist" politics fusing elements of populist left and right, particularly prominent in German anti-establishment circles but echoed in the English-speaking world by YouTube stars such as Russell Brand and Joe Rogan. Thus Wagenknecht has made her own well-watched clips railing against lockdowns and cancel culture, as well as an array of other totems of Western policy orthodoxy – including net-zero provisions such as heat pumps, support for Nato and Ukraine, and Covid-19 vaccines.

Often this (one might say) more cynical Wagenknecht draws on her Theorist persona. For example, her apparently genuine belief in the affinity between Germany and Russia provides a natural platform for her to exploit discontent among her audience about increased energy prices since the invasion of Ukraine. It also allows her to rail against sanctions on Vladimir Putin's regime that she claims are motivated not by concern for the Ukrainian people but by American energy interests. Likewise, her argument about the "unfair exchange" of cultural power in 21st-century Western societies, to the benefit of "lifestyle leftists", is a Christmas tree on which she can hang all manner of flimsy jibes at political correctness.

But it is a cap on immigration, broad suspicion of the Atlantic Alliance and re-orienting Germany to Russia and China, but with not just higher socia spending and higher minimum wages, but also more of a state directed and organised (but not planned) economy. As I say my understanding is that she has moderated economically and is a little more pro-market nowadays.

It is great reading the left criticism of her as operating "within a nostalgic social-democratic and highly bourgeois framework that has nothing to do with a class orientation derived from the conflict between capital and labour [...] it's hard to believe that she was once a leading representative of the Communist Platform." Somethings never change :lol:

Edit: I should say - I totally disagree with the soft-Poujadism comparison. I think that's nonsense from my understanding.

So... whats the word on the street then? PM Shitbag? Or could there still be a coalition that keeps him out?

My theory is that about 30% of any given human population are xenophobic bastards. The internet has given them a voice and helped them organise. This places great pressure on traditional centre-right and centre-left parties as they are fighting to get a majority when only 70% of the votes are in play.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on November 23, 2023, 07:43:25 AMMy theory is that about 30% of any given human population are xenophobic bastards. The internet has given them a voice and helped them organise. This places great pressure on traditional centre-right and centre-left parties as they are fighting to get a majority when only 70% of the votes are in play.

This is pretty much my opinion too.

Seeing as to how lots of muslims behave with regards to the war it's little wonder that a anti-muslim party gets a lot of votes.

The reasonable parties in the center need to find a solution to something that a lot of people see as a problem.

For myself in Sweden I have no party to vote for. I'm not racist, positive to immigration. I want to see religious extremism and integration handled better and there's no party ticking my boxes. No wonder lots of people turn to anti-immigration parties.

Quote from: Josquius on November 23, 2023, 07:08:38 AMSo... whats the word on the street then? PM Shitbag? Or could there still be a coalition that keeps him out?

I think he might be able to pull it off. He's waited 20 years for this after all. He could offer loads of concessions to get there, he pretty much rules the party by himself so there are not many short term risks.
The only realistic alternative is a broad coalition without PVV, but that will only be explored if Wilders fails to build his own.

And then there's the option of a minority government, but I don't really see that working out for Wilders.

Quote from: Threviel on November 23, 2023, 09:20:52 AMSeeing as to how lots of muslims behave with regards to the war it's little wonder that a anti-muslim party gets a lot of votes.

Polls showed the Israel-Hamas war was not much of an issue at all. And even if the vote was about supporting Israel or Palestine, I'm not sure Israel would have won.

VVD made the election all about immigration, and the anti-immigration party won.

Poor Dutchies :(

Quote from: Threviel on November 23, 2023, 09:20:52 AMSeeing as to how lots of muslims behave with regards to the war it's little wonder that a anti-muslim party gets a lot of votes.

The reasonable parties in the center need to find a solution to something that a lot of people see as a problem.

For myself in Sweden I have no party to vote for. I'm not racist, positive to immigration. I want to see religious extremism and integration handled better and there's no party ticking my boxes. No wonder lots of people turn to anti-immigration parties.

The trouble is, nobody cares about facts or practical solutions on this issue.
Come up with a great workable plan to tackle illegal immigration and you'll just be met with glazed eyes as you're up against the guy shouting about how we need to just kick out the rape gangs. People want simple solutions to simple problems.
In the UK just look at how much attention asylum seekers get despite being such a tiny amount of immigration numbers.
For the group who really see immigration as the key issue there tends to be little room for nuance or reality. This is why moderates tend to just concentrate on other things.
I do believe that's where the key lies- getting people to give a shit about the serious problems.

I presume this asshole is also pro-Kremlin? The Netherlands have been one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine within the EU, IIRC one of the largest donors relative to size.

Quote from: celedhring on November 23, 2023, 10:03:22 AMI presume this asshole is also pro-Kremlin? The Netherlands have been one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine within the EU, IIRC one of the largest donors relative to size.

Canadian media is reporting that one of his platform planks was stopping aid to Ukraine. It's not clear whether he's pro-Russian or that's just part of his Netherlands first isolationist policy.

But either way it puts a further question mark on whether Europe will actually support Ukraine if the US withdrawal support under a Trump presidency.

Quote from: Josquius on November 23, 2023, 09:36:19 AMThe trouble is, nobody cares about facts or practical solutions on this issue.
Come up with a great workable plan to tackle illegal immigration and you'll just be met with glazed eyes as you're up against the guy shouting about how we need to just kick out the rape gangs. People want simple solutions to simple problems.
In the UK just look at how much attention asylum seekers get despite being such a tiny amount of immigration numbers.
For the group who really see immigration as the key issue there tends to be little room for nuance or reality. This is why moderates tend to just concentrate on other things.
I do believe that's where the key lies- getting people to give a shit about the serious problems.

Yeah, there are lots of problems with integration and they have all been taboo to talk about in Sweden until these last few years, and then our racist-party was already at 20%. If the centrist parties had talked about it and done something about the problems back in the 90's or early noughts they would probably still be a miniscule fringe party rather than soon party #1.

As it is now Sweden, and I presume all of western Europe, has a colour and religion coded poor/lower working class, where most criminals are immigrants since the poors are the ones committing lots of crime and the immigrants are the poor. No wonder racism grows for those that can't be bothered to read up.

Quote from: celedhring on November 23, 2023, 10:03:22 AMI presume this asshole is also pro-Kremlin? The Netherlands have been one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine within the EU, IIRC one of the largest donors relative to size.

Pro-Kremlin is probably too strong. But definitely in favour of cutting support for Ukraine, or any international support for that matter. Including, ironically, his buddy Orban.

Quote from: Josquius on November 23, 2023, 09:36:19 AMIn the UK just look at how much attention asylum seekers get despite being such a tiny amount of immigration numbers.
For the group who really see immigration as the key issue there tends to be little room for nuance or reality. This is why moderates tend to just concentrate on other things.
I do believe that's where the key lies- getting people to give a shit about the serious problems.

mass migration is of course a serious problem, and a detriment to society if the type of migrants is wrong.
We've seen in the past few weeks what the results of that are.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on November 23, 2023, 07:43:25 AMMy theory is that about 30% of any given human population are xenophobic bastards. The internet has given them a voice and helped them organise. This places great pressure on traditional centre-right and centre-left parties as they are fighting to get a majority when only 70% of the votes are in play.

My theory is that the left is very good at creating silent majorities, or at least silent significant blocks, by putting labels on anyone wanting to challenge some of their ideas.  That is very effective at stifling speech, but that also blinds them towards discontent that their policies generate.  Then they inevitably get surprised that legitimate xenophobes get a lot more support than expected, because not-quite-xenophobes have no other way to express the opinion that as citizens they should have a right to express.

In my personal life, several times I've been surprised that the people I would assume to be woke progressives actually turn out to be anti-woke liberals like me, but I only find that out after they feel safe to vent to me.  The sooner the left realizes that they have a hand in the success of Trumpists, the sooner we'll be rid of that scourge.

Ah yes. The old I'm only a racist because the left called me a racist.

I honestly hear "you just call everyone who disagrees with you a racist" and the like far more often than I hear somebody actually being called a racist.
Like the fishing for being called stupid this seems to be another thing the populist right love and they'll jump to the protestation before they've even had the insult.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 23, 2023, 12:11:39 PM

Quote from: Josquius on November 23, 2023, 09:36:19 AMIn the UK just look at how much attention asylum seekers get despite being such a tiny amount of immigration numbers.
For the group who really see immigration as the key issue there tends to be little room for nuance or reality. This is why moderates tend to just concentrate on other things.
I do believe that's where the key lies- getting people to give a shit about the serious problems.

mass migration is of course a serious problem, and a detriment to society if the type of migrants is wrong.
We've seen in the past few weeks what the results of that are.

Mass migration isn't a thing in the modern western context.
We've seen... What in the past few weeks that shows this thing that isn't happening is bad?

What we have seen in Sweden is demands for religious legislation, which is horrendously bad, due to mass immigration.

We have seen a sharp uptick in anti-semitic actions which is bad and due to mass immigration.

We have seen increases in poverty, which although a global net positive is a local negative, due to mass immigration.

We have seen state resources diverted to supporting mass immigration instead of lowered taxes or better health care or whatever. Every refugee in Sweden costs something like £7.000 each year for the rest of their lives. They are a huge financial burden.

We have seen a lack of housing due to mass immigration.

We have seen upticks in familial violence, honour culture which is entirely anathema to our society, due to mass immigration.

There are lots of negatives for the "indigenous" population with mass immigration and denying that is why the racist parties are growing in popularity.

There are also positives, but I'm not entirely convinced that they are greater than the negatives from a utilitaristic perspective.

All this is valid for Sweden, I don't know about countries with functioning integration policys.

Josq, you couldn't have missed the point harder if you tried.  You can't measure the number of threats being perceived by counting the number of threats being executed.  Here is a hopefully exaggerated hypothetical: if Trump comes to power in 2025 and has 1000 supporters of Democrats publicly executed, would it make much sense to go "I hear much more often people saying they'll be executed for supporting Democrats than I hear about people being executed for supporting Democrats"?  If you're concerned about being unfairly called a racist, you probably will be avoiding things that will unfairly get you called racist, but you wouldn't be happy about it.

I think a lot of people are clearly feeling threatened into not expressing their opinions, and you don't need to have a threat executed on you personally to start censoring yourself.  There are many bad outcomes to democracy from that, but the one most relevant to this thread is that there is a misperception on the left about electoral support for certain issues, so you underestimate the blowback.  You may think that only racists oppose you, because people who are not racists are the ones most scared of being called a racist and thus will not express their opposition publicly.

Quote from: Josquius on November 24, 2023, 07:29:22 AMAh yes. The old I'm only a racist because the left called me a racist.

I honestly hear "you just call everyone who disagrees with you a racist" and the like far more often than I hear somebody actually being called a racist.
Like the fishing for being called stupid this seems to be another thing the populist right love and they'll jump to the protestation before they've even had the insult.

I watch a lot of cop cams.  You're a racist is handed out like water on those.

Quote from: Threviel on November 24, 2023, 07:50:05 AMAll this is valid for Sweden, I don't know about countries with functioning integration policys.

Housing remains a problem. The rest is pretty good.

I wouldn't classify any immigration into Canada to be mass immigration.

QuoteMass migration isn't a thing in the modern western context.

I mean, my first thought was to agree but then I was thinking... if by mass migration we mean something like 4th-5th century movements, then obviously we do not have big single mass of people breaching the frontier and taking over towns by force, but in terms of the relative number of people with "alien" cultures starting to mingle with the local populations... when we talk about that age of migration we casually summarise several decades in half sentences because that's all the detail we have. so who knows the effects don't compare? If your country went from next to zero to several percentage of the total population for people of X foreign origin within your life time, are you not allowed to consider that a major change just because it happened over a longer-than-instantaneous period? Obviously the correct reaction even in that case is not racism and bigotry, but I do feel like sometimes the cross-cultural tensions are dismissed too much out of hand by the Left.

People like josq are, in the context of mass migration, part of the problem.

Belgium has gone, in my lifetime,  from less than 10% people with foreign roots to over 30%. That's actually worse than the 5th century great migrations

Quote from: Tamas on November 24, 2023, 08:51:06 AMI mean, my first thought was to agree but then I was thinking... if by mass migration we mean something like 4th-5th century movements, then obviously we do not have big single mass of people breaching the frontier and taking over towns by force, but in terms of the relative number of people with "alien" cultures starting to mingle with the local populations... when we talk about that age of migration we casually summarise several decades in half sentences because that's all the detail we have. so who knows the effects don't compare?

Yes - and on that "mass migration" point I do always think it can be slightly undermining. I know people mean well when they say England's always been a country of migrants (which I'm not really sure is true, I think it's just something we've picked up from America) and then give examples like the Vikings. I'm really not sure it helps the argument they think they're making :lol:

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 24, 2023, 09:04:44 AM

Quote from: Tamas on November 24, 2023, 08:51:06 AMI mean, my first thought was to agree but then I was thinking... if by mass migration we mean something like 4th-5th century movements, then obviously we do not have big single mass of people breaching the frontier and taking over towns by force, but in terms of the relative number of people with "alien" cultures starting to mingle with the local populations... when we talk about that age of migration we casually summarise several decades in half sentences because that's all the detail we have. so who knows the effects don't compare?

Yes - and on that "mass migration" point I do always think it can be slightly undermining. I know people mean well when they say England's always been a country of migrants (which I'm not really sure is true, I think it's just something we've picked up from America) and then give examples like the Vikings. I'm really not sure it helps the argument they think they're making :lol:

The Normans overstayed their tourist visa :contract:

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 24, 2023, 09:04:44 AM

Quote from: Tamas on November 24, 2023, 08:51:06 AMI mean, my first thought was to agree but then I was thinking... if by mass migration we mean something like 4th-5th century movements, then obviously we do not have big single mass of people breaching the frontier and taking over towns by force, but in terms of the relative number of people with "alien" cultures starting to mingle with the local populations... when we talk about that age of migration we casually summarise several decades in half sentences because that's all the detail we have. so who knows the effects don't compare?

Yes - and on that "mass migration" point I do always think it can be slightly undermining. I know people mean well when they say England's always been a country of migrants (which I'm not really sure is true, I think it's just something we've picked up from America) and then give examples like the Vikings. I'm really not sure it helps the argument they think they're making :lol:

I never thought of it that way but you have a point.  :lol: Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, inspiring stories indeed.  :lol:

At least in Hungary you can point to German settlers who came invited (well, from 18th century onwards invited by a German monarch, but not before that).

QuoteJosq, you couldn't have missed the point harder if you tried.  You can't measure the number of threats being perceived by counting the number of threats being executed.  Here is a hopefully exaggerated hypothetical: if Trump comes to power in 2025 and has 1000 supporters of Democrats publicly executed, would it make much sense to go "I hear much more often people saying they'll be executed for supporting Democrats than I hear about people being executed for supporting Democrats"?  If you're concerned about being unfairly called a racist, you probably will be avoiding things that will unfairly get you called racist, but you wouldn't be happy about it.

I think a lot of people are clearly feeling threatened into not expressing their opinions, and you don't need to have a threat executed on you personally to start censoring yourself.  There are many bad outcomes to democracy from that, but the one most relevant to this thread is that there is a misperception on the left about electoral support for certain issues, so you underestimate the blowback.  You may think that only racists oppose you, because people who are not racists are the ones most scared of being called a racist and thus will not express their opposition publicly.

If you're worried about being called racist for saying something then
1: you need to consider whether not being insulted is more important to you than saying what you want to say. I certainly don't give a shit about the insults that come my way for my views.
2: you need to consider whether what you want to say might actually be a bit racist?

I understand what you're saying here but I don't think it lines up with reality at all.
I'm speaking about contexts here where people are saying far right shit. They're not self policing for fear of teh woke. They're just coming out and saying Muslims are bad and should be reported.
They then jump to "you just call everyone who disagrees with you a racist!" - often before anyone has said so.

For the broader  real world...maybe it's the circles you move in but I've definitely not noticed people being afraid to say shit in line with the populist right. Quite the opposite. I know some who are actually decent guys but they spout typical far right talking points to sound tough.
Back when brexit was going down despite the vote share in my home town being less than 60-40 you never heard anything from the remain side :when I spoke up about it I saw why, lots of outright threats came my way.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 24, 2023, 08:59:23 AMPeople like josq are, in the context of mass migration, part of the problem.

Belgium has gone, in my lifetime,  from less than 10% people with foreign roots to over 30%. That's actually worse than the 5th century great migrations

I would say people like you are the problem.

The trouble with this "x% increase in people with foreign roots!" take is it always assumes/implies they're a monolithic mass, an orgsanised invasion, rather than big a super diverse bunch.

Thinking about it there a lots of things that's bad or annoying because of refugees.

Swedish comparable school results are in the gutter in comparison to similar countries. Natives are some of the best pupils in the world.

There are something like 400 000 unemployed, but we have a serious lack of workers necessitating foreign workers for unskilled labour work. Recently the government stopped visas under a certain level making lots of companies raise wages due to not getting local labour. At the same time those 400 000 get unemployment benefits or social aid.

When we had our kids relatives couldn't visit at the hospital at all, due to experiences with the behaviour of immigrant families.

Non pig-meat is often locked up in super markets due to theft.

We are not allowed to see our kids medical records from age 13, causes lots of issues when the kids have Down's or something like that, due to immigrants abusing their teen kids.

and so on, lots of daily minor annoyances, not proven to be caused by immigration, but strongly implied. It's no wonder really that people are going anti-immigration.

I have been struggling with this for a few years. Trying to find good arguments that Sweden should help and aid refugees and have a generous immigration policy, but from a utilitaristic perspective there are precious few arguments. The only argument that's strong is the humanist one, we are rich and we should help others. From almost every other perspective mass refugee immigration is a disaster. It's good for them, but it's not good for us. And once they become us it's bad for more of us. 

It seems, from a factual standpoint, that the fucking racists were right all along, just for the wrong reasons.

I have good faith that we'll ride this out as a society and come out better in the end, but I'm more and more starting to believe that that end will not be in my lifetime.

See. These don't sound like problems with immigration.
They are exactly of the sort of problems moderate parties should be really focusing on rather than just falling for the far rights attempt to blame everything on immigration.

Take housing for instance. In the UK population growth rate in recent degrades has been broadly similar to the 50/60s.... Except we didn't have such a problem in the housing system then.
Why? We built houses. We didn't sell off social housing. We didn't have the same setup of predatory buy to let land lords.
I completely understand why immigrants make a great scape goat for housing. It all seems so logical. More people = fewer houses available.
But this ignores the fundamentals that more people also means a bigger economy which means more capacity to build houses... If the government actually tried to solve the problem that is rather than just doing the politically convenient thing and blaming immigration.

Quote from: Threviel on November 24, 2023, 09:50:17 AMSwedish comparable school results are in the gutter in comparison to similar countries. Natives are some of the best pupils in the world.

Ok so that's a very chicken or egg situation. If teachers decide non-white kids are dumb Fs their grades will suffer.

QuoteWhen we had our kids relatives couldn't visit at the hospital at all, due to experiences with the behaviour of immigrant families.

I'll stay away from that one otherwise I'll launch into a tirade over our maternity ward stay in Slough which would among other similar stories include my experiences of suffering through a speaker-phoned conversation between a happy grandmother and a relative in Pakistan, both yelling over the noise of the construction equipment nearby on the Asian end, in their native language. That was a bit before I asked the same grandma to turn down her native music since my newborn is trying to sleep on the other end of the curtain, and a while before new neighbours from another ethnicity turned the bed next to ours into a happy family event with loud music snacks, and wide-ranging conversations. I'll just skip the rest of the memories of those 7 days.

Quote from: Josquius on November 24, 2023, 10:00:20 AMSee. These don't sound like problems with immigration.
They are exactly of the sort of problems moderate parties should be really focusing on rather than just calling for the far rights attempt to blame everything on immigration.

Take housing for instance. In the UK population growth rate in recent degrades has been broadly similar to the 50/60s.... Except we didn't have such a problem in the housing system then.
Why? We built houses. We didn't sell off social housing. We didn't have the same setup of predatory buy to let land lords.
I completely understand why immigrants make a great scape goat for housing. It all seems so logical. More people = fewer houses available.
But this ignores the fundamentals that more people also means a bigger economy which means more capacity to build houses... If the government actually tried to solve the problem that is rather than just doing the politically convenient thing and blaming immigration.

To support Threviel's point - the registar office where we married in the UK was plastered full with leaflets over how you cannot be forced into a marriage and ways to ask for help and protection. Are these warranted because of 20th century British customs, or?

That's just wrong, one millionish  people that are a financial drain on society has to live somewhere, without them there would be more resources to build houses.

Quote from: Josquius on November 24, 2023, 09:46:22 AMThe trouble with this "x% increase in people with foreign roots!" take is it always assumes/implies they're a monolithic mass, an orgsanised invasion, rather than big a super diverse bunch.

I'd also add that I think this is in part a problem with the framing in some continental European countries, because there is an (understandable) reluctance to talk about race and fear of communitarianism etc.

Because of that the phrase is normally "people with foreign/migration background". I think it's a problem because the phrasing emphasises someone's "foreign-ness"/their ancestor's migration rather than opening up to hyphenated identities. But also from a public policy perspective I think it's probably even less helpful than BAME.

Edit: Separately I agree with Threv here:

QuoteTrying to find good arguments that Sweden should help and aid refugees and have a generous immigration policy, but from a utilitaristic perspective there are precious few arguments. The only argument that's strong is the humanist one, we are rich and we should help others.

But I'd argue it's possibly disastrous as an immigration policy. There is a moral case and duty on refugees. But I'd argue that for a successful immigration policy (that is capable of achieving public support) the priority should probably be about economic migrants and students.

Sometimes it can double as both - I think Syria's middle class no longer lives in Syria. But that's an extreme (and tragic) example. It probably won't be like that if you're (as countries should) working to re-settle refugees within the UN framework.

Wether or not foreigners are a monolithic block or not is irrelevant. Same on whether or not they're invading or 'invading'.
They're not part of the native population, and if there's too many of them at once the native society will be in trouble trying to assimilate the newcomers.

Add to that virtue-signalling, usually left-of-center, people behaving like the my were last century's priests preaching from the pulpit that you need to follow their dogmas and you end up with the effect that problems in society can't be mentioned (elephants in the room) resulting in problems that can't be tackled.

And then they have the gall to call the people, often of the poorer classes, names when they've had enough.
It's not without reason that many traditional socialist party voters left the left, resulting in parties that are even more gauche-caviar and/or islamogauchist.

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 24, 2023, 09:04:44 AMYes - and on that "mass migration" point I do always think it can be slightly undermining. I know people mean well when they say England's always been a country of migrants (which I'm not really sure is true, I think it's just something we've picked up from America) and then give examples like the Vikings. I'm really not sure it helps the argument they think they're making :lol:

King Knútur had no Viking problems during his reign as king of England.  -_-

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Canute_and_%C3%86lfgifu_cropped_%28Canute%29.jpg)

Quote from: Tamas on November 24, 2023, 10:08:07 AM

Quote from: Josquius on November 24, 2023, 10:00:20 AMSee. These don't sound like problems with immigration.
They are exactly of the sort of problems moderate parties should be really focusing on rather than just calling for the far rights attempt to blame everything on immigration.

Take housing for instance. In the UK population growth rate in recent degrades has been broadly similar to the 50/60s.... Except we didn't have such a problem in the housing system then.
Why? We built houses. We didn't sell off social housing. We didn't have the same setup of predatory buy to let land lords.
I completely understand why immigrants make a great scape goat for housing. It all seems so logical. More people = fewer houses available.
But this ignores the fundamentals that more people also means a bigger economy which means more capacity to build houses... If the government actually tried to solve the problem that is rather than just doing the politically convenient thing and blaming immigration.

To support Threviel's point - the registar office where we married in the UK was plastered full with leaflets over how you cannot be forced into a marriage and ways to ask for help and protection. Are these warranted because of 20th century British customs, or?

Yes. This is a bad thing.
But again it's the crazy ivans of the world who are to blame for this - both their brothers from a deprived immigrant background who want to do this, and they themselves who see everything as about immigration and stopping the Muslims.
If it wasn't for these people trying to use stuff like womens rights as a cynical ploy to attack Muslims when it suits them (how riddled far right groups are with paedophilia is another interesting one..) then people who actually do give a shit about women's rights as their primary goal would have better luck tackling stuff like forced marriage.
If we didn't waste so much time and energy panicking about a few thousand guys in dinghies, then maybe we could put some political capital into actually building far more houses than these refugees might take.

Also needs noting. This isn't as big an issue as the amount of reporting about it would seem to reflect. Read a piece on the BBC lately how even arranged marriages with foreigners had fallen off a cliff with Bradford Pakistani community never mind forced marriages.

Yeah, but the immigrant crazies wouldn't be here without immigration and the posters would not have been posted.

Quote from: Threviel on November 24, 2023, 12:24:42 PMYeah, but the immigrant crazies wouldn't be here without immigration and the posters would not have been posted.

They're here already. That's done.  It wasn't forseen when the decision was made to import large numbers from Punjab and Kashmir that heavy industry would collapse and there would no longer be a need for large numbers of low education workers in these places.
However had the government made more of an effort to transition the economy in these towns and provide opportunities for young people growing up there, then the social problems of a culturally diffetent low educated high poverty rate population wouldnt have came to be.
And its here that the solutions lie. Not whinging about current immigration which tends to come from completely different groups with different cultural norms and people with a generally high education level.

High education might be the norm in the UK, but very much not in Sweden.

As I said, my observations are on Sweden. Countries with functioning immigration policies are different.

So Pakistani immigrants engage in forced marriage because shipbuilding and steel shut down?  :hmm:

Squeeze, you're playing seven degrees of Kevin Bacon but instead of Bacon it's Tories.

Quote from: Threviel on November 24, 2023, 12:44:01 PMHigh education might be the norm in the UK, but very much not in Sweden.

As I said, my observations are on Sweden. Countries with functioning immigration policies are different.

It varies a lot in terms of education. But broadly Indian, Bangladeshi, Black African and Chinese kids have above average educational attainment - and above White British kids. Pakistani and Black Caribbean still have below average attainment.

It's probably because there's multiple factors and the interaction of ethnicity, wealth and regional inequality is complicated and not super-clear. Broadly there are regional disparities, there's a performance gap between the richest and the pporest (depending on the measurement this might have narrowed in the last year), ethnic inequalities have shifted hugely in the last 50 years but haven't levelled out. The only consistent trend is girls broadly outperforming boys.

I'm not sure there's necessarily a link with eduucation and forced (or cousin) marriage though.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 24, 2023, 12:50:31 PMSo Pakistani immigrants engage in forced marriage because shipbuilding and steel shut down?  :hmm:

Squeeze, you're playing seven degrees of Kevin Bacon but instead of Bacon it's Tories.

More the textile industry. But basically yes.
Limit a person's outlook and opportunities and they tend to stick to what they know rather than questioning and finding their own way.
It's well observed that if you want
 people to integrate that economic integration is core to this.

And yes. Basically everything does come down to economics. Which in the UK basically means tory mismanagement :p

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 24, 2023, 11:09:25 AMWether or not foreigners are a monolithic block or not is irrelevant. Same on whether or not they're invading or 'invading'.
They're not part of the native population, and if there's too many of them at once the native society will be in trouble trying to assimilate the newcomers.

Add to that virtue-signalling, usually left-of-center, people behaving like the my were last century's priests preaching from the pulpit that you need to follow their dogmas and you end up with the effect that problems in society can't be mentioned (elephants in the room) resulting in problems that can't be tackled.

And then they have the gall to call the people, often of the poorer classes, names when they've had enough.
It's not without reason that many traditional socialist party voters left the left, resulting in parties that are even more gauche-caviar and/or islamogauchist.

I have to agree that issues have been left unattended and as a result they seem to have gotten worse...

I have some questions for you, if you don't mind:

From your perspective, what is the solution? What are reasonable actions that can be taken to enact that solution?

Do you make any distinction between types and categories of foreignes and immigrants - and do those distinctions matter to your proposed solutions? When it comes to Muslims, from your point of view is there any reason to distinguish between radical Islamists and other Muslims? From your perspective are there "good Muslims", and if so how does that figure into the actions you think we should take?

Basically if we accept your framing of the problem and your general analysis, what actions and policies do you propose? And how fine-grained or broadly do you think we should apply those actions and policies?

Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 24, 2023, 12:50:31 PMSqueeze, you're playing seven degrees of Kevin Bacon but instead of Bacon it's Tories.

Admiral Yi, meet Josquis.

Josquis, meet Admiral Yi.

Quote from: Barrister on November 24, 2023, 02:40:03 PMAdmiral Yi, meet Josquis.

Josquis, meet Admiral Yi.

I see what you did there.  :ph34r:

Quote from: Jacob on November 24, 2023, 01:01:07 PMI have to agree that issues have been left unattended and as a result they seem to have gotten worse...

I have some questions for you, if you don't mind:

1.From your perspective, what is the solution? What are reasonable actions that can be taken to enact that solution?

2a.Do you make any distinction between types and categories of foreignes and immigrants - and do those distinctions matter to your proposed solutions? 2b.When it comes to Muslims, from your point of view is there any reason to distinguish between radical Islamists and other Muslims? From your perspective are there "good Muslims", and if so how does that figure into the actions you think we should take?

3.Basically if we accept your framing of the problem and your general analysis, what actions and policies do you propose? And how fine-grained or broadly do you think we should apply those actions and policies?

all from the belgian perspective, mind you.

1. Far stronger control over the borders, both internal and external. Covid has shown that it is possible (and of course it was also possible before Shengen). Illegal entry must be reduced to a minimum and walls, border-fences and pushbacks all have their place in that. Illegals that are already present need to tracked and effectively deported, not handed a notice to leave the territory. Once that has been done strict policies for immigration can be enacted: it's not like the US, Canada, Australia or New Zealand let just anyone in.
Basically making sure that we don't get an influx the size of -at the low end- Lokeren (35k) or -at the high end- Brugge (115k) every year (the low and high range has been between 2009-2022, net migration only so the actually immigration is higher), or about a million people in the last 20 years or so. Infrastructure and services just can't keep up, and that's not even taking into account the environmental and climate targets that were set.
Cheating needs to be -basically- punished, restoring and rising support for green-card style migration and actual asylumseekers (like the Ukrainians). Limited migration will also enable society to assimilate the people arriving into society: like it did with the Italians, the Greeks, the Spanish and even many of the earliest arrivals from Morocco and Turkey.
Additionally, the period of cultural self-flaggelation western society is going through needs to end. A culture that doesn't respect itself isn't going to inspire assimilation. The western countries have done bad things through history, so did everyone else. So people need to stop accentuating only the bad from their own country/culture/history and stop focussing on only the good from the immigrant countries/cultures/histories. The western countries did many good things, so much so that without those things most of current day humanity wouldn't even be alive without them.

2. Not exactly sure what you mean but I'll give it a shot.
2a. Not all foreigners/immigrants are the same, culture wise, this includes religion (individually they are, obviously, all different). The reality is that there is something like cultural distance that positively or negatively affects the ability of groups of migrants to assimilate into the host society.
Migrants from countries with cultures that are similar to ours should generally adapt faster and easier, while migrants from cultures that are very different will probably have it harder. Some might even be wholly incompatible. Ability to assimilate is of course further modulated by the individual migrant's character and traits, amount of ghettoisation (peer pressure to stick to the culture), willingness and access to work*, presence of a schoolculture<->streetculture, access to media from the original country etc etc. The willingness of the host culture to integrate newcomers is of import too, of course.
The endresult still being that it's preferable to have immigrants from cultures than can be slotted in easily. Immigrants from the other group are still possible, but only in minimal numbers. Illegals, regardless of groups, should get the boot. They undermine goodwill.
Even then: I still wouldn't want to host 30% of Dutchmen, Frenchmen, Englishmen or Germans, all arriving in a generation. They'd still mess up the host society.


2b.
It's the ideology that is an issue, so anyone following it suffers, as it where, from a -50 to -100 penalty to diplomatic relations depending on severity of the following. I've got no reason to be positive towards an ideology that basically wants to separate my head from the rest of my body because I don't believe in their version of a sky-creature, any sky-creature at all, or any other crazy tenet of ideology. I also don't appreciate the negative influences of the ideology on our society.** We've got enough crazies as it is.
Individually they can be the best people you can imagine, but then again: I'm pretty sure the germans of 1939 were, in general and individually, upstanding people. Same for the communists (ours over here still think that Stalin and Mao were 'swell guys') or those 'conservative' (reactionary actually) extremists in the US. You wouldn't want them to have too much, if any, influence on your society.
The best muslims are those that aren't of course.
As it is, distrust the group but consider the individual.
Given that religious fundamentalism is a big thing in the islamic communities (as per research of Ruud Koopmans) their communities must be under watch, extremists causing trouble need to go and existing mosques brought under state control while at the same time removing foreign control from these mosques (so no Diyanet for example). No more new mosques and no converting of others allowed. That ban can be lifted once the muslim countries reciprocate regarding freedom of religion. Preachers preaching hate can get a one way ticket out of here. Migration of muslims needs to be limited as much as possible. That's not going to be easy but the government's first responsability is towards the people living in the country it governs, then to the allied and friendly nations. Only then towards the rest, and even then, since they have their own governments (who most decidedly don't give a fig about us, or even their own citizens). We've decolonized.

3. A hard one and unless the powers that be in government and administration are overturned completely nothing is ever going to happen, but here goes (with the risk of repeating myself):
- cracking down on illegal migration, hard. In relation to that: cracking down even harder on human trafficking, it's modern slavery. The people engaging it should lose at least all their illgotten gains and in an ideal world much more.
- illegal migrants that are present need to be removed from the territory
- no endless asylum procedures. Rejected is out.
- no longer allowing that 3rd countries refuse to take back their criminal expats. They're citizens of those countries: you're getting them back. The european economy is large enough that most of those countries can be pressured into submission on that (EU politicians need to grow some balls -of steel, not light- on that and many other issues)
- refugees need to be given refuge in the region as much as possible (and yes, for the majority that already happens). The European countries could do a tad more on that. It makes financial sense since it's usually much much cheaper to house people over there instead of over here (cost of living among others). It's also likely that the neighbouring countries are culturally closer, decreasing the sense of estrangement. It'll also facilitate returning to the home country once the issue is resolved. Again, the EU could do more provided it finds its balls***
- A great reduction in illegal migration should ideally lead to more capacity and willingness to help those actual asylumseekers for which refuge in the region isn't feasible. So limited numbers****
- Once the crisis is solved, asylumseekers go home. As long as the crisis hasn't been resolved: no holidays in the country you fled from. After all: when, during WW1, up to a million belgians fled to the Netherlands they didn't stay their indefinately. Heck, most of them were back home a year later (in 1915!).
- Regular migration needs to be possible, but subject to the needs of our countries. So a system like the US, Canada, Australia... i.e. the supposed blue-card proposed at the EU-level. But again: there's still quite a bit of unemployment in the European countries so with proper amounts of reschooling we should put these people to work first and foremost. After all: it's not quite okay to separate the other countries from their educated people.*****
- allowing mass migration from the islamic regions was a mistake, and a bad one. It also can't be reversed quickly. The best we can do putting up pressure so people stop being practicing, instead becoming fully secularised or even ex-muslims. Make it easier to leave than to join. Reduced foreign influence on the mosques, etc
- no multiple nationalities, especially not for politicians. You can't serve more than one master. If you migrate here with the intention of staying for ever, then you need to fully choose for your new country. If you can't: stay an expat and return home once your permit runs out.
- and a last one: specifically for Belgium. So you know it'll absolutely never happen. The various governments we have need to become more efficient in what they do, they also need to do less since it's not the task of government to do everything, and they need to stop wasting our money (highest or second highest taxed country in the world when it comes to people working, and the second biggest deficit in the EU this year. Percentage wise that is. It still comes down to about 30 billion euros iirc.). Meaning we basically have no reserves when another crisis hits, and the - especially- francofone left parties are so retrograde and extreme that reforms are basically impossible.


I'm well aware that migration is of all times and that a bit of migration is usually a good thing to shake things up a bit and keep the cultures vibrant. But I'm also of the opinion that what we're having since at least the start of the century is not a little migration but mass migration. And of that I'm less convinced it's a boon, more like a burden, since I'm not certain that there are any mass migrations in history that were of a positive nature to the people on the receiving end during the event. Centuries later, when things had been restored, maybe. But at the moment itself: wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Anyways, I'll stop. I've probably lost my train of thought a few times so I'm not even sure any of it'll make sense.

----

*remember that I live in a country where an immigrant can live a relatively comfortable life just on stipends from the state without have to work a day in his life. Same goes for more than a few natives too, by the way. One extreme case from a few years ago was a person who never worked a day in his life having a bigger pension than someone who worked a full career or 40ish years. Like I said: extreme cases, but it shows what is possible.

**For example, Fouad Ahadir from the socialist party, voted against the law that would outlaw slaughter without stunning the animals first (something that is done in Indonesia, only the biggest muslim country in the world). His reasoning was that he couldn't believe God would allow the animals to suffer. Religious obsurantism in other words.

*** Yes, I know I'm not that big a fan of the EU as it is and I'm also not a big fan of a EU state. This being cause by the way the EU is, which doesn't give many any confidence in a potential EU federal state. They'd fuck up. Doesn't mean that should the EU improve it's quality of politics greatly I wouldn't be amenable to backing a federal EU then. (I hope I didn't mess up my is and isn'ts here...)

****In case of Ukraine: we're basically the region.

***** Migration towards Europe also shouldn't be a method autocratic countries can use to get rid of their dissenters and thus stave of collapse of their faulty regimes. If the people there want better regimes they'll have to put in the work. We generally can't do it for them since we'd be accused of 'imperialism' if we did.

Thank you for that. I didn't ask you because I wanted to argue about it - so I'm not about to construct a long reply or argument or anything. I'm sure there's stuff I disagree with or can question, but that wasn't the point. Mostly in the past our political exchanges have been at the level of sarcastic oneliners and I wanted to move beyond that.

I'm going to finish reading your post, digest and think. I may or may not come back with comments or questions, but appreciate the effort you went to in laying it out like that.

Quote from: Jacob on November 24, 2023, 06:09:50 PMThank you for that. I didn't ask you because I wanted to argue about it - so I'm not about to construct a long reply or argument or anything. I'm sure there's stuff I disagree with or can question, but that wasn't the point. Mostly in the past our political exchanges have been at the level of sarcastic oneliners and I wanted to move beyond that.

I'm going to finish reading your post, digest and think. I may or may not come back with comments or questions, but appreciate the effort you went to in laying it out like that.

no problem.
There's no need to reply to it if you don't have the time or desire to do so.
And I'm well aware of my sarcasm and cynicism and one liners. Not always endearing (probably mostly not). heh
I've worked with enough people from all over the globe, including those following a number of versions of islam, to be more pragmatic in real life.

Wilders having trouble as not even other right-wingers like him. :nelson:

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231129-huge-blow-for-wilders-as-major-party-snubs-coalition

So what happens if he can't form a coalition?

We're not there yet. This is mostly just posturing before the real talks start. The other parties can probably get pretty large concessions from Wilders and he's probably willing to give them for a chance to form a coalition.
If it really doesn't work, coalition options without the PVV will be looked at, or a minority government.

There's been post-election poll apparently. Seems like it might be a bad idea to piss of the electorate by playing polical games. On the other hand: it's still early days and the Dutch electorate is one of the most volatile in western Europe.

Isn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Jeez, it's not because you disagree with them that they are fascist.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:04:17 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Jeez, it's not because you disagree with them that they are fascist.

Ah, "You just call everyone who disagrees with you a fascist".
Interesting how this always comes out when fascy views are being called fascist and its just never an issue with other disagreeable groups.

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 04:09:57 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:04:17 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Jeez, it's not because you disagree with them that they are fascist.

Ah, "You just call everyone who disagrees with you a fascist".
Interesting how this always comes out when fascy views are being called fascist and its just never an issue with other disagreeable groups.

Problem is that you think everyone is a fascist. Ever wondered if you're not the one with the extremist views?

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:16:58 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 04:09:57 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:04:17 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Jeez, it's not because you disagree with them that they are fascist.

Ah, "You just call everyone who disagrees with you a fascist".
Interesting how this always comes out when fascy views are being called fascist and its just never an issue with other disagreeable groups.

Problem is that you think everyone is a fascist. Ever wondered if you're not the one with the extremist views?

Except that evidently isn't true.
My distaste for Margaret Thatcher is well known I believe? Do I call her a fascist?

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 04:17:47 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:16:58 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 04:09:57 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:04:17 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Jeez, it's not because you disagree with them that they are fascist.

Ah, "You just call everyone who disagrees with you a fascist".
Interesting how this always comes out when fascy views are being called fascist and its just never an issue with other disagreeable groups.

Problem is that you think everyone is a fascist. Ever wondered if you're not the one with the extremist views?

Except that evidently isn't true.
My distaste for Margaret Thatcher is well known I believe? Do I call her a fascist?

He is just upset because you are ragging on his dreadful views.

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Yeah, still well within the realm of normalcy.

QuoteAny sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

No, and there won't be at this stage. All leftist parties are banking on Wilders trying and failing.

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 04:17:47 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:16:58 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 04:09:57 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 04:04:17 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 03:48:44 AMIsn't this the normal way things work after elections there?

Any sign of an alternative coalition building elsewhere excluding the fascists?

Jeez, it's not because you disagree with them that they are fascist.

Ah, "You just call everyone who disagrees with you a fascist".
Interesting how this always comes out when fascy views are being called fascist and its just never an issue with other disagreeable groups.

Problem is that you think everyone is a fascist. Ever wondered if you're not the one with the extremist views?

Except that evidently isn't true.
My distaste for Margaret Thatcher is well known I believe? Do I call her a fascist?

I think he was confusing you & I.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 02:02:23 AMThere's been post-election poll apparently. Seems like it might be a bad idea to piss of the electorate by playing polical games. On the other hand: it's still early days and the Dutch electorate is one of the most volatile in western Europe.

How so? Who is playing political games and how is the pissed off electorate manifesting itself in the polls?

https://www.peilingennederland.nl/alle-peilingen.html

seats: poll (elections)
PVV : 42 (37)
Links kartel : 22 (25)
NSC : 19 (20)
VVD : 16 (24)
D'66 : 11 (9)
BBB : 10 (7)
CDA : 6 (5)
SP : 5 (5)
VOLT : 3 (2)
CU : 3 (3)
SGP : 3 (3)
Denk : 3 (3)
FVD : 3 (3)
JA21 : 1 (1)

with polling being what it is, I'm not sure how credible these results are. But then again, the voters have blindsided the pollsters before.
Wilders seems to gaining more potential voters, VVD seems to be losing more. Again, it's poll and an early one at that but it appears as if a part of the people don't appreciate it when the right-wing doesn't work together

As for volatility: only a few months ago BBB was the big next thing and with election-time they weren't. So it seems the dutch voters are willing to cast their votes on new parties easily, searching for that party that'll -I guess- do what it promises. And then going to the next one if the previous ends up being a disappointment.
It does seem that in all this the 'establishment' parties continue their downwards trend. Which is something we've been seeing across Europe for the last 30 years or so? (maybe even longer, but now for certain parties the trend has gone on so long that some of them are but mere shadows, with no real successors ready yet).

In any case: the mood inside the EU is not positive with a recent study of the European Council on Foreign Relations indicating that about a third of it's citizens say things are going the right way, with 2 thirds saying the opposite

we'll see in a few months what's really going on

Surely people in Europe saying things are going the wrong way is bad news for the far right, them being that wrong way

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 02:30:43 PMSurely people in Europe saying things are going the wrong way is bad news for the far right, them being that wrong way

Get with the program Jos. Things going wrong means foreigners are to blame.

I'll be glad our crushing labor shortage will be solved as soon as we close our borders to people looking for work.

Quote from: Maladict on December 04, 2023, 02:44:19 PM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 02:30:43 PMSurely people in Europe saying things are going the wrong way is bad news for the far right, them being that wrong way

Get with the program Jos. Things going wrong means foreigners are to blame.

I'll be glad our crushing labor shortage will be solved as soon as we close our borders to people looking for work.

Our Federal government closed foreign worker visas for a period of time due in part to the theory that Canadians were not getting those jobs.  It was quickly realized that no Canadians were applying for those jobs and emergency visas starting getting issued about three months later.

Quote from: crazy canuck on December 04, 2023, 03:21:57 PM

Quote from: Maladict on December 04, 2023, 02:44:19 PM

Quote from: Josquius on December 04, 2023, 02:30:43 PMSurely people in Europe saying things are going the wrong way is bad news for the far right, them being that wrong way

Get with the program Jos. Things going wrong means foreigners are to blame.

I'll be glad our crushing labor shortage will be solved as soon as we close our borders to people looking for work.

Our Federal government closed foreign worker visas for a period of time due in part to the theory that Canadians were not getting those jobs.  It was quickly realized that no Canadians were applying for those jobs and emergency visas starting getting issued about three months later.

Same in the UK. Quickly turned out no Brit wanted to work on the fields for the pittance the farmers were willing and/or able to pay.

Quote from: Tamas on December 05, 2023, 06:09:41 AMSame in the UK. Quickly turned out no Brit wanted to work on the fields for the pittance the farmers were willing and/or able to pay.

I don't think it's the same in the UK.

The government's not ever closed foreign worker visas - in fact it's been pretty substantially liberalised. It's one of the reasons we have record high net migration right now.

QuoteYeah, still well within the realm of normalcy.

Is the Netherlands a country where someone gets appointed as formateur to formally negotiate a government?

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 05, 2023, 07:01:01 AMIs the Netherlands a country where someone gets appointed as formateur to formally negotiate a government?

Yes, but we're not even there yet. We're now in the exploratory phase where someone is appointed to see which potential coalition should have a formateur appointed.

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 05, 2023, 07:01:01 AM

Quote from: Tamas on December 05, 2023, 06:09:41 AMSame in the UK. Quickly turned out no Brit wanted to work on the fields for the pittance the farmers were willing and/or able to pay.

I don't think it's the same in the UK.

The government's not ever closed foreign worker visas - in fact it's been pretty substantially liberalised. It's one of the reasons we have record high net migration right now.

Sure, Brexit was a non-event :cheers:

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 04, 2023, 02:02:44 PMhttps://www.peilingennederland.nl/alle-peilingen.html

seats: poll (elections)
PVV : 42 (37)
Links kartel : 22 (25)
NSC : 19 (20)
VVD : 16 (24)
D'66 : 11 (9)
BBB : 10 (7)
CDA : 6 (5)
SP : 5 (5)
VOLT : 3 (2)
CU : 3 (3)
SGP : 3 (3)
Denk : 3 (3)
FVD : 3 (3)
JA21 : 1 (1)

And the latest:

QuoteEenVandaag Opiniepanel
@Opiniepanel
Nieuwste zetelpeiling van @EenVandaag en @IpsosNL:
PVV: 47 (+10)
GL-PvdA: 22 (-3)
VVD: 18 (-6)
NSC: 19 (-1)
D66: 9
BBB: 8 (+1)
CDA: 4 (-1)
SP: 3 (-2)
DENK: 4 (+1)
PvdD: 5 (+2)
FvD: 3
SGP: 3
CU: 3
Volt: 2
JA21: 0 (-1)

Shows the seats they'd win now and the increase from the election. I'm not sure if this is just what happens once a taboo has been broken. Or if it's a bit like the campaign Cummings described in the event of a second Brexit referendum which would just be on the slogan: "tell them again".

Not unrelatedly just saw the first French poll that actually had the top two parties as NUPES (assuming they survive) and RN - so a Melenchon-Le Pen run off (and I have zero doubt that the European preference would be for Le Pen). But this feels like a warning sign for the Netherlands (which has been a bit of a canary in the coal mine for Europe before) and Europe more generally - or at least for policy makers/people from the centre.

Right or not it should be clear now that European population has been upset/unnerved by immigration and not talking about it was not the solution. I am not saying xenophobes should be catered for, but concerns even if incorrect must he addressed if they grow big enough.

Quote from: Tamas on December 19, 2023, 08:01:48 AMRight or not it should be clear now that European population has been upset/unnerved by immigration and not talking about it was not the solution. I am not saying xenophobes should be catered for, but concerns even if incorrect must he addressed if they grow big enough.

I'd say otherwise. We've talked about it endlessly- this was clearly the wrong approach, to just see the immigration as the core problem that had people unsettled, rather than actually focussing on the real issues that affect people's day to day.

Mass migration is a real issue that affects people.

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 19, 2023, 07:48:28 AMNot unrelatedly just saw the first French poll that actually had the top two parties as NUPES (assuming they survive) and RN - so a Melenchon-Le Pen run off (and I have zero doubt that the European preference would be for Le Pen). But this feels like a warning sign for the Netherlands (which has been a bit of a canary in the coal mine for Europe before) and Europe more generally - or at least for policy makers/people from the centre.

Very unlikely to survive at this point, thanks to Mélenchon, and the war in Gaza.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 19, 2023, 10:44:44 AMMass migration is a real issue that affects people.

Mass migration isn't a thing.
People think its a real and serious issue as its an excellent scapegoat for the real problems in modern Europe.

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on December 19, 2023, 11:09:01 AMVery unlikely to survive at this point, thanks to Mélenchon, and the war in Gaza.

Yes. His no show at the march against anti-semitism (attended by everyone else) was pretty outrageous. Not surprising but there we are.

There will be a question of the extent to which the centre left (Green/PS types) are willing to hold their nose.

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 08:32:30 AMI'd say otherwise. We've talked about it endlessly- this was clearly the wrong approach, to just see the immigration as the core problem that had people unsettled, rather than actually focussing on the real issues that affect people's day to day.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 19, 2023, 10:44:44 AMMass migration is a real issue that affects people.

Which drags out the centrist ideologue in me :lol:

Because I think both of these are right. I don't think in a Europe where we've had twenty plus years of Wilders, Fortuyn, Le Pen, Lega, Farage - and accommodation with that from hijab bans to Merkel's "multiculturalism has failed", that we can realistically say that we have failed to talk about it.

On the other hand I think Britain's a demonstration here where we have a government routinely derided as hard-right, with record levels of immigration and population growth at its highest level in 60+ years - combined with record low home building and decades of low investment. Those two will clash at some point.

I don't think talking more will help and I'm not particularly interested in pathologising what's causing it. And as someone on the left this would perhaps inevitably be my solution, but I think we need large scale public investment, particularly home building in the UK, but more broadly in the public realm, in public services etc.

I think just continuing to talk about and "acknowledge legitimate concerns" while not either: reducing immigration or increasing investment will just lead to further radicalisation to the hard right. Similarly I think not wanting to talk about it and using trite language about "we've always been a migration society - look at the Vikings" and not acknowledging there is a cultural change is also doomed. Here I actually weirdly think Gareth Southgate's work with the England team is a possible model :lol: :ph34r:

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 11:14:11 AMMass migration isn't a thing.
People think its a real and serious issue as its an excellent scapegoat for the real problems in modern Europe.

Who gets to decide which are the real and serious issues?

Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 19, 2023, 11:36:11 AM[quote author=Josquius link=msg=1428792 date=1703002451
Mass migration isn't a thing.
People think its a real and serious issue as its an excellent scapegoat for the real problems in modern Europe.

Who gets to decide which are the real and serious issues?
[/quote]

Extensive research and analysis.

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 11:38:19 AM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 19, 2023, 11:36:11 AM[quote author=Josquius link=msg=1428792 date=1703002451
Mass migration isn't a thing.
People think its a real and serious issue as its an excellent scapegoat for the real problems in modern Europe.

Who gets to decide which are the real and serious issues?

Extensive research and analysis.
[/quote]

I think you have to do better than that.

Now look - I'll agree that "mass migration" is a kind of dog whistle, that it dovetails with "replacement theory" which is BS.

But it is absolutely 100% legitimate to discuss immigration and refugee policies, and to have a discussion about immigration levels in a given country.

Of course part of that conversation is also that

A: we in "the West" have been having below-replacement fertility levels for awhile now, and immigration is somewhat required.
B: we can't ignore why people in the global south are so poor they risk their lives to come into our countries

Really, I just want us to be able to have a frank discussion about immigration that doesn't devolve into either proponents of immigration accusing the other side of being racists, or opponents of immigration being racists.

What is mass immigration?

Quote from: Barrister on December 19, 2023, 12:35:59 PMuote author=Josquius link=msg=1428797

Extensive research and analysis.
[/quot

I think you have to do better than that.

Now look - I'll agree that "mass migration" is a kind of dog whistle, that it dovetails with "replacement theory" which is BS.

But it is absolutely 100% legitimate to discuss immigration and refugee policies, and to have a discussion about immigration levels in a given country.

Of course part of that conversation is also that

A: we in "the West" have been having below-replacement fertility levels for awhile now, and immigration is somewhat required.
B: we can't ignore why people in the global south are so poor they risk their lives to come into our countries

Really, I just want us to be able to have a frank discussion about immigration that doesn't devolve into either proponents of immigration accusing the other side of being racists, or opponents of immigration being racists.

Of course. You can't not have an immigration policy.
But this "you can't even talk about immigration without being called a racist" thing is itself such a dog whistle. It gels nicely with the far rights raging desire for victim status.
The truth in modern politics is more often the opposite. It's hard not to talk about immigration even when evidence points a different direction.
We've been allowing the populist right to dictate the agenda way too long.

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 11:38:19 AM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 19, 2023, 11:36:11 AMWho gets to decide which are the real and serious issues?

Extensive research and analysis.

Seems like a great way to have regular citizens who are not part of this extensive research and analysis committee feel disenfranchised.  Who cares what you think are real and serious issues, we have extensive research and analysis to tell you what the real and serious issues are.

Democracy gives power to the people not because the people are the greatest decision-makers, but rather because when people are subjected to power and its decisions without being allowed a say in it, resentment builds.

Quote from: Barrister on December 19, 2023, 12:35:59 PMA: we in "the West" have been having below-replacement fertility levels for awhile now, and immigration is somewhat required.
B: we can't ignore why people in the global south are so poor they risk their lives to come into our countries

Although this varies by country but for the UK and, I'd imagine, Canada immigration is mainly from, for want of a better phrase, the global middle class. It's people on work and study visas from China, India, Nigeria, Philippines etc.

I think that is a little different in a lot of Europe. Still many students, but far more family reunification and humanitarian migrants, far fewer for work.

The poorest are most often trapped in or near their homes. This is even true with refugees - the ones who are able to try and get to Europe or North America (and who can pay the fees required) are often not the poorest (or necessarily the most vulnerable). In respect of refugees it's why I think it's really important to try and re-vivify UN processes to actually make sure the most in need are settled first not just the young, able bodied and often middle class (from within their own societies).

Obviously the world's leading host of refugees are, I believe, Turkiye and Iran, Colombia hosts millions, as do, say, Sudan and South Sudan (mainly internally displaced but recently Sudanese are fleeing to South Sudan!). Looking at desperation in the global south, it is something still primarily felt in the global south.

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 19, 2023, 03:29:53 PM

Quote from: Barrister on December 19, 2023, 12:35:59 PMA: we in "the West" have been having below-replacement fertility levels for awhile now, and immigration is somewhat required.
B: we can't ignore why people in the global south are so poor they risk their lives to come into our countries

Although this varies by country but for the UK and, I'd imagine, Canada immigration is mainly from, for want of a better phrase, the global middle class. It's people on work and study visas from China, India, Nigeria, Philippines etc.

I think that is a little different in a lot of Europe. Still many students, but far more family reunification and humanitarian migrants, far fewer for work.

The poorest are most often trapped in or near their homes. This is even true with refugees - the ones who are able to try and get to Europe or North America (and who can pay the fees required) are often not the poorest (or necessarily the most vulnerable). In respect of refugees it's why I think it's really important to try and re-vivify UN processes to actually make sure the most in need are settled first not just the young, able bodied and often middle class (from within their own societies).

Obviously the world's leading host of refugees are, I believe, Turkiye and Iran, Colombia hosts millions, as do, say, Sudan and South Sudan (mainly internally displaced but recently Sudanese are fleeing to South Sudan!). Looking at desperation in the global south, it is something still primarily felt in the global south.

No absolutely.  Canada and UK are very much geographically isolated from the "global south", so we do not have the pressures that places like southern Europe or even the US have in terms of refugees.  A lot of our immigration is coming from India, China, Phillippines, etc.

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 19, 2023, 03:29:53 PM

Quote from: Barrister on December 19, 2023, 12:35:59 PMA: we in "the West" have been having below-replacement fertility levels for awhile now, and immigration is somewhat required.
B: we can't ignore why people in the global south are so poor they risk their lives to come into our countries

Although this varies by country but for the UK and, I'd imagine, Canada immigration is mainly from, for want of a better phrase, the global middle class. It's people on work and study visas from China, India, Nigeria, Philippines etc.

I think that is a little different in a lot of Europe. Still many students, but far more family reunification and humanitarian migrants, far fewer for work.

The poorest are most often trapped in or near their homes. This is even true with refugees - the ones who are able to try and get to Europe or North America (and who can pay the fees required) are often not the poorest (or necessarily the most vulnerable). In respect of refugees it's why I think it's really important to try and re-vivify UN processes to actually make sure the most in need are settled first not just the young, able bodied and often middle class (from within their own societies).

Obviously the world's leading host of refugees are, I believe, Turkiye and Iran, Colombia hosts millions, as do, say, Sudan and South Sudan (mainly internally displaced but recently Sudanese are fleeing to South Sudan!). Looking at desperation in the global south, it is something still primarily felt in the global south.

That is the perception of what is happening in Canada.  But not reality.  A while back in the Canadian politics thread  I linked a detailed examination the Globe did on Canadian Immigration.  The upshot was that it is not fulfilling its objectives because we are not in fact attracting mainly students eagers and willing to make a life here.  We are mainly getting their families - ie parents and grandparents.  And so your demographics are not getting younger, our workforce is not expanding as anticipated and our social costs are increasing without the benefit of the first two factors helping to pay for the increase.

I thought it said that the "economic class" visas were still over half of residents family reunification/dependents were about 1/3. Not as tilted as the UK (which is about 2/3 students and workers). But still mainly "economic" in one way or another.

But the contrast with Europe is that in much of Europe you need to flip those numbers. For example, in France I think over half of migrants are family reunification or humanitarian resettlement.

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 19, 2023, 04:29:44 PMI thought it said that the "economic class" visas were still over half of residents family reunification/dependents were about 1/3. Not as tilted as the UK (which is about 2/3 students and workers). But still mainly "economic" in one way or another.

But the contrast with Europe is that in much of Europe you need to flip those numbers. For example, in France I think over half of migrants are family reunification or humanitarian resettlement.

You have a good memory.

This is the bit I think you are talking about:

QuoteThat is not the only catch. Many working-age immigrants arrive in Canada with dependent children and spouses who do not work, and are often joined later by retired family members and parents. For example, while about 253,000 of the 406,000 permanent residents Canada accepted in 2021 were admitted in the economic-class category, about one-third of the total were spouses or dependents, according to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). Another 81,000 permanent residents entered Canada in 2021 under family reunification programs.

"If you were really serious [about lowering the dependency ratio] you wouldn't allow any parents and grandparents to come in," Mr. Griffith says. "The demographic arguments for higher immigration don't really hold water or are vastly overstated."

That's it - though in the UK family reunification is a function of human rights and the rights to a family life. It's possible to change but that's one of the clauses of ECHR that has been developed by British judges in a really quite expansive way - it may be something for parliament to look at (though I'm not sure - feels like it would undermine the offer). It has certainly come under criticism.

Although the UK is even more tilted to work (around 325,000) and study (around 375,000) v family (70,000) and humanitarian routes (165,000). Those are the net figures to June 2023 and don't include EU or Brits, which are even more work and study tilted (but net emigration for the EU and for the Brits).

Not sure it's possible for immigration alone to reduce dependency, or if it's desirable to use it in that way. Instinctively it makes me think of German or Dutch "guest workers". I'd guess the bigger (but more expensive) piece is making it more affordable and attractive to have a family for everyone in the country.

By comparison this is France (and I don't think this is uncommon in much of Europe) - still lots of students but work is a far smaller proportion (and only recently growing) and family reunification far larger:
(https://www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/source_charts/cp-2022-france-fig4-.png)

Similarly I think the latest stats on the Netherlands had family reunification running at about double the number of work visas - or about the same as work and study put together. So again over 50% of the total are refugees and family reunification (of the 40% that is non-EU/free movement).

I think that the approach in Europe may be better ethically, but I think it might make integration and building political support more challenging - which needs balancing.

Quote from: DGuller on December 19, 2023, 02:43:16 PM

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 11:38:19 AM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 19, 2023, 11:36:11 AMWho gets to decide which are the real and serious issues?

Extensive research and analysis.

Seems like a great way to have regular citizens who are not part of this extensive research and analysis committee feel disenfranchised.  Who cares what you think are real and serious issues, we have extensive research and analysis to tell you what the real and serious issues are.

Democracy gives power to the people not because the people are the greatest decision-makers, but rather because when people are subjected to power and its decisions without being allowed a say in it, resentment builds.

Its a balance. But I do think the smart answer is weighted a bit more towards technocrat side of the scale than the populist one. Its the way our democracy is fundamentally meant to work- we elect people who have time and teams of professionals to get a better understanding of the way the world works than anyone with a 9 to 5 and other commitments could ever get.

You obviously don't tell people you're not going to take what they say at face value. When they're screaming they can't get a doctors appointment because of all the immigrants you nod along and make all the right noises and record everything they said...but then you take that away and cross reference it with other data and see that the problems they're having getting a doctors appointment would be best tackled by investment in the health system rather than any sort of anti immigrant grandstanding.

There's the famous but sadly apocryphal Henry Ford quote "If I asked people what they wanted they would have said faster horses". You don't completely ignore what people want. But you do use expertise to figure out the core problem and a real solution rather than what they think is the solution.

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 11:14:11 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 19, 2023, 10:44:44 AMMass migration is a real issue that affects people.

Mass migration isn't a thing.
People think its a real and serious issue as its an excellent scapegoat for the real problems in modern Europe.

Then be forever clueless as to why peoplevote the way they do.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 20, 2023, 04:08:46 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 19, 2023, 11:14:11 AM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 19, 2023, 10:44:44 AMMass migration is a real issue that affects people.

Mass migration isn't a thing.
People think its a real and serious issue as its an excellent scapegoat for the real problems in modern Europe.

Then be forever clueless as to why peoplevote the way they do.

A belief in a handy scapegoat for all the problems of the day doesnt make it true.

Quote from: Josquius on December 24, 2023, 06:47:43 AMA belief in a handy scapegoat for all the problems of the day doesnt make it true.

Neither does it make it untrue.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 24, 2023, 07:54:43 AM

Quote from: Josquius on December 24, 2023, 06:47:43 AMA belief in a handy scapegoat for all the problems of the day doesnt make it true.

Neither does it make it untrue.

No
It being bollocks makes it untrue.

Quote from: Josquius on December 24, 2023, 09:57:36 AMNo
It being bollocks makes it untrue.

Which doesn't get us any closer to the truth.