"And when you let them in, you don't grimace"
January 27, 2016 3:37 PM Subscribe
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who built a barbed wire fence around his country to keep out the migrants, was also [at a Brussels summit]. He saw, and enjoyed, seeing [Angela] Merkel in a fix. He took the floor and said: "It is only a matter of time before Germany builds a fence. Then I'll have the Europe that I believe is right." Merkel said nothing at first, a person present at the meeting relates. Only later, after a couple other heads of government had their say, did Merkel turn to Orbán and say: "I lived behind a fence for too long for me to now wish for those times to return."-The Isolated Chancellor: What Is Driving Angela Merkel? by Markus Feldenkirchen and René Pfister of Der Spiegel.
I'm annoyed at the title on the "Vanishing Trust" graph. The graph shows that Merkel's popularly has dropped in the past, and she has regained her footing, and it's low at the moment. That is not exactly the same thing as "Vanishing Trust."
And also annoyed at how they repeatedly say that Germany can't handle the refugees without breaking it down. What does it take to handle the refugees, and what is missing? They don't say. Instead it's all about the political landscape.
posted by bunderful at 4:58 PM on January 27, 2016 [6 favorites]
And also annoyed at how they repeatedly say that Germany can't handle the refugees without breaking it down. What does it take to handle the refugees, and what is missing? They don't say. Instead it's all about the political landscape.
posted by bunderful at 4:58 PM on January 27, 2016 [6 favorites]
So, if I'm correctly interpreting the question that the "Vanishing Trust" graph shows responses to, Merkel's approval ratings are above 55%?
posted by eviemath at 5:16 PM on January 27, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 5:16 PM on January 27, 2016 [4 favorites]
This past fall I went to a family reunion in Hungary, where many of my maternal grandmother's family perished in the Holocaust. While we were there, we went to the Pan-European Picnic. In case you haven't heard of it, that was the site where East Germans first escaped through the Iron Curtain to the west, crossing the Hungarian border as the guards there held their fire. (It is deeply ironic that Hungary, with its own history of uprising against the USSR, and this proud monument, is taking the racist, xenophobic and hateful approach it is today to immigrants.)
Parenthetically, I toured Berlin (including East Berlin), Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and East Germany back in the days when the Iron Curtain was in existence. I'll never forget the Wall, the armed guards in their towers at Checkpoint Charlie, watching as border guards in the other countries tore apart cars and searched people at the border, listening to panicked people in those countries plead with me for help defecting, or all the other manifestations of a police state I saw in all those places.
I will tell you that Angela Merkel spoke when the Picnic monument was dedicated, talking about how incredibly meaningful it was to her as an East German to finally see people winning their freedom. She means what she says about the current immigrants. She knows how critical it is that people at risk find safety and opportunity.
posted by bearwife at 5:18 PM on January 27, 2016 [54 favorites]
Parenthetically, I toured Berlin (including East Berlin), Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and East Germany back in the days when the Iron Curtain was in existence. I'll never forget the Wall, the armed guards in their towers at Checkpoint Charlie, watching as border guards in the other countries tore apart cars and searched people at the border, listening to panicked people in those countries plead with me for help defecting, or all the other manifestations of a police state I saw in all those places.
I will tell you that Angela Merkel spoke when the Picnic monument was dedicated, talking about how incredibly meaningful it was to her as an East German to finally see people winning their freedom. She means what she says about the current immigrants. She knows how critical it is that people at risk find safety and opportunity.
posted by bearwife at 5:18 PM on January 27, 2016 [54 favorites]
It is also hard to take seriously an article that quotes Trump as a reasoned, impartial political commentator and prognosticator.
posted by eviemath at 5:20 PM on January 27, 2016 [18 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 5:20 PM on January 27, 2016 [18 favorites]
Angela Merkel seems to be one of the few people who recognize the refugee crisis as the huge, historical event that it is. And she seems to be one of the few people who wants to be on the right side of history.
posted by pjsky at 5:27 PM on January 27, 2016 [79 favorites]
posted by pjsky at 5:27 PM on January 27, 2016 [79 favorites]
I don't always agree with Ms. Merkel. (Greece needs to accept austerity measures, really?) but she's right this time.
posted by evilDoug at 5:28 PM on January 27, 2016 [17 favorites]
posted by evilDoug at 5:28 PM on January 27, 2016 [17 favorites]
bunderful: Instead it's all about the political landscape.
One of the aspects I found interesting about the article is that it puts Merkel into the context of the German political milieu. Most articles I've read elide all that. Part of what I find impressive about her stance on the refugee crisis is how she's navigating the choppy waters of domestic politics.
eviemath: It is also hard to take seriously an article that quotes Trump as a reasoned, impartial political commentator and prognosticator.
I'm pretty sure Trump is being quoted as a right-wing, xenophobic politician, much in the same way as Orbán is quoted later in the article.
posted by Kattullus at 5:32 PM on January 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
One of the aspects I found interesting about the article is that it puts Merkel into the context of the German political milieu. Most articles I've read elide all that. Part of what I find impressive about her stance on the refugee crisis is how she's navigating the choppy waters of domestic politics.
eviemath: It is also hard to take seriously an article that quotes Trump as a reasoned, impartial political commentator and prognosticator.
I'm pretty sure Trump is being quoted as a right-wing, xenophobic politician, much in the same way as Orbán is quoted later in the article.
posted by Kattullus at 5:32 PM on January 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
I was taken to visit the InterGerman Border in 1987 as an exchange student -- I know about the fence of which Merkel speaks. It was a Cold War awakening for me as a 19 year old, one that has stuck with me much more strongly than going to Berlin and seeing that city divided by The Wall. (It might have been the oddly arranged military parade of might that was arranged for all the exchange students to witness while we were visiting the Border region -- the Wall was just a thing, but that parade was... full of missiles and marching soldiers, all theater stages for 16-20 year olds from Western countries.)
I understand her feelings about this. I didn't grow up where she did, but I share her views. And I also have sympathy for those who disagree. But when I hear about "sealing the US borders" spouted by US politicians, I always ask myself, "Have you actually SEEN a truly sealed border? It is one of the most horrifying things you will encounter."
posted by hippybear at 5:41 PM on January 27, 2016 [18 favorites]
I understand her feelings about this. I didn't grow up where she did, but I share her views. And I also have sympathy for those who disagree. But when I hear about "sealing the US borders" spouted by US politicians, I always ask myself, "Have you actually SEEN a truly sealed border? It is one of the most horrifying things you will encounter."
posted by hippybear at 5:41 PM on January 27, 2016 [18 favorites]
It sounds like I meant that the German political background in the article is not interesting, and I should have worded my comment more carefully. As someone who doesn't have a lot of knowledge in the area it was a rather exciting read on that count.
posted by bunderful at 5:41 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by bunderful at 5:41 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
"I lived behind a fence for too long for me to now wish for those times to return."
She lived on the inside of a fence intended to fence its people in, like prisoners. The fences going up today are fences intended to keep a wholly foreign people out. Not saying intra-European walls and fences are the only public policy solution, or even the correct one, but the rhetorical comparisons are apples to oranges.
Further, just like Merkel had a right to live in her own country and not have it be ruined by an insane government, today's migrants have a right to have their own countries not be destroyed by Western policies.
posted by resurrexit at 6:26 PM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
She lived on the inside of a fence intended to fence its people in, like prisoners. The fences going up today are fences intended to keep a wholly foreign people out. Not saying intra-European walls and fences are the only public policy solution, or even the correct one, but the rhetorical comparisons are apples to oranges.
Further, just like Merkel had a right to live in her own country and not have it be ruined by an insane government, today's migrants have a right to have their own countries not be destroyed by Western policies.
posted by resurrexit at 6:26 PM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
Further, just like Merkel had a right to live in her own country and not have it be ruined by an insane government, today's migrants have a right to have their own countries not be destroyed by Western policies.
Neither of which were actually true versions of reality that any living person in any of those countries experienced.
posted by hippybear at 6:38 PM on January 27, 2016 [16 favorites]
Neither of which were actually true versions of reality that any living person in any of those countries experienced.
posted by hippybear at 6:38 PM on January 27, 2016 [16 favorites]
She lived on the inside of a fence intended to fence its people in, like prisoners. The fences going up today are fences intended to keep a wholly foreign people out.
Apples and oranges, you say? Perhaps. But I think we can compare apples and oranges in this instance, as both the apple and the orange are evil.
posted by maxsparber at 7:30 PM on January 27, 2016 [4 favorites]
Apples and oranges, you say? Perhaps. But I think we can compare apples and oranges in this instance, as both the apple and the orange are evil.
posted by maxsparber at 7:30 PM on January 27, 2016 [4 favorites]
Merkel won me over last year when push seemed to be coming to shove in the Ukraine:
“I am firmly convinced this conflict cannot be solved with military means [...] I cannot imagine any situation in which improved equipment for the Ukrainian army leads to President Putin being so impressed that he believes he will lose militarily. I have to put it that bluntly.” She added that force had not proved to be the solution in the past when dealing with Russia. “I grew up in East Germany, I have seen the Wall,” she said. “The Americans did not intervene in the Wall, but in the end we won.”
The right woman at the right time.
posted by philip-random at 7:33 PM on January 27, 2016 [25 favorites]
“I am firmly convinced this conflict cannot be solved with military means [...] I cannot imagine any situation in which improved equipment for the Ukrainian army leads to President Putin being so impressed that he believes he will lose militarily. I have to put it that bluntly.” She added that force had not proved to be the solution in the past when dealing with Russia. “I grew up in East Germany, I have seen the Wall,” she said. “The Americans did not intervene in the Wall, but in the end we won.”
The right woman at the right time.
posted by philip-random at 7:33 PM on January 27, 2016 [25 favorites]
When I read about how Europe and America reacted to the Jews fleeing Hitler I think, perhaps, we will never learn. People don't flee amusement parks. People don't leave their homes and jobs in droves because they're just too lazy to take part in the political process. When a father puts his child on an overcrowded boat to cross to Greece, of all places, he's trying to save what he loves from something a lot worse than poverty.
Good on Merkel for standing up for European Christian values.
posted by irisclara at 7:52 PM on January 27, 2016 [14 favorites]
Good on Merkel for standing up for European Christian values.
posted by irisclara at 7:52 PM on January 27, 2016 [14 favorites]
And also annoyed at how they repeatedly say that Germany can't handle the refugees without breaking it down. What does it take to handle the refugees, and what is missing? They don't say. Instead it's all about the political landscape.
Germany also absorbed a wave of refugees after the war. They were ethnic Germans who either fled in advance of the Soviet army's progress through eastern Europe or were expelled later on, so had the advantage of a common language, but it's not like they weren't refugees.
posted by hoyland at 7:54 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
Germany also absorbed a wave of refugees after the war. They were ethnic Germans who either fled in advance of the Soviet army's progress through eastern Europe or were expelled later on, so had the advantage of a common language, but it's not like they weren't refugees.
posted by hoyland at 7:54 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
How many of the migrants are from Syria though? Aren't most of them in Turkey? There are reports of most of the ones in Europe being economic migrants and not refugees from war.
posted by asra at 9:02 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by asra at 9:02 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
It may be that, for purely practical reasons, Germany will have to implement some sort of limit on how quickly they can admit refugees. The article notes that the influx has caused extreme delays in processing the paperwork necessary to allow the refugees to work, for example.
Even if that turns out to be the case, Merkel should be praised very highly for erring on the side of accepting more refugees rather than fewer to none. Almost universally, nations go in the other direction if they have any control over their border.
The better answer is to hire more people to process the immigration paperwork and convince other countries to share the load more evenly to help reduce the number of refugees any one country must process and support. Yet thanks to the political situation elsewhere, Germany is being left to shoulder the burden largely on its own. It's unfair to Germany and is exacerbating the situation there both practically and politically, but more importantly is unfair to the refugees who will likely see their main remaining safe haven in the West closed in relatively short order. If certain other countries who refuse to accept refugees in anything approaching the proportion they ought to, the backlash in Germany and the other countries who have accepted greater numbers of refugees would be greatly reduced. Probably as much from the feelings of solidarity that would be generated as from any "benefit" to reducing the volume of refugees seeking haven in any given country.
The part that really takes my feelings on the situation from outrage up to legit anger, though, is the absurd short-sightedness involved in the anti-immigrant position. Leaving aside the moral bankruptcy involved in denying people safe haven when they are forced to flee their homes, the anti-immigrant position is terrible economic policy.
Despite the short term problems that can be caused by a sudden spike in immigration, in the long term it is a significant benefit to the destination country. Even if you can't get beyond straight self interest, more open borders are the way to go. The brain drain on the other end of the pipeline is a problem, to be sure, but that isn't even anywhere to be found in the rhetoric of the xenophobes, even as something mentioned in passing.
That ended up being more than a bit of a ramble, but to summarize, Merkel's political situation is being exacerbated by the unwillingness of many other nations to help and it is especially infuriating because even without the moral dimension, those nations would benefit economically, so they're once again punching themselves in the face and prolonging their economic crisis.
Come to think of it, maybe that's why the refugee crisis is being overblown by the power structure in most nations. It distracts from the continued failure of their economic policies.
posted by wierdo at 9:14 PM on January 27, 2016 [6 favorites]
Even if that turns out to be the case, Merkel should be praised very highly for erring on the side of accepting more refugees rather than fewer to none. Almost universally, nations go in the other direction if they have any control over their border.
The better answer is to hire more people to process the immigration paperwork and convince other countries to share the load more evenly to help reduce the number of refugees any one country must process and support. Yet thanks to the political situation elsewhere, Germany is being left to shoulder the burden largely on its own. It's unfair to Germany and is exacerbating the situation there both practically and politically, but more importantly is unfair to the refugees who will likely see their main remaining safe haven in the West closed in relatively short order. If certain other countries who refuse to accept refugees in anything approaching the proportion they ought to, the backlash in Germany and the other countries who have accepted greater numbers of refugees would be greatly reduced. Probably as much from the feelings of solidarity that would be generated as from any "benefit" to reducing the volume of refugees seeking haven in any given country.
The part that really takes my feelings on the situation from outrage up to legit anger, though, is the absurd short-sightedness involved in the anti-immigrant position. Leaving aside the moral bankruptcy involved in denying people safe haven when they are forced to flee their homes, the anti-immigrant position is terrible economic policy.
Despite the short term problems that can be caused by a sudden spike in immigration, in the long term it is a significant benefit to the destination country. Even if you can't get beyond straight self interest, more open borders are the way to go. The brain drain on the other end of the pipeline is a problem, to be sure, but that isn't even anywhere to be found in the rhetoric of the xenophobes, even as something mentioned in passing.
That ended up being more than a bit of a ramble, but to summarize, Merkel's political situation is being exacerbated by the unwillingness of many other nations to help and it is especially infuriating because even without the moral dimension, those nations would benefit economically, so they're once again punching themselves in the face and prolonging their economic crisis.
Come to think of it, maybe that's why the refugee crisis is being overblown by the power structure in most nations. It distracts from the continued failure of their economic policies.
posted by wierdo at 9:14 PM on January 27, 2016 [6 favorites]
How many of the migrants are from Syria though? Aren't most of them in Turkey?
The plurality are in Turkey but not the majority.
posted by Justinian at 9:24 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
The plurality are in Turkey but not the majority.
posted by Justinian at 9:24 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
The figure I've seen thrown around most recently is that the European Commission reckons that about 60% of the migrant population in this last year's wave are economic migrants, mostly from the Maghreb.
Despite the short term problems that can be caused by a sudden spike in immigration, in the long term it is a significant benefit to the destination country. Even if you can't get beyond straight self interest, more open borders are the way to go.
Is it really axiomatic that immigration is always a net plus? What are your parameters for "benefit"? Increased GDP? Higher quality of life? Increased cultural diversity? What do open borders and the "short term problems" of immigration mean for social democracies?
posted by nicolas léonard sadi carnot at 9:31 PM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
Despite the short term problems that can be caused by a sudden spike in immigration, in the long term it is a significant benefit to the destination country. Even if you can't get beyond straight self interest, more open borders are the way to go.
Is it really axiomatic that immigration is always a net plus? What are your parameters for "benefit"? Increased GDP? Higher quality of life? Increased cultural diversity? What do open borders and the "short term problems" of immigration mean for social democracies?
posted by nicolas léonard sadi carnot at 9:31 PM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
Exactly; it depends on how you define your terms. For example, was the mass immigration to North America from the 17th to 19th centuries a significant benefit? To most people, yes. To the native Americans... not so much.
posted by Justinian at 9:47 PM on January 27, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by Justinian at 9:47 PM on January 27, 2016 [5 favorites]
She lived on the inside of a fence intended to fence its people in, like prisoners. The fences going up today are fences intended to keep a wholly foreign people out.
I live in Hungary, and I'm not so sure. Just keep watching.
posted by holist at 10:02 PM on January 27, 2016 [10 favorites]
I live in Hungary, and I'm not so sure. Just keep watching.
posted by holist at 10:02 PM on January 27, 2016 [10 favorites]
The figure I've seen thrown around most recently is that the European Commission reckons that about 60% of the migrant population in this last year's wave are economic migrants, mostly from the Maghreb.
I found the claim repeated in many places, all based on Frontex figures that have not been officially released yet. Frans Timmermans, who made the claim, is "the most powerful EU official in Brussels" - the first vice-president of the European Commission. I'd be very surprised if his claim didn't have some sort less than straightforward political motivation.
But I do find the distinction false. I think in the great majority of cases, turning everything you own into money and leaving for a very different country with the intention to settle there is based on a complex mix of motivations, and economic ones are almost always in there. But it is a difficult line to draw, and perhaps one that should not be drawn at all. Is having no future an economic condition? Is this more a case of measuring out sympathy? How poor and hopeless do you have to be before your 'economic' desire for a better life makes you a person deserving of protection?
posted by holist at 10:25 PM on January 27, 2016 [17 favorites]
I found the claim repeated in many places, all based on Frontex figures that have not been officially released yet. Frans Timmermans, who made the claim, is "the most powerful EU official in Brussels" - the first vice-president of the European Commission. I'd be very surprised if his claim didn't have some sort less than straightforward political motivation.
But I do find the distinction false. I think in the great majority of cases, turning everything you own into money and leaving for a very different country with the intention to settle there is based on a complex mix of motivations, and economic ones are almost always in there. But it is a difficult line to draw, and perhaps one that should not be drawn at all. Is having no future an economic condition? Is this more a case of measuring out sympathy? How poor and hopeless do you have to be before your 'economic' desire for a better life makes you a person deserving of protection?
posted by holist at 10:25 PM on January 27, 2016 [17 favorites]
And finally, sorry: "a wholly foreign people".
There's the essence of the problem, right there.
posted by holist at 10:38 PM on January 27, 2016 [9 favorites]
There's the essence of the problem, right there.
posted by holist at 10:38 PM on January 27, 2016 [9 favorites]
The rise/return of nationalism in the "smaller" countries of Europe - here's The Killing's Sofie Gråbøl on Denmark's recent new law to expropriate refugees who are "too rich" - is extremely worrisome.
posted by progosk at 10:59 PM on January 27, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by progosk at 10:59 PM on January 27, 2016 [5 favorites]
And also annoyed at how they repeatedly say that Germany can't handle the refugees without breaking it down. What does it take to handle the refugees, and what is missing? They don't say. Instead it's all about the political landscape.That this is said about post-unification Germany is hilarious to me.
posted by fullerine at 11:20 PM on January 27, 2016
She lived on the inside of a fence intended to fence its people in, like prisoners. The fences going up today are fences intended to keep a wholly foreign people out.
True. East Germany built a fence to keep its citizen on the INSIDE. The debate in Europe is on whether to build fences in order to keep people OUTSIDE. But I think this is not how Merkel sees the fences. I think to her, a fence is something that keeps refugees from getting from an unsafe point to a safe point. If you look at it that way, the distinction is not so great.
The question, of course, is what do you do with the people once they are in the country. Do refugees have the same rights as citizens of that country? Do they get free health insurance? A free basic income? Do they get pensions, even if they never paid into the pension system? Do they get the right to work? Do they have the right to STAY in the country indefinitely? Even after having committed a crime? What if the persecution/war in their home countries has stopped?
While the economic net benefit over the long run may be positive, it is quite naive to think that there is a net positive for everyone. There are always losers in large migrations, and in the case of Europe, it will be those at the lower end of the income spectrum that will feel the increased competition from migrants in the labor and housing market. Those who will profit, on the other hand, are e.g. those that benefit from cheap labor (in addition, of course, to those that are saved from war and persecution). And besides, what does "long run" mean in this context anyway? Will there ever be a time when there are no more wars and refugees? And if not, do we commit to keeping the doors open as long as there are wars and persecution in the world? If refugees will cost us in the short run and we keep the door open, then it might not be so unreasonable to expect multiple short runs that will continue for longer than we are alive.
Should our solidarity primarily be with those that are already here (e.g. by limiting the number of refugees or otherwise increasing the barriers for refugees to enter the labor market)? Or should our solidarity be unconditionally extended to every human being on the planet? Or something in between, e.g. only to those who make it to come knocking on our doors, as is the case now? Or should we perhaps eliminate the doors entirely? Is there no bound to our solidarity? Last year, there were >1 million coming to Germany, something that no one would have imagined several years ago. What if next year, there are 3 million?
Of course, declaring your unconditional solidarity with people from far-away war zones is easy if you're comparatively wealthy, but much more difficult if you are unsecure about your own future.
Anyway, those are the fault lines. In the end, Europe will have to make a decision.
We will either have to share a significant portion of our wealth. Or we will have to keep out those that come knocking on our doors. And that means fences. And knowing that there are people dying in wars somewhere. Or drowning in the Mediterranean on their way to get here.
Either way, it is not going to be pretty.
posted by sour cream at 11:42 PM on January 27, 2016 [5 favorites]
True. East Germany built a fence to keep its citizen on the INSIDE. The debate in Europe is on whether to build fences in order to keep people OUTSIDE. But I think this is not how Merkel sees the fences. I think to her, a fence is something that keeps refugees from getting from an unsafe point to a safe point. If you look at it that way, the distinction is not so great.
The question, of course, is what do you do with the people once they are in the country. Do refugees have the same rights as citizens of that country? Do they get free health insurance? A free basic income? Do they get pensions, even if they never paid into the pension system? Do they get the right to work? Do they have the right to STAY in the country indefinitely? Even after having committed a crime? What if the persecution/war in their home countries has stopped?
While the economic net benefit over the long run may be positive, it is quite naive to think that there is a net positive for everyone. There are always losers in large migrations, and in the case of Europe, it will be those at the lower end of the income spectrum that will feel the increased competition from migrants in the labor and housing market. Those who will profit, on the other hand, are e.g. those that benefit from cheap labor (in addition, of course, to those that are saved from war and persecution). And besides, what does "long run" mean in this context anyway? Will there ever be a time when there are no more wars and refugees? And if not, do we commit to keeping the doors open as long as there are wars and persecution in the world? If refugees will cost us in the short run and we keep the door open, then it might not be so unreasonable to expect multiple short runs that will continue for longer than we are alive.
Should our solidarity primarily be with those that are already here (e.g. by limiting the number of refugees or otherwise increasing the barriers for refugees to enter the labor market)? Or should our solidarity be unconditionally extended to every human being on the planet? Or something in between, e.g. only to those who make it to come knocking on our doors, as is the case now? Or should we perhaps eliminate the doors entirely? Is there no bound to our solidarity? Last year, there were >1 million coming to Germany, something that no one would have imagined several years ago. What if next year, there are 3 million?
Of course, declaring your unconditional solidarity with people from far-away war zones is easy if you're comparatively wealthy, but much more difficult if you are unsecure about your own future.
Anyway, those are the fault lines. In the end, Europe will have to make a decision.
We will either have to share a significant portion of our wealth. Or we will have to keep out those that come knocking on our doors. And that means fences. And knowing that there are people dying in wars somewhere. Or drowning in the Mediterranean on their way to get here.
Either way, it is not going to be pretty.
posted by sour cream at 11:42 PM on January 27, 2016 [5 favorites]
Actually, it seems to me that Europe (as in the population, rather than its masters) making the decision to share a significant portion of its wealth would be pretty. Amazingly pretty. Unbelievably pretty, sadly, but still.
posted by holist at 11:55 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by holist at 11:55 PM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
"I will not become involved in a competition for who can treat the refugees the worst," she said.
Currently top of the leader board is Denmark, where the police seize your jewellery when you arrive. Britain houses those waiting to hear if they have asylum (who are not allowed to work) in houses with doors painted red and are made to wear wristbands, while in terms of vocabulary, 'sex mobs' is standard. And we're only a few months in.
posted by colie at 12:41 AM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
Currently top of the leader board is Denmark, where the police seize your jewellery when you arrive. Britain houses those waiting to hear if they have asylum (who are not allowed to work) in houses with doors painted red and are made to wear wristbands, while in terms of vocabulary, 'sex mobs' is standard. And we're only a few months in.
posted by colie at 12:41 AM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
Good article. If Merkel can live out the year she will have to be canonized. The bureaucratic chaos of 'processing' the refugees is the biggest nightmare - whatever else might be happening politically, the logistical, the registration of all these people is the real hurdle - because bureaucracies are sentient super-beings in their own right and they will what they will.
Which is wickedly ironic - Seehofer and Schäuble are asking for something utterly inconsequential yet pivotal - and it's similar to parenting technique of not saying 'no' right now. They want a 'cap' that has no real bearing in the real world - it can always be moved up or down - and Merkel doesn't (though it can always be moved) want a cap. Both could very well be undone by the simple fact that the bureaucracy of integrating all these people is too much over too short a period of time.
I remember when she made that little girl cry and I thought 'damn, that looks really really bad' and it makes me think Merkel thought the same thing - thought, 'why really can't we take them all? Or at least many many more?'
Now the opposition parties are attacking her moment of 'weakness' and it's all too much like the scorpion killing the frog who is swimming it over the river.
The easiest solution would be to end the civil war in Syrian and let all these people move back.
However it shakes out, Merkel has proved she is a compassionate human being at the helm of one of the strongest nations in the world. No mean feat.
posted by From Bklyn at 1:25 AM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
Which is wickedly ironic - Seehofer and Schäuble are asking for something utterly inconsequential yet pivotal - and it's similar to parenting technique of not saying 'no' right now. They want a 'cap' that has no real bearing in the real world - it can always be moved up or down - and Merkel doesn't (though it can always be moved) want a cap. Both could very well be undone by the simple fact that the bureaucracy of integrating all these people is too much over too short a period of time.
I remember when she made that little girl cry and I thought 'damn, that looks really really bad' and it makes me think Merkel thought the same thing - thought, 'why really can't we take them all? Or at least many many more?'
Now the opposition parties are attacking her moment of 'weakness' and it's all too much like the scorpion killing the frog who is swimming it over the river.
The easiest solution would be to end the civil war in Syrian and let all these people move back.
However it shakes out, Merkel has proved she is a compassionate human being at the helm of one of the strongest nations in the world. No mean feat.
posted by From Bklyn at 1:25 AM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
And Mr. Douthat's? I poop in your hat.
Making you ask, "did you really do that?"
To which I'll reply, "Yes, Douthat, I did that."
posted by From Bklyn at 1:29 AM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
Making you ask, "did you really do that?"
To which I'll reply, "Yes, Douthat, I did that."
posted by From Bklyn at 1:29 AM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
She lived on the inside of a fence intended to fence its people in, like prisoners. The fences going up today are fences intended to keep a wholly foreign people out.
Yeah, this only makes sense if your citizens are 'people' and the refugees are 'immigrants'. As soon as they become humanised, the distinction disappears.
posted by Ned G at 1:56 AM on January 28, 2016 [8 favorites]
Yeah, this only makes sense if your citizens are 'people' and the refugees are 'immigrants'. As soon as they become humanised, the distinction disappears.
posted by Ned G at 1:56 AM on January 28, 2016 [8 favorites]
From Bklyn: "Now the opposition parties are attacking her moment of 'weakness' …"The opposition parties are the green Greens and the far left Lefties. Merkel faces much harder attacks both from inside her own party and especially from the Bavarian conservatives. The Prime Minister of Bavaria is threatening to sue the federal government (which is run by a coalition including his own party!) at the constitutional court over this.
posted by brokkr at 2:07 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
While I'm not a complete fan of Merkel (austerity, Greece etc.) I would ask right-wing evangelical Christians in America to look closely at her actions as described here:
posted by ianso at 3:34 AM on January 28, 2016 [5 favorites]
Merkel grew up with the tenet that, if a stranger is standing in the rain before your door, you let him in and help, he continues. "And when you let them in, you don't grimace," Dohnanyi says. "Christians don't do that." Merkel herself recently said something similar. "We hold speeches on Sundays and we talk about values. I am the chair of a Christian political party. And then people come to us from 2,000 kilometers away and then you're supposed to say: You can't show a friendly face here anymore?"Wouldn't it be nice if 'Christian' politics everywhere was about having the conviction to be loving and compassionate, no matter how unpopular it is with your voters.
posted by ianso at 3:34 AM on January 28, 2016 [5 favorites]
The best solution, as From Bklyn says, is to somehow stabilize the situation in Syria, to eliminate the "push" factor. Unfortunately that's even more difficult than the logistics of processing hundreds of thousands of migrants.
Here's the issue with asylum law, though. To be considered a refugee you have to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution in your country of nationality. Well-founded fear of future persecution is usually interpreted to mean something specific and individualized: you, personally, are being targeted for persecution on one of the enumerated grounds. I haven't studied this in a while but I don't know whether most countries view a civil war situation is providing that kind of specific persecution. If that's the case, I wonder whether most of the people coming from Syria even qualify as refugees under the Convention.
posted by orrnyereg at 4:19 AM on January 28, 2016
Here's the issue with asylum law, though. To be considered a refugee you have to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution in your country of nationality. Well-founded fear of future persecution is usually interpreted to mean something specific and individualized: you, personally, are being targeted for persecution on one of the enumerated grounds. I haven't studied this in a while but I don't know whether most countries view a civil war situation is providing that kind of specific persecution. If that's the case, I wonder whether most of the people coming from Syria even qualify as refugees under the Convention.
posted by orrnyereg at 4:19 AM on January 28, 2016
Even if they don't qualify as refugees, other international law will prevent them being deported to Syria if it would endanger them, which it surely would . So where will they go? I have no idea.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:26 AM on January 28, 2016
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:26 AM on January 28, 2016
I thought even the far right had stopped trying to insist that the 4 million+ people who have fled a fully out-of-control four-way civil war were not refugees but 'economic migrants' or some other codeword for 'blacks we don't want.'
posted by colie at 5:11 AM on January 28, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by colie at 5:11 AM on January 28, 2016 [5 favorites]
So I support the admission of refugees but
Germany also absorbed a wave of refugees after the war. They were ethnic Germans who either fled in advance of the Soviet army's progress through eastern Europe or were expelled later on, so had the advantage of a common language, but it's not like they weren't refugees.
A set of decisions basically made by Allied occupation forces and visited upon Germany, and that in part succeeded by just not giving a shit about the suffering on either pushing or receiving side, is probably not the best example for how refugees can be absorbed.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:11 AM on January 28, 2016
Germany also absorbed a wave of refugees after the war. They were ethnic Germans who either fled in advance of the Soviet army's progress through eastern Europe or were expelled later on, so had the advantage of a common language, but it's not like they weren't refugees.
A set of decisions basically made by Allied occupation forces and visited upon Germany, and that in part succeeded by just not giving a shit about the suffering on either pushing or receiving side, is probably not the best example for how refugees can be absorbed.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:11 AM on January 28, 2016
Germany also absorbed a wave of refugees after the war.
The two are not really comparable. At the end of WWII all of Germany was a rubble pile - and the refugees arriving in the west were 'German.' Today the refugees look different, speak a different language and pray different. And German is prosperous and comfortable.
And I misspoke saying Schäuble and Seehoffer were 'opposition party,' I meant ' assassins of the old school.'
posted by From Bklyn at 5:43 AM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
The two are not really comparable. At the end of WWII all of Germany was a rubble pile - and the refugees arriving in the west were 'German.' Today the refugees look different, speak a different language and pray different. And German is prosperous and comfortable.
And I misspoke saying Schäuble and Seehoffer were 'opposition party,' I meant ' assassins of the old school.'
posted by From Bklyn at 5:43 AM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
Here's the issue with asylum law, though. To be considered a refugee you have to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution in your country of nationality.
I don't think that's entirely true. I think a distinction is made between "persecution" and "war-zone", and there's a legal difference between the two. So, if you come from (certain regions of) Syria, it is well accepted that the country is a war zone, and you don't have to demonstrate anything. As for demonstrating persecution, I believe the hurdle for that is also surprisingly low. Basically, the premise is that you come to Europe empty-handed so in most you cannot "prove" your persecution with documents. I believe that in practice it's more of an interview that is then checked for plausibility.
But all that is almost irrelevant, because hardly anyone is ever sent back, even if it turns out that they have no right to claim asylum. In 2015, less than 20.000 were sent back from Germany out of more than a million that made it there in that year, so that's less then 2%. There also stories of families that let themselves be voluntarily "deported" for the summer holidays in Kosovo or Albania or whereever. Who can blame them?
So it doesn't really matter whether you're considered a refugee or not. Once you make it to Germany, there's statistically a 98% chance that you can stay. And even if the process is accelerated in the future, this figure is unlikely to ever go below 80% or 90%.
posted by sour cream at 6:00 AM on January 28, 2016
I don't think that's entirely true. I think a distinction is made between "persecution" and "war-zone", and there's a legal difference between the two. So, if you come from (certain regions of) Syria, it is well accepted that the country is a war zone, and you don't have to demonstrate anything. As for demonstrating persecution, I believe the hurdle for that is also surprisingly low. Basically, the premise is that you come to Europe empty-handed so in most you cannot "prove" your persecution with documents. I believe that in practice it's more of an interview that is then checked for plausibility.
But all that is almost irrelevant, because hardly anyone is ever sent back, even if it turns out that they have no right to claim asylum. In 2015, less than 20.000 were sent back from Germany out of more than a million that made it there in that year, so that's less then 2%. There also stories of families that let themselves be voluntarily "deported" for the summer holidays in Kosovo or Albania or whereever. Who can blame them?
So it doesn't really matter whether you're considered a refugee or not. Once you make it to Germany, there's statistically a 98% chance that you can stay. And even if the process is accelerated in the future, this figure is unlikely to ever go below 80% or 90%.
posted by sour cream at 6:00 AM on January 28, 2016
Merkel's political situation is being exacerbated by the unwillingness of many other nations to help
Remember the song Proud to be an American? Me neither.
posted by Literaryhero at 6:12 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Remember the song Proud to be an American? Me neither.
posted by Literaryhero at 6:12 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Will there ever be a time when there are no more wars and refugees? And if not, do we commit to keeping the doors open as long as there are wars and persecution in the world?
Maybe the folks who instigated this refugee crisis in Washington and London and Paris could stop causing refugee crises.
Thought the spiegel article was great. I wonder if the chancellor staff who arranged her photo-op with the teenage Lebanon refugee would like to have that one back. That part of the story where Merkel told her there wasn't anything that could be done and she instantly burst into tears and then the chancellor did a 180 degree policy turn within a couple days was amazing.
posted by bukvich at 6:49 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Maybe the folks who instigated this refugee crisis in Washington and London and Paris could stop causing refugee crises.
Thought the spiegel article was great. I wonder if the chancellor staff who arranged her photo-op with the teenage Lebanon refugee would like to have that one back. That part of the story where Merkel told her there wasn't anything that could be done and she instantly burst into tears and then the chancellor did a 180 degree policy turn within a couple days was amazing.
posted by bukvich at 6:49 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Angela Merkel seems to be one of the few people who recognize the refugee crisis as the huge, historical event that it is.
Conservatives and nationalists have been saying this loudly and consistently from the get-go. That's why they're against it.
They do agree with her on one thing, however. Both she and they think multiculturalism has utterly failed. Waist deep in Big Muddy is their take on it, push on seems to be hers.
posted by IndigoJones at 8:08 AM on January 28, 2016
Conservatives and nationalists have been saying this loudly and consistently from the get-go. That's why they're against it.
They do agree with her on one thing, however. Both she and they think multiculturalism has utterly failed. Waist deep in Big Muddy is their take on it, push on seems to be hers.
posted by IndigoJones at 8:08 AM on January 28, 2016
As someone who is probably not eating today because the paycheck doesn't get direct deposited until tomorrow, I don't think it is comfort underlying my willingness to accept refugees from war-torn nations.
People come, they get jobs, they buy things. Things that need to be produced and sold, so even if a refugee terk my jerb, I can go get another one thanks to the increased economic activity they are supporting. Hell, I might even be employed by one of them in a few years.
Granted, with the tax system such as it is, most of the gain will go to some rich assholes, some to the new immigrants, and a teensy tiny slice to me and everyone else, but that's a problem with neoliberal policy, not with immigration itself.
posted by wierdo at 8:13 AM on January 28, 2016 [9 favorites]
People come, they get jobs, they buy things. Things that need to be produced and sold, so even if a refugee terk my jerb, I can go get another one thanks to the increased economic activity they are supporting. Hell, I might even be employed by one of them in a few years.
Granted, with the tax system such as it is, most of the gain will go to some rich assholes, some to the new immigrants, and a teensy tiny slice to me and everyone else, but that's a problem with neoliberal policy, not with immigration itself.
posted by wierdo at 8:13 AM on January 28, 2016 [9 favorites]
The best solution, as From Bklyn says, is to somehow stabilize the situation in Syria, to eliminate the "push" factor. Unfortunately that's even more difficult than the logistics of processing hundreds of thousands of migrants.
Syria's northern neighbor's blatant support of Dae'sh/ ISIS and brutal suppression of the one militia in that ghastly war that stands for anything humane, is a major factor in the "push."
Note, conveniently, that the refugees migrating to Europe come by way of Turkey. By the time they enter the EU, they are already safe from the war itself, and are fleeing the dangers inherent in sleeping on the streets in Turkey. (Those dangers are real, and obfuscating them with such labels as "economic migrant" is a vile thing to do. But they are also far smaller than the dangers of the Syrian war itself).
Sealing the borders and kettling the refugees in Turkey could force Erdogan to reckon with reality and start cutting deals with the YPG militia. At which point, the northeastern corner of Syria could become habitable again.
posted by ocschwar at 8:58 AM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
bearwife: "(It is deeply ironic that Hungary, with its own history of uprising against the USSR, and this proud monument, is taking the racist, xenophobic and hateful approach it is today to immigrants.)"
It's not ironic, it's fuckwitted.
posted by chavenet at 11:08 AM on January 28, 2016
It's not ironic, it's fuckwitted.
posted by chavenet at 11:08 AM on January 28, 2016
"But she isn't flexible when she is under pressure," says one of her confidants. "Perhaps that is her greatest blemish."
Blemish? That's a feature, not a bug. She won't be pressured into being flexible, but she is flexible when given time to think about things.
posted by chavenet at 11:28 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Blemish? That's a feature, not a bug. She won't be pressured into being flexible, but she is flexible when given time to think about things.
posted by chavenet at 11:28 AM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Apples and oranges, you say? Perhaps. But I think we can compare apples and oranges in this instance, as both the apple and the orange are evil.
Is it 'evil' for German citizens to have the authority decide who is allowed to be in Germany, or Hungarian citizens to have the authority to decide who is allowed to be in Hungary? Merely showing up with a need, after passing through multiple "safe third party countries" as many of these migrants have done, is not an automatic claim on the resources of another nation and another people.
posted by theorique at 1:01 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
Is it 'evil' for German citizens to have the authority decide who is allowed to be in Germany, or Hungarian citizens to have the authority to decide who is allowed to be in Hungary? Merely showing up with a need, after passing through multiple "safe third party countries" as many of these migrants have done, is not an automatic claim on the resources of another nation and another people.
posted by theorique at 1:01 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
So it doesn't really matter whether you're considered a refugee or not. Once you make it to Germany, there's statistically a 98% chance that you can stay. And even if the process is accelerated in the future, this figure is unlikely to ever go below 80% or 90%.
Does "chance you can stay" mean get a legal status that allows you to work?
Not to derail to France too much, but this was certainly not true in France 15 years ago - where a Rwandan acquaintance of mine finally got his asylum approved (and so an ability to work and so eat regularly) a full 7 years after the fact, despite significant documentation of his being a target. At the time there was serious conflict in algeria, yet none of the algerian refugees I knew could work legally, months after they fled (and several had relatives specifically targeted for execution). The refugee/asylum situation was far less friendly wrt getting legal status than I could have ever possibly imagined. Based on the descriptions of the refugee camps there, I can't imagine this is true now in France.
posted by lab.beetle at 1:32 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
Does "chance you can stay" mean get a legal status that allows you to work?
Not to derail to France too much, but this was certainly not true in France 15 years ago - where a Rwandan acquaintance of mine finally got his asylum approved (and so an ability to work and so eat regularly) a full 7 years after the fact, despite significant documentation of his being a target. At the time there was serious conflict in algeria, yet none of the algerian refugees I knew could work legally, months after they fled (and several had relatives specifically targeted for execution). The refugee/asylum situation was far less friendly wrt getting legal status than I could have ever possibly imagined. Based on the descriptions of the refugee camps there, I can't imagine this is true now in France.
posted by lab.beetle at 1:32 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
This is so complex and multi-layered, it's hard to even begin.
Merkel's stance and poise are so unusual for her that I do not doubt this is an expression of her deepest held beliefs. BUT any sane European politician should do what she is doing. We are all speeding towards a demographic catastrophe and the Southern European countries are already there. We need immigrants and it is a great idea to invite refugees, because they are very often smart immigrants.
Again: this is complicated; one of the reasons there has been a delay from the beginning of the various ME/Asian/African civil wars and "Arab Spring" to the current refugee crisis is that Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece were able to absorb (almost) all the refugees/immigrants who came to their coasts for a very long while. Just like in the US, the farms needed cheap labour, because nobody was left to work in the fields. In Europe we have very few young, and those we have are well-educated and won't do farm-work or other manual labour.
In the welfare states up north, we have exactly the same issue, but our farm-hands, dish-washers, and construction laborers until recently came from Eastern EU, and were regulated. Which we could handle, with some fretting. The south can handle illegal workers, we cannot, for several reasons (including universal health care and other entitlements). And here is one complication which I have never seen mentioned: the migration from east to west within the EU has drained the east of knowledge and man-power and contributed to the already extant nationalism and xenophobia in those countries. Which again reaches back to the libertarian policies applied to the changes during the 1990's in the East and Russia.
With the collapse of economy in the south, the refugees and the illegal immigrants have begun moving up north, in spite of the total lack of unregulated jobs. And here we are.
All over the world, international conventions bid countries to offer the same conditions for refugees as for their natural citizens. But in the Nordic welfare states, the level of service, which we all agree upon, means that every single refugee must receive benefits (some cash, some in the form of education, housing, child benefits and childcare, and then of course health-care), at the scale of 200.000 dollars. It's a bit less in Germany and the UK, but not that much.
The way we manage this in Scandinavia (and to a much lesser degree in Germany and the UK) means that people who in their homelands were politically active academics, or leaders in their rural homes, are suddenly treated as mentally ill social clients. It is crazy! We need doctors and lawyers and nurses and programmers and biologists and chemists etc. And we need farm hands and cleaners and factory workers and day-laborers. But all of these smart people are forced to stay in "integration progress" on benefits for at least 6 months.
During this process, an overwhelming majority become passive bordering on depressive, or they are "integrated" into semi-criminal networks of frustrated immigrants. Meaninglessly watered-down understandings of cultural relativism lead to municipal workers making deals with fundamentalist men about keeping women bound into abusive relationships. Youth in wonderfully designed housing areas (not "ghettos" at all) never have a chance of education or integration because they are adopted by an all embracing social system and told they are better of in welfare than in careers.
(I can see how this might look like Reagan-era denigration of welfare, but I have met several US-based planners and social workers who cannot believe what is going on here. It's a different animal. I support the welfare society, and work within it, but crazy inhuman things are happening - my guess is because of un-acknowledged racism). The long-term consequence is that all those people who could be a benefit to Scandinavian societies end up being a problem. And that is how the governments are calculating these days: they see every single refugee or immigrant as a long term expense, running up to millions of dollars. The Danish government is worse that the other Nordic countries, but the reasoning is the same, because the system of management is the same. And from their point of view, the number of refugees and migrants are undermining the very existence of the Nordic welfare society. As I understand it, the situation in France is different, but very similar.
I don't agree - I agree with Merkel. But I'm trying to outline their reasoning.
Meanwhile in the East of the EU, several states are bordering on autocratic nationalism, and the EU is doing nothing. The official consensus is that the Eastern states should be taking on more refugees, but the unofficial consensus is that no sane person would want to go there, and that more refugees in those countries might lead to all-out fascism, and no-one wants that. Again, Merkel is up-front here, certainly because of her background on the east side of the Iron Curtain.
I hinted at it above: a major reason for the autocracies of the East is the ideologically driven failure of the West during the 1990's. While every single Western country in 1990 had some form of welfare (except the US) - we forced Eastern Europe and Russia into a Libertarian Dystopia which unsurprisingly led to nationalism and authoritarianism. How could we know this would happen? Well because last time we thought free for all Capitalism was a good idea, we got Fascism, Nazis and Communists. Surprise? Eastern countries were doing OK during the boom, but are hit hard by the recession and a huge majority had little advantage of the boom and are having much disadvantage of the recession. Populist politicians are having an easy game. This doesn't change the fact that they need people in the only slightly longer term. But the populists aren't there to tell that.
I don't think I remembered all the layers. But:
You have all of Europe desperately needing immigration and meeting lots of people eager to emigrate and settle in Europe, wether for political or economic reasons.
Southern Europe knowing it and living it but being paralyzed by an economic crisis and corruption.
Northern Europe ignoring it and being paralyzed by a static welfare system.
Eastern Europe doing the LALALALALA after a generation being fooled into believing that libertarian economics would benefit the general populace.
What I haven't addressed are the popular and populist sentiments. It's not that I don't acknowledge them, but I do tend to think that our leaders are obligated to explain to and convince the general populace that we need to invite people in if we don't want to die alone in the ruins of out homes. While some generations have experienced terrible plagues like the Black Death or WW1, we are the first generations who have not reproduced ourselves. This is a unique situation, and maybe that is why people can't imagine it.
The boomers are the largest generation ever. And the healthiest. But at some point they will be old, and someone will need to care for them and pay for them and renovate their houses and care for their infrastructures. And those someone are the (in Europe) tiny x-ers. It's not going to happen. Not out of bad will, but out of logistics. (And a scary amount of my x-er friends have died young).
2015 is the turning point, and we have already felt it in the form of our great rock heroes dying. The largest European generation ever is that of 1945, but until 1965 the level of reproduction was huge. And then it ended. From this year and 20 years on, Europe will die out, unless it embraces immigration and learns to include migrants into its culture and values. It's a task. And not one that can be handled by hate.
Excuse me for the rant. These are terrible times.
posted by mumimor at 1:41 PM on January 28, 2016 [8 favorites]
Merkel's stance and poise are so unusual for her that I do not doubt this is an expression of her deepest held beliefs. BUT any sane European politician should do what she is doing. We are all speeding towards a demographic catastrophe and the Southern European countries are already there. We need immigrants and it is a great idea to invite refugees, because they are very often smart immigrants.
Again: this is complicated; one of the reasons there has been a delay from the beginning of the various ME/Asian/African civil wars and "Arab Spring" to the current refugee crisis is that Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece were able to absorb (almost) all the refugees/immigrants who came to their coasts for a very long while. Just like in the US, the farms needed cheap labour, because nobody was left to work in the fields. In Europe we have very few young, and those we have are well-educated and won't do farm-work or other manual labour.
In the welfare states up north, we have exactly the same issue, but our farm-hands, dish-washers, and construction laborers until recently came from Eastern EU, and were regulated. Which we could handle, with some fretting. The south can handle illegal workers, we cannot, for several reasons (including universal health care and other entitlements). And here is one complication which I have never seen mentioned: the migration from east to west within the EU has drained the east of knowledge and man-power and contributed to the already extant nationalism and xenophobia in those countries. Which again reaches back to the libertarian policies applied to the changes during the 1990's in the East and Russia.
With the collapse of economy in the south, the refugees and the illegal immigrants have begun moving up north, in spite of the total lack of unregulated jobs. And here we are.
All over the world, international conventions bid countries to offer the same conditions for refugees as for their natural citizens. But in the Nordic welfare states, the level of service, which we all agree upon, means that every single refugee must receive benefits (some cash, some in the form of education, housing, child benefits and childcare, and then of course health-care), at the scale of 200.000 dollars. It's a bit less in Germany and the UK, but not that much.
The way we manage this in Scandinavia (and to a much lesser degree in Germany and the UK) means that people who in their homelands were politically active academics, or leaders in their rural homes, are suddenly treated as mentally ill social clients. It is crazy! We need doctors and lawyers and nurses and programmers and biologists and chemists etc. And we need farm hands and cleaners and factory workers and day-laborers. But all of these smart people are forced to stay in "integration progress" on benefits for at least 6 months.
During this process, an overwhelming majority become passive bordering on depressive, or they are "integrated" into semi-criminal networks of frustrated immigrants. Meaninglessly watered-down understandings of cultural relativism lead to municipal workers making deals with fundamentalist men about keeping women bound into abusive relationships. Youth in wonderfully designed housing areas (not "ghettos" at all) never have a chance of education or integration because they are adopted by an all embracing social system and told they are better of in welfare than in careers.
(I can see how this might look like Reagan-era denigration of welfare, but I have met several US-based planners and social workers who cannot believe what is going on here. It's a different animal. I support the welfare society, and work within it, but crazy inhuman things are happening - my guess is because of un-acknowledged racism). The long-term consequence is that all those people who could be a benefit to Scandinavian societies end up being a problem. And that is how the governments are calculating these days: they see every single refugee or immigrant as a long term expense, running up to millions of dollars. The Danish government is worse that the other Nordic countries, but the reasoning is the same, because the system of management is the same. And from their point of view, the number of refugees and migrants are undermining the very existence of the Nordic welfare society. As I understand it, the situation in France is different, but very similar.
I don't agree - I agree with Merkel. But I'm trying to outline their reasoning.
Meanwhile in the East of the EU, several states are bordering on autocratic nationalism, and the EU is doing nothing. The official consensus is that the Eastern states should be taking on more refugees, but the unofficial consensus is that no sane person would want to go there, and that more refugees in those countries might lead to all-out fascism, and no-one wants that. Again, Merkel is up-front here, certainly because of her background on the east side of the Iron Curtain.
I hinted at it above: a major reason for the autocracies of the East is the ideologically driven failure of the West during the 1990's. While every single Western country in 1990 had some form of welfare (except the US) - we forced Eastern Europe and Russia into a Libertarian Dystopia which unsurprisingly led to nationalism and authoritarianism. How could we know this would happen? Well because last time we thought free for all Capitalism was a good idea, we got Fascism, Nazis and Communists. Surprise? Eastern countries were doing OK during the boom, but are hit hard by the recession and a huge majority had little advantage of the boom and are having much disadvantage of the recession. Populist politicians are having an easy game. This doesn't change the fact that they need people in the only slightly longer term. But the populists aren't there to tell that.
I don't think I remembered all the layers. But:
You have all of Europe desperately needing immigration and meeting lots of people eager to emigrate and settle in Europe, wether for political or economic reasons.
Southern Europe knowing it and living it but being paralyzed by an economic crisis and corruption.
Northern Europe ignoring it and being paralyzed by a static welfare system.
Eastern Europe doing the LALALALALA after a generation being fooled into believing that libertarian economics would benefit the general populace.
What I haven't addressed are the popular and populist sentiments. It's not that I don't acknowledge them, but I do tend to think that our leaders are obligated to explain to and convince the general populace that we need to invite people in if we don't want to die alone in the ruins of out homes. While some generations have experienced terrible plagues like the Black Death or WW1, we are the first generations who have not reproduced ourselves. This is a unique situation, and maybe that is why people can't imagine it.
The boomers are the largest generation ever. And the healthiest. But at some point they will be old, and someone will need to care for them and pay for them and renovate their houses and care for their infrastructures. And those someone are the (in Europe) tiny x-ers. It's not going to happen. Not out of bad will, but out of logistics. (And a scary amount of my x-er friends have died young).
2015 is the turning point, and we have already felt it in the form of our great rock heroes dying. The largest European generation ever is that of 1945, but until 1965 the level of reproduction was huge. And then it ended. From this year and 20 years on, Europe will die out, unless it embraces immigration and learns to include migrants into its culture and values. It's a task. And not one that can be handled by hate.
Excuse me for the rant. These are terrible times.
posted by mumimor at 1:41 PM on January 28, 2016 [8 favorites]
Merely showing up with a need
Desperate people dying on makeshift rafts with their children as they flee IS and Assad, trying to get to Germany, France or the UK because those are among the richest countries on Earth... their country destroyed by Uncle Sam's proxy war, and now they're reduced to the status of animals or freight. Nice.
posted by colie at 1:43 PM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
Desperate people dying on makeshift rafts with their children as they flee IS and Assad, trying to get to Germany, France or the UK because those are among the richest countries on Earth... their country destroyed by Uncle Sam's proxy war, and now they're reduced to the status of animals or freight. Nice.
posted by colie at 1:43 PM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
Desperate people dying on makeshift rafts with their children as they flee IS and Assad, trying to get to Germany, France or the UK
Nope. They are not fleeing Assad or Daesh at that point.
They are fleeing Turkey.
posted by ocschwar at 1:51 PM on January 28, 2016
There are 2 million of them in Turkey, which does not fully recognise the Geneva conventions on refugees and does not allow them to work or send their children to school. Turkey - not an EU member - is backing IS against the Kurds in the Syrian civil war.
posted by colie at 2:01 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by colie at 2:01 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Even if Turkey was a great place for refugees, why should it have to shoulder the responsibility for taking care of all of them? Similarly, why should it fall upon the Mediterranean nations of Europe to do the same for the people who come by boat?
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 2:12 PM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 2:12 PM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
Even if Turkey was a great place for refugees, why should it have to shoulder the responsibility for taking care of all of them?
Because being relieved of that responsibility is a very nice concession to offer Turkey on the condition that they 1. stop backing ISIS, 2. stop bombing the YPG, and 3. coordinate with NATO and the EU about which Sunni militias, if any, they do back.
posted by ocschwar at 2:15 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
The latest thinking, mooted by a Belgian minister, is to turn parts of Greece into camps for hundreds of thousands, administered by the EU. They need to get the vocabulary right to put this one out there, though, because the current term 'Closed Facilities' will remind people too much of the Nazis. The only way Greece itself could stop the refugees would be to shoot them in their boats as they rowed across.
posted by colie at 2:23 PM on January 28, 2016
posted by colie at 2:23 PM on January 28, 2016
mumimor: But all of these smart people are forced to stay in "integration progress" on benefits for at least 6 months.
During this process, an overwhelming majority become passive bordering on depressive, or they are "integrated" into semi-criminal networks of frustrated immigrants. Meaninglessly watered-down understandings of cultural relativism lead to municipal workers making deals with fundamentalist men about keeping women bound into abusive relationships. Youth in wonderfully designed housing areas (not "ghettos" at all) never have a chance of education or integration because they are adopted by an all embracing social system and told they are better of in welfare than in careers.
There is so much wrong with this that I hardly know where to begin.
I have been an immigrant in a Nordic country, specifically Finland. As I'm from Iceland, I had almost all the rights afforded to a Finnish citizen because of some decades-old inter-Nordic treaties (as well as all the social privileges that come from being a white Nordic). However, I took Finnish classes with a mix of people, including asylum-seekers and immigrants from outside Europe, some of whom had been in Finland for a short time, others which had been there longer.
The racist make-believe you set forth has absolutely nothing to do with the reality I experienced and witnessed. The people I took classes with were motivated and eager to make a life for themselves. While there were many cultural difference, people socialized across boundaries of ethnicity and creed. And this wasn't some special class for especially promising newcomers, this was just one Finnish-language program among many in Helsinki. And while there were some gripes about Finland (especially the weather, but some about society as well) these weren't any different to that of immigrants in general. Or indeed gripes I made when I was an immigrant living in the US. The only networks of frustrated immigrants I became aware of were people meeting to commiserate about their troubles and sharing their successes so others might learn.
The narrative you retold is a dehumanizing fantasy which serves to oppress those who've been uprooted by war and other deprivations.
posted by Kattullus at 2:44 PM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
During this process, an overwhelming majority become passive bordering on depressive, or they are "integrated" into semi-criminal networks of frustrated immigrants. Meaninglessly watered-down understandings of cultural relativism lead to municipal workers making deals with fundamentalist men about keeping women bound into abusive relationships. Youth in wonderfully designed housing areas (not "ghettos" at all) never have a chance of education or integration because they are adopted by an all embracing social system and told they are better of in welfare than in careers.
There is so much wrong with this that I hardly know where to begin.
I have been an immigrant in a Nordic country, specifically Finland. As I'm from Iceland, I had almost all the rights afforded to a Finnish citizen because of some decades-old inter-Nordic treaties (as well as all the social privileges that come from being a white Nordic). However, I took Finnish classes with a mix of people, including asylum-seekers and immigrants from outside Europe, some of whom had been in Finland for a short time, others which had been there longer.
The racist make-believe you set forth has absolutely nothing to do with the reality I experienced and witnessed. The people I took classes with were motivated and eager to make a life for themselves. While there were many cultural difference, people socialized across boundaries of ethnicity and creed. And this wasn't some special class for especially promising newcomers, this was just one Finnish-language program among many in Helsinki. And while there were some gripes about Finland (especially the weather, but some about society as well) these weren't any different to that of immigrants in general. Or indeed gripes I made when I was an immigrant living in the US. The only networks of frustrated immigrants I became aware of were people meeting to commiserate about their troubles and sharing their successes so others might learn.
The narrative you retold is a dehumanizing fantasy which serves to oppress those who've been uprooted by war and other deprivations.
posted by Kattullus at 2:44 PM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
Is it 'evil' for German citizens to have the authority decide who is allowed to be in Germany, or Hungarian citizens to have the authority to decide who is allowed to be in Hungary?
Welk, yes. I mean, this was the logic behind the Holocaust.
posted by maxsparber at 2:52 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Welk, yes. I mean, this was the logic behind the Holocaust.
posted by maxsparber at 2:52 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Taken to the extreme, I mean. But nationalism and closed borders are behind untiold horrors.
posted by maxsparber at 2:55 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by maxsparber at 2:55 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Kattullus - one of my best friends is a teacher in classes like the ones you took, in Denmark. And maybe Finland is completely different (though the statistics indicate otherwise).
My friend, the Danish teacher, says that the system which regulates people into which classes they may take makes certain that some people never can be integrated, no matter what their academic level is. It's not like that if you learn perfect Danish in level 1, you can graduate to level 2. You will always be at level 1 and can only hope your children will do better. This means that if you are 17 when you arrive to Denmark, and thus you have not quite reached your final secondary exam, you are accepted as a level 1 refugee.
And according to the new laws (in Denmark), you can never ever be granted citizenship if you only achieved level 1. Yes, I know, Kafka.
Until my friend explained this to me, I had no idea. The way knowledge of language was explained in the media seemed sane and fair. The way levels of education was explained seemed sane and fair.
All that said - I wrote in my first comment that Denmark is the worst of the Nordic countries, and it might well be that Finland has fairer rules.
posted by mumimor at 3:00 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
My friend, the Danish teacher, says that the system which regulates people into which classes they may take makes certain that some people never can be integrated, no matter what their academic level is. It's not like that if you learn perfect Danish in level 1, you can graduate to level 2. You will always be at level 1 and can only hope your children will do better. This means that if you are 17 when you arrive to Denmark, and thus you have not quite reached your final secondary exam, you are accepted as a level 1 refugee.
And according to the new laws (in Denmark), you can never ever be granted citizenship if you only achieved level 1. Yes, I know, Kafka.
Until my friend explained this to me, I had no idea. The way knowledge of language was explained in the media seemed sane and fair. The way levels of education was explained seemed sane and fair.
All that said - I wrote in my first comment that Denmark is the worst of the Nordic countries, and it might well be that Finland has fairer rules.
posted by mumimor at 3:00 PM on January 28, 2016 [2 favorites]
Welk, yes. I mean, this was the logic behind the Holocaust.
So if a nation is empowered to control its own borders, and, by extension, the people who come and go and the length of their stay, that will lead (in the extreme) to a holocaust? The argument seems a bit Godwin-ish.
If not the people in the nation, or their government, who should act as the authority that decides who gets to stay in a given country? Why is the government of the country not the ultimate authority within its own borders?
The only way Greece itself could stop the refugees would be to shoot them in their boats as they rowed across.
Someone - it's not completely clear who - seems to be verging on doing this.
posted by theorique at 5:21 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
So if a nation is empowered to control its own borders, and, by extension, the people who come and go and the length of their stay, that will lead (in the extreme) to a holocaust? The argument seems a bit Godwin-ish.
If not the people in the nation, or their government, who should act as the authority that decides who gets to stay in a given country? Why is the government of the country not the ultimate authority within its own borders?
The only way Greece itself could stop the refugees would be to shoot them in their boats as they rowed across.
Someone - it's not completely clear who - seems to be verging on doing this.
posted by theorique at 5:21 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
An argument that a nation doesn't have the authority to decide who is allowed to immigrate to that nation is an argument for the dissolution of the nation state as the major organizational entity in the world. Which, as I've said before, some people on Metafilter would undoubtedly argue for but which I don't think has very much traction out in the world as a whole.
It's when they start trying to control who is allowed to emigrate or live in the country once they are already citizens that you are moseying on down the road to tyranny. But controlling who becomes a citizen is pretty fundamentally the basis for the whole nation-state thing.
posted by Justinian at 5:31 PM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
It's when they start trying to control who is allowed to emigrate or live in the country once they are already citizens that you are moseying on down the road to tyranny. But controlling who becomes a citizen is pretty fundamentally the basis for the whole nation-state thing.
posted by Justinian at 5:31 PM on January 28, 2016 [3 favorites]
An argument that a nation doesn't have the authority to decide who is allowed to immigrate to that nation is an argument for the dissolution of the nation state as the major organizational entity in the world.
Nation states cede various amounts of sovereignty via treaties all the time, as 147 of them have done by agreeing to be parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. They do not do this out of altrusim -- they do it because there is broad recognition that doing so makes the world better for all involved. To say that that these obligations constitute a total destruction of sovereignty is a transparently fallacious slippery slope argument.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:00 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
Nation states cede various amounts of sovereignty via treaties all the time, as 147 of them have done by agreeing to be parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. They do not do this out of altrusim -- they do it because there is broad recognition that doing so makes the world better for all involved. To say that that these obligations constitute a total destruction of sovereignty is a transparently fallacious slippery slope argument.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:00 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
Agreeing to a set of principles in a treaty is controlling your own borders, though.
posted by Justinian at 6:05 PM on January 28, 2016
posted by Justinian at 6:05 PM on January 28, 2016
Listen, you can argue a nation's rights all you like, but as a Jew all I can think of it the death ship of Holocaust refugees that traveled the globe, searching for safe port, to be turned away again and again. These were people who had been citizens of European nations that then decided they were unwelcome interlopers, as is, it seems, their right.
When national "rights" are unjust, they aren't rights, but mechanisms of evil.
posted by maxsparber at 7:14 PM on January 28, 2016 [9 favorites]
When national "rights" are unjust, they aren't rights, but mechanisms of evil.
posted by maxsparber at 7:14 PM on January 28, 2016 [9 favorites]
. Why is the government of the country not the ultimate authority within its own borders?
Because that would mean any government has the right to kill all their citizens who can't leave fast enough to escape?
posted by the agents of KAOS at 7:19 PM on January 28, 2016
Because that would mean any government has the right to kill all their citizens who can't leave fast enough to escape?
posted by the agents of KAOS at 7:19 PM on January 28, 2016
maxsparber, lots of people, entities, or organizations have had the right to do things which we consider unjust. It's easy to come up with a list of things we have the right to do which are at the same time unjust.
posted by Justinian at 7:37 PM on January 28, 2016
posted by Justinian at 7:37 PM on January 28, 2016
To put it another way, if we only possessed those rights which could never be used unjustly, we wouldn't have many rights left, would we?
posted by Justinian at 7:41 PM on January 28, 2016
posted by Justinian at 7:41 PM on January 28, 2016
We tend not to treat rights that can be used unjustly as absolute. You have the right to speech, but not to speech that incites. Governments have the right to execute criminals, but not to murder their population. They have the right to abridge freedom of speech, but not to eliminate it. If they abuse these rights, the international community addresses it, sometimes with sanctions, sometimes with war.
So I don't believe nations have the absolute right to decide who is a citizen and who gets to cross borders. I believe it is a right until it becomes unjust, because no nation has a right to injustice, and those that claim an absolute right to do so always seem to end up murdering or allowing to be murdered those with the least power and greatest need.
posted by maxsparber at 8:04 PM on January 28, 2016
So I don't believe nations have the absolute right to decide who is a citizen and who gets to cross borders. I believe it is a right until it becomes unjust, because no nation has a right to injustice, and those that claim an absolute right to do so always seem to end up murdering or allowing to be murdered those with the least power and greatest need.
posted by maxsparber at 8:04 PM on January 28, 2016
This goes back a few years now, but what mumimor says about the Danish system rings true. I had a good Somali friend whilst I was living in Copenhagen. He had been an electrician in Somalia and wanted to be an electrician in Denmark. He wasn't able to do so - he simply wasn't allowed to take the language course because he was already taking another course (the electrician certificate he needed to work in Denmark). There was literally no way M could qualify.
And Denmark has changed since I shared a flat with M. - and very much for the worse.
Right-wing The Danish People's Party is now polling as the biggest party overall (their spin doctor has long been involved with far right-wing nationalistic groups). L-87 was passed in parliament - as noted it allows the government to seize valuables above a certain level (I've read the law and it's terrifyingly vague in places). Even more importantly, L-87 separates refugee families for a period of about 3-5 years.
And another personal anecdote. Tonnes of Danes have informally created networks helping refugees settle in local communities - Venligboerne, they are called. They've arranged social events where Danes can meet refugees, baked goods, helped with winter clothes, and generally offered a helping hand wherever. A woman I know is one of those Venligboere. She has been called names by her neighbours - names closely associated with women who fraternised with German soldiers during the Nazi occupation of Denmark.
It's damn ugly.
posted by kariebookish at 4:03 AM on January 29, 2016 [6 favorites]
And Denmark has changed since I shared a flat with M. - and very much for the worse.
Right-wing The Danish People's Party is now polling as the biggest party overall (their spin doctor has long been involved with far right-wing nationalistic groups). L-87 was passed in parliament - as noted it allows the government to seize valuables above a certain level (I've read the law and it's terrifyingly vague in places). Even more importantly, L-87 separates refugee families for a period of about 3-5 years.
And another personal anecdote. Tonnes of Danes have informally created networks helping refugees settle in local communities - Venligboerne, they are called. They've arranged social events where Danes can meet refugees, baked goods, helped with winter clothes, and generally offered a helping hand wherever. A woman I know is one of those Venligboere. She has been called names by her neighbours - names closely associated with women who fraternised with German soldiers during the Nazi occupation of Denmark.
It's damn ugly.
posted by kariebookish at 4:03 AM on January 29, 2016 [6 favorites]
He wasn't able to do so - he simply wasn't allowed to take the language course because he was already taking another course (the electrician certificate he needed to work in Denmark). There was literally no way M could qualify.
Really? There's no other way to learn Danish while living in Denmark but to attend a language course?
What about trying to talk to people in Danish, watching TV, trying to read the newspaper with a dictionary?
Actually, many if not most people in Somalia speak multiple languages and most of them manage to do so without state-sponsored intensive language courses.
But I suppose if you come to Denmark as a refugee, it's the state's responsibility to make sure that you learn the language, not the refugee's.
posted by sour cream at 5:18 AM on January 29, 2016
Really? There's no other way to learn Danish while living in Denmark but to attend a language course?
What about trying to talk to people in Danish, watching TV, trying to read the newspaper with a dictionary?
Actually, many if not most people in Somalia speak multiple languages and most of them manage to do so without state-sponsored intensive language courses.
But I suppose if you come to Denmark as a refugee, it's the state's responsibility to make sure that you learn the language, not the refugee's.
posted by sour cream at 5:18 AM on January 29, 2016
Have you ever tried to learn to speak conversational Danish by reading a newspaper with a dictionary?
posted by maxsparber at 5:23 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by maxsparber at 5:23 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
No, but I did learn Spanish that way (total immersion, including trying to read the newspaper every morning - no language course).
If newspapers are too difficult, you can also start with something easier, e.g. comic books.
posted by sour cream at 5:39 AM on January 29, 2016
If newspapers are too difficult, you can also start with something easier, e.g. comic books.
posted by sour cream at 5:39 AM on January 29, 2016
sour cream: "There's no other way to learn Danish while living in Denmark but to attend a language course?"Of course there is. But it doesn't matter if you speak it fluently if you don't have the papers to prove it.
Røvhuller.
posted by brokkr at 6:07 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
Yep, you need the certificate, the paperwork. We were many people trying to help M out and 'beat the system' but he ended up working in kitchens instead of becoming a qualified electrician once again. Even though he already was a qualified electrician who could joke in Danish over dinner. Without paperwork you are nothing.
ETA. He also spoke Danish well enough to actually do the electrician course but.. you know, paperwork.
posted by kariebookish at 6:27 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
ETA. He also spoke Danish well enough to actually do the electrician course but.. you know, paperwork.
posted by kariebookish at 6:27 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
Spanish is a rather straightforward language for English speakers -- a lot of cognates, similar sentence structure, most English speakers have some exposure to Spanish through their life.
Moving from Arabic or Ethiopic to Danish is a much larger linguistic transition. Different alphabet, almost no cognates, radically different sentence structure, different sounds, no lifetime of exposure. I would submit that your experiences with language likely do not parallel those of the refugees we are discussing, and your dismissal of the difficulties of learning the language is wildly unfair.
posted by maxsparber at 6:28 AM on January 29, 2016 [9 favorites]
Moving from Arabic or Ethiopic to Danish is a much larger linguistic transition. Different alphabet, almost no cognates, radically different sentence structure, different sounds, no lifetime of exposure. I would submit that your experiences with language likely do not parallel those of the refugees we are discussing, and your dismissal of the difficulties of learning the language is wildly unfair.
posted by maxsparber at 6:28 AM on January 29, 2016 [9 favorites]
I've double-checked and the official language of Ethiopia is Amharic. Not sure where I got Ethiopic from, except perhaps the lingering memories of being a classical and religious studies major years and years ago.
Still, Semetic language, different alphabet, etc.
posted by maxsparber at 6:52 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
Still, Semetic language, different alphabet, etc.
posted by maxsparber at 6:52 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
maxsparber, it seems that the guy learned to speak Danish fluently (enough to make jokes in Danish over dinner or complete coursework to be an electrician) even without courses, which basically proves my point.
Rather, if I understand it correctly now, the problem is that they didn't let him obtain some certification of his language ability, which I presume requires some sort of test. If that is the case, then yes, I agree that this is stupid. If entering the workforce requires certification, then you need to make the certification process open to everyone.
I wonder what's behind it. Making it as hard as possible for immigrants? Or possibly lobbying by trade unions that try to keep immigrants out?
posted by sour cream at 7:26 AM on January 29, 2016
Rather, if I understand it correctly now, the problem is that they didn't let him obtain some certification of his language ability, which I presume requires some sort of test. If that is the case, then yes, I agree that this is stupid. If entering the workforce requires certification, then you need to make the certification process open to everyone.
I wonder what's behind it. Making it as hard as possible for immigrants? Or possibly lobbying by trade unions that try to keep immigrants out?
posted by sour cream at 7:26 AM on January 29, 2016
As I understand it, refugees cone from two groups -- the relatively well-off, who often have a fair amount of education, and the desperately poor, who often don't, and don't have the resources to self-educate.
I mean, I think there is an unexamined privilege going on here. If you have resources, it may be relatively simple to track down an Amharic-Danish dictionary. But if you're utterly broke, without community resources, and impoverished, this is a nearly impossible task. They may not be available at a Danish bookstore, which might be impossible for you to navigate anyway, and how are you going to order one online when you don't have a credit card, a computer that speaks your language, or a fixed address?
I think it is important not to map out experiences onto those who are in very different circumstances, especially when doing so places the blame for those circumstances on them.
posted by maxsparber at 7:51 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
I mean, I think there is an unexamined privilege going on here. If you have resources, it may be relatively simple to track down an Amharic-Danish dictionary. But if you're utterly broke, without community resources, and impoverished, this is a nearly impossible task. They may not be available at a Danish bookstore, which might be impossible for you to navigate anyway, and how are you going to order one online when you don't have a credit card, a computer that speaks your language, or a fixed address?
I think it is important not to map out experiences onto those who are in very different circumstances, especially when doing so places the blame for those circumstances on them.
posted by maxsparber at 7:51 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
I'm not sure where you get Amharic from; I thought we're talking about a guy from Somalia.
The principal languages of Somalia are Somali, Arabic and English. Many people are bilingual in Somalia, and at least for Arabic and English, it shouldn't be difficult to find dictionaries. Literacy isn't very high, though.
posted by sour cream at 8:24 AM on January 29, 2016
The principal languages of Somalia are Somali, Arabic and English. Many people are bilingual in Somalia, and at least for Arabic and English, it shouldn't be difficult to find dictionaries. Literacy isn't very high, though.
posted by sour cream at 8:24 AM on January 29, 2016
I suppose I mentally jumped to Ethiopia because the Danish have long relations with Ethiopia. As for Somalis, a lot of them have some English education, many don't. Somalis do use Latin letters, but their orthography is quite a bit different -- for example, the Somali Latin alphabet lacks p, v and z.
I don't want to overstate my case. I just think learning a language is hard, harder still when you're poor, even harder still when you're a refugee, and even harder yet when you get no assistance.
posted by maxsparber at 9:04 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
I don't want to overstate my case. I just think learning a language is hard, harder still when you're poor, even harder still when you're a refugee, and even harder yet when you get no assistance.
posted by maxsparber at 9:04 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
This is really a derail, and I shouldn't contribute, but Danish is very difficult to learn for all except Germans, because the pronunciation has nothing to do with the spelling - similar to the way most people know from French, but entirely different. For some reason, Germans can handle this. Even Swedes and Norwegians struggle - obligatory
posted by mumimor at 11:26 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by mumimor at 11:26 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
Immigrant absorption is remarkably a different matter in the US.
Political grandstanding notwithstanding, it's the consensus in the US that immigrants who are past their 20's are simply not going to learn much English, and that it's not worth freaking out over.
Easier to hold to that consensus when your country never bothered to declare an official language, and when your national identity is defined by a simplistic reading of a political manifesto scribbled by an autistic plantation owner 200 years ago, though.
posted by ocschwar at 6:22 PM on January 29, 2016
Political grandstanding notwithstanding, it's the consensus in the US that immigrants who are past their 20's are simply not going to learn much English, and that it's not worth freaking out over.
Easier to hold to that consensus when your country never bothered to declare an official language, and when your national identity is defined by a simplistic reading of a political manifesto scribbled by an autistic plantation owner 200 years ago, though.
posted by ocschwar at 6:22 PM on January 29, 2016
Germany's Merkel says refugees must return home once war is over
posted by anthill at 9:57 AM on January 30, 2016
posted by anthill at 9:57 AM on January 30, 2016
Good luck with that!
posted by Justinian at 10:35 AM on January 30, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Justinian at 10:35 AM on January 30, 2016 [1 favorite]
sour cream: "I wonder what's behind it. Making it as hard as possible for immigrants?"ding ding ding we have a winner
posted by brokkr at 11:42 AM on January 31, 2016 [1 favorite]
Mod note: A couple of comments deleted. Wrapping "greedy refugees" victim blaming stuff in "some people think" rhetoric is not a good way to go.
posted by taz (staff) at 7:12 AM on February 1, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 7:12 AM on February 1, 2016 [2 favorites]
Great article, Lalochezia.
It doesn't matter whether people want more migrants or don't want them; either way, Europe will be irrevocably changed.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:24 PM on February 1, 2016
It doesn't matter whether people want more migrants or don't want them; either way, Europe will be irrevocably changed.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:24 PM on February 1, 2016
It doesn't matter whether people want more migrants or don't want them; either way, Europe will be irrevocably changed.
Europe is faced with an existential decision: if they repel/expel migrants in forceful ways, that will change the self-image of the member nations as "more humanitarian than their Yankee rivals"; if Europe admits millions of refugees from radically different cultures over the next years and decades, will the culture and values of Europe be preserved?
In history, nations have resorted to extreme and often ugly means (war, genocide, etc) to protect their homelands from foreign influence. It will be interesting to see if this scenario plays out differently.
posted by theorique at 2:49 AM on February 2, 2016
Europe is faced with an existential decision: if they repel/expel migrants in forceful ways, that will change the self-image of the member nations as "more humanitarian than their Yankee rivals"; if Europe admits millions of refugees from radically different cultures over the next years and decades, will the culture and values of Europe be preserved?
In history, nations have resorted to extreme and often ugly means (war, genocide, etc) to protect their homelands from foreign influence. It will be interesting to see if this scenario plays out differently.
posted by theorique at 2:49 AM on February 2, 2016
will the culture and values of Europe be preserved?
What are they?
posted by colie at 3:27 AM on February 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
What are they?
posted by colie at 3:27 AM on February 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
theorique: "Europe is faced with an existential decision: if they repel/expel migrants in forceful ways, that will change the self-image of the member nations as "more humanitarian than their Yankee rivals.""Meanwhile…
posted by brokkr at 3:51 AM on February 2, 2016
What are they?
The specific ones I had in mind were: Common Law/rule of law, Christianity, scientific method (and culture of scientific practice), the rights of the individual, democracy, economic liberalism.
posted by theorique at 5:24 AM on February 2, 2016
The specific ones I had in mind were: Common Law/rule of law, Christianity, scientific method (and culture of scientific practice), the rights of the individual, democracy, economic liberalism.
posted by theorique at 5:24 AM on February 2, 2016
What keeps me up at night is that it's possible this whole refugee crisis is just the wisp of smoke before the conflagration. If some of the more dire climate change projections happen we could see hundreds of millions of people dislocated across the world, both within Europe and among its Mediterranean neighbors in the next 50-100 years. It would be nice if the current contretemps could be reframed as an opportunity to build a robust bureaucratic and economic infrastructure to deal with the possible future deluge. The current international governance structures to deal with this are woefully inadequate. See this report (PDF).
I suppose there's little political will for that, unfortunately.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:59 AM on February 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
I suppose there's little political will for that, unfortunately.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:59 AM on February 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
The specific ones I had in mind were: Common Law/rule of law, Christianity, scientific method (and culture of scientific practice), the rights of the individual, democracy, economic liberalism.
The idea that these values are "European" is so patently absurd, I don't even..
As a European who has some Christian ancestors, and some not-Christian ancestors, I also find it offensive.
As a woman, knowing that women still don't have equal rights in most of Europe, I also find it offensive.
As a European, knowing that several European countries are less than democratic, and do not respect the concept of rule of law, or the rights of individuals, I find it offensive.
I suppose it is your privilege speaking
(excuse me for being angry)
posted by mumimor at 12:11 PM on February 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
The idea that these values are "European" is so patently absurd, I don't even..
As a European who has some Christian ancestors, and some not-Christian ancestors, I also find it offensive.
As a woman, knowing that women still don't have equal rights in most of Europe, I also find it offensive.
As a European, knowing that several European countries are less than democratic, and do not respect the concept of rule of law, or the rights of individuals, I find it offensive.
I suppose it is your privilege speaking
(excuse me for being angry)
posted by mumimor at 12:11 PM on February 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
The specific ones I had in mind were: Common Law/rule of law, Christianity, scientific method (and culture of scientific practice), the rights of the individual, democracy, economic liberalism.
'Democracy is a European value' is a phrase that literally does not make any sense, and bears zero relation to the facts. And that was the only one I could even engage with - 'scientific method' is something to do with the people who are already living in Europe in 2016 but don't want immigrants to come along and be all unscientific?
posted by colie at 2:41 PM on February 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
'Democracy is a European value' is a phrase that literally does not make any sense, and bears zero relation to the facts. And that was the only one I could even engage with - 'scientific method' is something to do with the people who are already living in Europe in 2016 but don't want immigrants to come along and be all unscientific?
posted by colie at 2:41 PM on February 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Will the culture and values of Europe be preserved, or will Europe welcome the Muslim barbarians? Tune in next time on Idiotic Musings for Stupid Children
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:38 PM on February 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:38 PM on February 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
It's nice to be reminded, as a Jew descended from residents of Besarabia, Belarus, France, and Poland, that all of my ancestors, by virtue of their Jewishness, were in violation of a basic European value, as though centuries of antisemitism hadn't already communicated that.
posted by maxsparber at 4:24 PM on February 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by maxsparber at 4:24 PM on February 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
Europe will be irrevocably changed.
I regret opening the floodgates for "Europe will no longer be White Jesusland"; what I meant was that the Schengen Convention and other mechanisms for visa-free travel in Europe will probably be shut down.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:03 PM on February 2, 2016
I regret opening the floodgates for "Europe will no longer be White Jesusland"; what I meant was that the Schengen Convention and other mechanisms for visa-free travel in Europe will probably be shut down.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:03 PM on February 2, 2016
I suppose it is your privilege speaking
Which privilege is that?
I'm not saying that these are the only European values, and that everything else must go. Only that these are some of the great gifts that Europe has given the world, and that they are inescapably part of the cultural heritage and legacy of Europe.
posted by theorique at 2:19 AM on February 3, 2016
Which privilege is that?
I'm not saying that these are the only European values, and that everything else must go. Only that these are some of the great gifts that Europe has given the world, and that they are inescapably part of the cultural heritage and legacy of Europe.
posted by theorique at 2:19 AM on February 3, 2016
Maybe a consideration of the effects of cultural 'dilution' is a worthwhile conversation to have. The numbers of asylum-seekers are not, actually, so big that they might genuinely 'dilute' the cultures to which they are fleeing, though.
I'm more worried about bigoted idiots going all nationalistic/stupid because some people running for their lives have found refuge. There was a good show/reportage on arte last night (unfortunately only in German) they follow four young men trying to come to Europe from Afghanistan. The culture shock is not to be underestimated, nor the severity o fthe lands they have left.
My point being, hand-waving is easy, a close look at the actual problems involved is more rewarding and worthwhile.
posted by From Bklyn at 2:40 AM on February 3, 2016
I'm more worried about bigoted idiots going all nationalistic/stupid because some people running for their lives have found refuge. There was a good show/reportage on arte last night (unfortunately only in German) they follow four young men trying to come to Europe from Afghanistan. The culture shock is not to be underestimated, nor the severity o fthe lands they have left.
My point being, hand-waving is easy, a close look at the actual problems involved is more rewarding and worthwhile.
posted by From Bklyn at 2:40 AM on February 3, 2016
It's nice to be reminded, as a Jew descended from residents of Besarabia, Belarus, France, and Poland, that all of my ancestors, by virtue of their Jewishness, were in violation of a basic European value, as though centuries of antisemitism hadn't already communicated that.
Some jews in Europe seem to be quite concerned about the level of hatred against jews that is displayed by some (of course not all) of the refugees from Muslim countries. It would be quite interesting to know if most jews in Europe regard the large influx of Muslim immigrants as a generally good thing or perhaps not so much.
posted by sour cream at 3:02 AM on February 3, 2016
Some jews in Europe seem to be quite concerned about the level of hatred against jews that is displayed by some (of course not all) of the refugees from Muslim countries. It would be quite interesting to know if most jews in Europe regard the large influx of Muslim immigrants as a generally good thing or perhaps not so much.
posted by sour cream at 3:02 AM on February 3, 2016
You can find a Jew with any opinion at all. Some Muslims should be worried that there are Islamophobic Jews out there, and a Jew in this thread finds himself worried that those Islamophobes are having their words cherry picked in this thread.
posted by maxsparber at 4:51 AM on February 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by maxsparber at 4:51 AM on February 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
Yeah, one thing that seems pretty certain is that assholes come in all sizes and colour.
posted by brokkr at 6:07 AM on February 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by brokkr at 6:07 AM on February 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
You can find a Jew with any opinion at all.
Moshe the sailor was shipwrecked on a desert island, and the first thing he did was build two synagogues. After he was rescued, people said to him, "As a good Jew, I can see why you would make it your priority to build a synagogue, it's a great mitzvah, but why would you waste your time building a second one?" Moshe smiled and said "That other shul? I would never attend it in a million years!"
posted by theorique at 2:23 PM on February 3, 2016
Moshe the sailor was shipwrecked on a desert island, and the first thing he did was build two synagogues. After he was rescued, people said to him, "As a good Jew, I can see why you would make it your priority to build a synagogue, it's a great mitzvah, but why would you waste your time building a second one?" Moshe smiled and said "That other shul? I would never attend it in a million years!"
posted by theorique at 2:23 PM on February 3, 2016
It is also hard to take seriously an article that quotes Trump as a reasoned, impartial political commentator and prognosticator.
I'm pretty sure Trump is being quoted as a right-wing, xenophobic politician, much in the same way as Orbán is quoted later in the article.
Here's a piece on Trump with the same lead author: Donald Trump Is the World's Most Dangerous Man
posted by homunculus at 9:02 PM on February 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm pretty sure Trump is being quoted as a right-wing, xenophobic politician, much in the same way as Orbán is quoted later in the article.
Here's a piece on Trump with the same lead author: Donald Trump Is the World's Most Dangerous Man
posted by homunculus at 9:02 PM on February 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
« Older Why Buffy, why now? | “I became weirdly obsessed with this novel years... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I don't know what I'd do if faced with the tough choices Merkel is facing, and I know it's not a black and white issue, but the pile on in that article is just infuriating.
posted by Wretch729 at 4:52 PM on January 27, 2016 [10 favorites]