Politics XXXV (Life in the Vault is about to change)

[Azdeus]

59 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

It seems Sweden is not so welcoming and friendly after all. Bad Sweden, bad.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2020/04/swedish-official-says-migrants-fail-because-swedes-are-prejudiced/

I like how they misconstrued what he said in the end, trusting noone to listen to the 12minute interview.

But Barakat said that the biggest problem is that Swedes aren’t doing enough to adapt to migrants. “It is important to adapt our approach to the people who come here,” he said in the interview. “The solutions we develop often do not meet the needs of the individual.”

An example he gave is that migrants who come from Africa and the Middle East should be educated in their native languages rather than Swedish.

What he said was, we don't adapt the education we offer immigrants to their needs, for instance we should teach in their native language so that they can have an easier time learning Swedish.

But yeah, when the source is the heavilly right leaning, bordering on nazi Fria Tider, I don't expect much. Can't be bothered with the rest though, I will say that the part about Swedes being prejudiced was cited more or less correctly.

[213374U]

Do you agree with that statement?

[Azdeus]

14 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Do you agree with that statement?

I would say so, the evidence they have supports it. And yeah, I do think it'd be a good idea to use their native language to help them get a proper career and learn Swedish.

Overall though, I think that we'd have an overall better successrate if we were to actually distribute people throughout the country and not dump them all in the same areas in Malmö, Gothenburg and Stockholm. Humans are tribal and like hanging out with "out own people", so if you put them all in the same general areas they have no reason to take any steps towards integration and instead become more insular. Municipalities should be penalized for in any way refusing to accept immigrants.

[Bartimaeus]

Having non-Swedish-speaking educators would seem only to contribute to the cultural insulation problem, not make it better. Unless it's expected that current, native educators take the time and effort pick up second and third languages to accommodate whatever the current major source(s) of immigration is. Some educators already have a hell of a time teaching in their native language, never mind foreign ones...

[Volourn]

If you move to a different country you should adapt not the other way around. But, I get it, this is the anti West prejudice showing usually from Western peons.

This reminds me of a westerner who gets int trouble with some bogus law in some 3d world **** hole. The westerner is blamed for not knowing better and not following the law as written. But, when  a foreigner comes to the West and runs afoul of the law (usually but not always more legit) the West is blamed for not adapting the law to suit the newcomer.

Western citizens are told to follow the law no matter what. Others  are often given a pass.

Talk about bigotry and law expectations.

[Malcador]

Westerners are the truly oppressed.

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, Azdeus said:

I would say so, the evidence they have supports it. And yeah, I do think it'd be a good idea to use their native language to help them get a proper career and learn Swedish.

Overall though, I think that we'd have an overall better successrate if we were to actually distribute people throughout the country and not dump them all in the same areas in Malmö, Gothenburg and Stockholm. Humans are tribal and like hanging out with "out own people", so if you put them all in the same general areas they have no reason to take any steps towards integration and instead become more insular. Municipalities should be penalized for in any way refusing to accept immigrants.

Native classes have helped quite lot in integration efforts in Finland in comparison offering classes only in Finnish, Swedish and English, as among some refugees there are lots of people especially women who don't know written version of their own language well let alone English (or Finnish or Swedish).

Refugee children aren't problem as they learn Finnish quickly usually in couple months, but adults have high risk to become social outsiders because they aren't able to communicate with native Finns.

[Azdeus]

 

56 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Having non-Swedish-speaking educators would seem only to contribute to the cultural insulation problem, not make it better. Unless it's expected that current, native educators take the time and effort pick up second and third languages to accommodate whatever the current major source(s) of immigration is. Some educators already have a hell of a time teaching in their native language, never mind foreign ones...

Maybe, maybe. I don't know that it'd necessarily be making the cultural isolation problem worse if they would be better able to become more fluent in Swedish and being easier for native Swedes to communicate with and thus according to the study being able to get a better paid job so that they can support themselves.

52 minutes ago, Volourn said:

If you move to a different country you should adapt not the other way around.

Yes? We're talking about possibly making it easier for them to adapt, not adapting to their ways.

[213374U]

Are we talking about refugees or economic migrants?

[Elerond]

10 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Are we talking about refugees or economic migrants?

Refugees, economic migrants usually don't have similar integration issues because of language at least here

[213374U]

Yeah, I'm not sure what the original piece was referring to either, and even if that's the same that was being discussed in the interview.

Edited April 29, 2020 by 213374U

[Azdeus]

The study was talking about all forms of immigration, workforce immigrants and refugees(IIRC), the "Swedish official" was mainly talking about refugees.

Edit; The way he phrased it in the interview it could also include things like berrypickers, I'd have to read the study proper to find out, but it's kind of late for me and I've had fubar workhours this week so I'll have to check later if I remember it.

Edited April 29, 2020 by Azdeus

[Guard Dog]

The US Libertarian Party finally has a seat in Congress. Justin Amash has switched parties ahead of hos Presidential bid. The reactions to that have been about what you'd expect. "He can't do that! This is the most important election in history!" "You HAVE to choose the lesser evil" & "Don't you know you're only helping Trump/Biden".

Why is it so difficult to comprehend that when both alternatives are unacceptable it is not only reasonable but smart to look for a third way?

[Azdeus]

Normally I'd post this in the funny thread, but this one's a bit too dark, and relevant.

[BruceVC]

21 hours ago, Volourn said:

If you move to a different country you should adapt not the other way around. But, I get it, this is the anti West prejudice showing usually from Western peons.

This reminds me of a westerner who gets int trouble with some bogus law in some 3d world **** hole. The westerner is blamed for not knowing better and not following the law as written. But, when  a foreigner comes to the West and runs afoul of the law (usually but not always more legit) the West is blamed for not adapting the law to suit the newcomer.

Western citizens are told to follow the law no matter what. Others  are often given a pass.

Talk about bigotry and law expectations.

I agree with basically everything you saying from both a personal experience and reasonableness perspective

Also I just want to add, if you immigrate to another country you must accept that  countries value system. If you not then dont immigrate there 

 

[HoonDing]

"if you immigrate to another country you must accept that  countries value system"

 

if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you

[ComradeYellow]

I like how the rhetoric has shifted from Conservatives over the past few years.  It went from "Build the Wall, Ban Muslims, Drain the Swamp, etc" to "Kill all Communists/socialists/leftists!"

Proof that Trumpism was always about neo-fascism combined with typical Republicanism (tax cuts for rich, screw the poor, kill people in leftists countries like Bolivia, Venezuela, etc.) rather than some kind of unique new policy agenda.

But perhaps there's light at the end of the tunnel:

Spoiler

Not 100% confirmed  yet but it's gearing that way.  This is going to get insane very quickly!

[BruceVC]

10 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

I like how the rhetoric has shifted from Conservatives over the past few years.  It went from "Build the Wall, Ban Muslims, Drain the Swamp, etc" to "Kill all Communists/socialists/leftists!"

Proof that Trumpism was always about neo-fascism combined with typical Republicanism (tax cuts for rich, screw the poor, kill people in leftists countries like Bolivia, Venezuela, etc.) rather than some kind of unique new policy agenda.

But perhaps there's light at the end of the tunnel:

  Hide contents

Not 100% confirmed  yet but it's gearing that way.  This is going to get insane very quickly!

The Green party seems like one of those parties with many grandiose ideas to address inequality and implement  massive  social structural reforms .....except someone else must pay and fund it  

[BruceVC]

19 minutes ago, HoonDing said:

"if you immigrate to another country you must accept that  countries value system"

 

if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you

Most current Democracies, or rather countries that are immigration destinations,have fair and reasonable value systems based on Constitutions and things like respect for human rights and freedom of speech

So there is no abyss. but a choice to have a better way of life or immigrate somewhere else ....simple really 

[ComradeYellow]

Just now, BruceVC said:

The Green party seems like one of those parties with many grandiose ideas to address inequality and implement  massive  social structural reforms .....except someone else must pay and fund it  

In any case, a 3 party system is better than a 2 party system.  If one party ****s up, the other two can form coalitions against it.

Looks like Ventura is trying to cozy up to Democrats to try to and form against Republicans, which is fine by me because I don't really care for Democrats but the alternative is dreadful, and the reality of living in a democratic society is that you have to make concessions and team up with one to destroy marginalize the other.

Should be fun!

[BruceVC]

17 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

In any case, a 3 party system is better than a 2 party system.  If one party ****s up, the other two can form coalitions against it.

Looks like Ventura is trying to cozy up to Democrats to try to and form against Republicans, which is fine by me because I don't really care for Democrats but the alternative is dreadful, and the reality of living in a democratic society is that you have to make concessions and team up with one to destroy marginalize the other.

Should be fun!

I agree, having realistic choices in any Democracy is always a good thing under most circumstances

It keeps the established parties more aware of bad policy decisions could cost them parts of there previous support base 

You know we are a  new Democracy in South Africa as certain  people dont quite understand what that means from a new political party perspective ....there were 48 political parties registered  in our 2019 general election and after the election 90 % of the new parties vanished because they didnt qualify for enough votes to get to parliament. Most of these new parties assumed you create a political party to create wealth and offered no new, real policies that other older parties already positioned 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_that_contested_the_2019_South_African_general_election

 

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by BruceVC

[ComradeYellow]

24 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

The Green party seems like one of those parties with many grandiose ideas to address inequality and implement  massive  social structural reforms .....except someone else must pay and fund it  

The Green Party as seeks to cut the bloated military budget by 50% so reinvesting that money back into society will go a long way.

Also, a multipolar world with Russia, China, and the U.S. competing with each other for power and influence is the the geopolitical version of a 3 party system rather than a 1 party system, the dreadful monopoly the U.S. has on world affairs is just as bad as China's 1 party state.

Friendly competition is the new cooperative in the 21's century it seems.

[Amentep]

2 hours ago, ComradeMaster said:

In any case, a 3 party system is better than a 2 party system. 

If you can't have a partiless system, than the more parties the better.

[ComradeYellow]

Just now, Amentep said:

If you can't have a partiless system, than the more parties the better.

Fun fact: The Confederacy actually adopted a party-free system in its short lifetime (As in, before getting roflstomped by the Yankees), and it turned out to be a disaster because the President couldn't count on a broad base of support when his administration came under fire.  Also they adopted a 6-year one term system, ensuring each election would have been a lukewarm lameduck session.

 

On 4/29/2020 at 3:13 PM, Volourn said:

If you move to a different country you should adapt not the other way around. But, I get it, this is the anti West prejudice showing usually from Western peons.

Unless you're Native American, we are all immigrants.  This country was built on the backs of immigrant labor.

[Orogun01]

There are no true natives everyone is an immigrant, ergo there are no true scotsmen.