Swedish Election 09 sep 2018

[Hastur]

Here's the election result from a typical "particularly exposed area" i.e. a no-go zone.

[Speaker to Animals]

Is it possible these leftie Swedes see the goodwill the rest of us have for Swedes in general as a result of these lunatic policies based on pathological altruism rather than our love of real Swedish culture and history?

In other words, do they think we love Sweden because of Sweden's progressive politics rather than Swedish culture itself?

[ssu]

When does an immigrant threaten Swedish culture? We still have enclaves of Finns, living on welfare, who never bothered to learn Swedish dating back to the '70s.

We have enclaves of Swedes, who never bothered to learn Finnish dating back to the, uh... early Middle Ages?

We have dialed back immigration drastically by now. We need to get it down even lower and start focusing on integration and assimilation. Joblessness among immigrants has to come down if we want to preserve our public sector spending. If we can't fix that our education, health care, and safety nets will suffer.

I think there are huge problems in this.

Integration and assimilation are simply difficult and take generations to succeed: even with same religious background, similar culture and similar racial background it's difficult. Finnish migrants or as they are called by some Swedes, finnjävlans, show this with their historical example. Now in the 60's and 70's Sweden was still a "one language, one culture" country. Hence there weren't any "minority rights" like having a right to get school education in Finnish. That changed in 1999 when Finnish alongside few others got status as an official minority language (thanks to the EU). A question woul be then when Arabic gets an official minority language status? Likely not immediately, but...

Even more important is the question: why would a Finn moving to Sweden would want to become a Swede (or the other way around)? What actually would be the incentive? There are no practical reasons to change citizenship as it is as easy to move between the Nordic countries as it is to move inside the countries. The only thing you have to do is change your postal address, everything else happens automatically and you enjoy all the similar services. You might say it's different with Nordic people than with other foreigners, especially those coming from the Third World, that they have an incentive to become Swedes. But then think about especially a refugees: refugees can have the idea that they indeed are going to go back to their country... at least sometime later. Palestinians are a good example of this as their cultural identity is fixed with Palestine, that has been taken from them. Do then these people want to assimilate to a host nation while being refugees? Or do they just stay as themselves and hope for the goldilocks future moment will come when they can go back (and that their children would want then to move also)?

And even if there is a true desire to assimilate, then there are the things that make it even more difficult:

- A different religion which basically defines a lot in your ordinary life (which collides with the majority culture in many ways)
- a different cultural background
- a totally different language
- the difficulty of entering the job market and the lure of just giving it up and letting the social welfare system take care of you
- a lot of similar people from your country having the same problems as you do and hence the lure of just hanging around with them and not mingling with the "natives".
- a political system that is so politically correct and favours multiculturalism so much that assimilation is very difficult in the first place.

[DBTrek]

The problem all Western societies have with immigration is this - forced integration is seen as evil oppression. And maybe, sometimes, like with America’s “Indian Schools”, it is. But the alternative is allowing your nation to be Balkanized by foreigners fleeing their failed shithole countries, only to create shithole outposts in your nation.

So what’s the solution?

I would submit that an immigration policy that only accepts applicants willing to assimilate is the best option.

[Montegriffo]

Maybe if nations were prepared to assimilate rather than marginalise refugees into ghettos.
France in particular is bad at this. Northern Africans from ex French colonies have spent generations being banished to the margins of society with poor housing and limited access to jobs. On top of this they are subjected to abuse from the likes of the Front National.
Not the best conditions for them to assimilate into society.

[C-Mag]

The problem all Western societies have with immigration is this - forced integration is seen as evil oppression. And maybe, sometimes, like with America’s “Indian Schools”, it is. But the alternative is allowing your nation to be Balkanized by foreigners fleeing their failed shithole countries, only to create shithole outposts in your nation.

So what’s the solution?

I would submit that an immigration policy that only accepts applicants willing to assimilate is the best option.

I agree.
So does the US Government (in theory) or Legal Immigration process is long and requires a good deal of assimilation. However, when you skip the process by allowing people to chaotically cross the borders at will or bring them in by the plane load and skip the process, then your are going to get the balkanization.

[Speaker to Animals]

Maybe if nations were prepared to assimilate rather than marginalise refugees into ghettos.
France in particular is bad at this. Northern Africans from ex French colonies have spent generations being banished to the margins of society with poor housing and limited access to jobs. On top of this they are subjected to abuse from the likes of the Front National.
Not the best conditions for them to assimilate into society.

We do not marginalize them into "ghettos".

They all congregate into concentrated areas so that they do not have to integrate.

We have no ghettos. Is there some law in the UK that forces Pakistanians to all live in those no-go zones? I doubt it. They want to live there because they are colonizing you.

You are turning the colonization of your people into some alleged victimization of your colonizers.

[Hastur]

America is a lot more successful at immigration. You can see that easily by comparing families where f.ex. one brother took his family to the US or Canada and another brother took his to a European nation. The ones going to America stands a much better chance of being integrated into society.

The reason, according to me, is that America doesn't do integration projects. It's assimilating or fail. Most people willingly assimilate and by doing so you get some organic integration effects.

Over here there is the belief that the state machinery has to be involved in everything or it won't happen. It's super stupid but you can't get the people to stop turning to the huge government tit for comfort and nourishment. We're infantilized and that is another reason people coming here from harsher realities won't respect our society.

[Montegriffo]

Maybe if nations were prepared to assimilate rather than marginalise refugees into ghettos.
France in particular is bad at this. Northern Africans from ex French colonies have spent generations being banished to the margins of society with poor housing and limited access to jobs. On top of this they are subjected to abuse from the likes of the Front National.
Not the best conditions for them to assimilate into society.

We do not marginalize them into "ghettos".

They all congregate into concentrated areas so that they do not have to integrate.

We have no ghettos. Is there some law in the UK that forces Pakistanians to all live in those no-go zones? I doubt it. They want to live there because they are colonizing you.

You are turning the colonization of your people into some alleged victimization of your colonizers.

There are no no-go zones in the UK. You are just repeating the lies of your right wing media.
https://metro.co.uk/2018/02/05/fearless ... e-7288616/

Alt-righters and other online mouth-breathers are OBSESSED with the idea of ‘no-go zones’ – and claim they’re to be found in major Western cities. This week, an intrepid security expert risked his life to travel into one of the most infamous, in London’s Tower Hamlets. What did he find? Ranting hate preachers? Youngsters readying themselves for suicide attacks? Er, no – he found a Carluccio’s, lots of booze shops and a Michelin-starred restaurant, all buried within the zone. Dan Kaszeta said, ‘Oh, look, it’s such a no-go zone that it has a Carluccio’s.ook, there is such strict Sharia law here that there is open sale of pork products ON THE STREET, oh the horror. See the shameful charcuterie, the salacious haram mortadella.’

The trolls tell me the police are too afraid to go into Tower Hamlets. So what is this police car doing in Tower Hamlets, then? Left unattended, with its light on, the constables obviously having fled in terror?

Now if you are really sincere about having honest debate you are going to have to walk back on this lie you keep trying to promote.

[Speaker to Animals]

POLICEMEN have backed up Donald Trump’s controversial claims there are “no-go”
areas in London for officers.

A number of officers have come forward, suggesting “it’s plainly obvious”
police are frightened in some areas of London.

“Rob”, who works for the Met Police, insisted police aren’t scared
but admitted bosses told officers not to wear uniforms in certain places in
the capital.

Speaking to Nick Ferrari on LBC, he said: “There has been a time when
it’s been advised not to wear half-blues or uniform to and from work.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/ ... -comments/


I suspect he was the guy who used to post at DCF. I wish he were here now to set you straight.

There for shizzle are no-go zones in London.