|
Post by pieter on Feb 13, 2014 16:22:49 GMT -7
Karl,
I think that in Europe, especially Western-Europe there is a different kind of clash of civilizations busy then Samuel P. Huntington's theory that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world.
Huntington's hypothesis is that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. He believed that great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. In Huntington's view nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. In Huntington's worldview 'The clash of civilizations' will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.
I see it differently and believe that the clash of civilizations in Europe are economical, cultural, ethnic, religious and between milieu's (social environments). The cultural, sociological, financial-economical and political gap between rich and poor is growing. Ethnic that gap is growing between native Europeans (wo are settled in an area, region or environment for centuries) and migrants (who are here for decades or just a few years) who have a different cultural and religious backgroud, different educational level and different lifestyle and habitat.
Worrysome is when ghetto's or low income subburbs and old city neighborhoods, become no go area's due to poverty, unemployment, crime, deteriorating life conditions and a gap between the citizens who live there. Due to mass immigrations ethnic enclaves have come to existance. Moroccan and Turkish neighborhoods or ethnic foreign neighborhoods and predominant white, native European neighborhoods outside the city centres. In the Netherlands we speak about 'white' schools and 'black schools', meaning native European Dutch schools and migrant schools filled with kids from foreigners. It is a reality that exists, because white European parents took their children of the black migrant schools and bring them further away to ethnic native Dutch schools. They don't want their kids to develop the migrant kids accents, mentality and family values.
Segregation exists from both sides. Each ethnic groups have their own pillar, with their community centres, mosques, coffee houses, shops and etc. You also see a growing gap between the migrant kids who studied, integrated and assimilated (sometimes even marrying native Dutch partners) and the traditional, old fashionate, orthodox Muslim milieu's who keep their own culture and refuse to mix or have contact with native European people. Although this is a very secularised country, they see this country and Europe as a Christian country and continent.
Cheers, Pieter
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Feb 13, 2014 17:35:26 GMT -7
When there is a gap between multi-culturalism and monoculture, I think I am on the multi-cultural side. Living in a multi-ethnic old city neighborhood, having had and having both native Dutch and migrant colleages and friends. Learned a lot of Turkish, Kurd, Iranian, Afghan, Moroccan, Surinamese, Dutch Antillian, Indonesian people, Moluccans and other people about their culture and about my own country and culture. The Netherlands is a mutli-cultural country since the Sephardic and Ashkenazi jews moved in from Portugal, Spain and later Central- and Eastern-Europe and when later Chinese, Indonesian and Black people came to my country from our colonies.
|
|
|
Post by karl on Feb 13, 2014 19:48:12 GMT -7
Karl, I think that in Europe, especially Western-Europe there is a different kind of clash of civilizations busy then Samuel P. Huntington's theory that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world. Huntington's hypothesis is that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. He believed that great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. In Huntington's view nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. In Huntington's worldview 'The clash of civilizations' will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future. I see it differently and believe that the clash of civilizations in Europe are economical, cultural, ethnic, religious and between milieu's (social environments). The cultural, sociological, financial-economical and political gap between rich and poor is growing. Ethnic that gap is growing between native Europeans (wo are settled in an area, region or environment for centuries) and migrants (who are here for decades or just a few years) who have a different cultural and religious backgroud, different educational level and different lifestyle and habitat. Worrysome is when ghetto's or low income subburbs and old city neighborhoods, become no go area's due to poverty, unemployment, crime, deteriorating life conditions and a gap between the citizens who live there. Due to mass immigrations ethnic enclaves have come to existance. Moroccan and Turkish neighborhoods or ethnic foreign neighborhoods and predominant white, native European neighborhoods outside the city centres. In the Netherlands we speak about 'white' schools and 'black schools', meaning native European Dutch schools and migrant schools filled with kids from foreigners. It is a reality that exists, because white European parents took their children of the black migrant schools and bring them further away to ethnic native Dutch schools. They don't want their kids to develop the migrant kids accents, mentality and family values. Segregation exists from both sides. Each ethnic groups have their own pillar, with their community centres, mosques, coffee houses, shops and etc. You also see a growing gap between the migrant kids who studied, integrated and assimilated (sometimes even marrying native Dutch partners) and the traditional, old fashionate, orthodox Muslim milieu's who keep their own culture and refuse to mix or have contact with native European people. Although this is a very secularised country, they see this country and Europe as a Christian country and continent. Cheers, Pieter Pieter It is interesting, you have grabed the bull by the horns and begin slinging the stuff about as it should be done so. This the reason of the space consuming quote of above. I do agree with you, for you have brought forward truth and reality. For as you have described, is a multi social/racial and economic segregation of values mixed up in a broth of troubles. The primary idea of allowing such numbers of various groups of immigrants, was in the basic principal of their assimulation and intergration into our society {both in the Netherlands and Germany}. For with this, was a great deal of resources and assets set aside to insure a successful programme. But, as reality of today has revealed, the programmes as entended, were/are a failure for very little has been accomplished in a positive note. In short, good ententions were flushed down the tolet with out wipe paper. Goverment good ententions are as a poor swimmer trying to stay afloat in rough water surronded by sharks. For with the plate of troubles, we have to deal with Islamic mind sets that keep to their own ethnic identities with out the process of adapting to their new country. For as you have rightly brought forward, our respective countries are Christian, not Islamic. These people left or were made to leave each their respective countries for what ever reason. They came to us, not us to to them, we owe them nothing, but an opportunity to build and work with us as equals. What is curantly on the frying pan and the grease is getting hot, is as rightly noted in our currant discussions. The currant situation as it stands, has not passed by notice of the various hate groups that seem to haunt us. And, we do not have the resources available at present, to toss oil upon the waters of troubles these people have the ability to create. What is good amongst the bad, is with some time past, new laws have been brought forward allowing use of our military as a last ditch effert for control of situations that have escalated beyound police control. But,,if conditions escalate to the event of military introvention, there goes our democratice manner. With this, if push came to shove, we may not expect military solders to act as police man. With this, the heavy equipment is not suitable for use in closed in quarters between buildings.. The situation that most of us do not wish to occure is: Public condemnation as issues begin to rise in temperment to the event of violence or acceptance of violence against any person with Islamic appearance. For this would equate to citizen against citizen. For no matter the issues, these people are still citizens or what ever their status, they are on our land and by Vicarious Responsiblity upon us with their presence, we are responsble for their safty and well being. The following is an abstract that best provides some insight to this, a problem in cultral diversity: IZA Clash of Cultures: Muslims and Christians in the Ethnosizing Process by Amelie F. Constant, Liliya Gataullina, Klaus F. Zimmermann, Laura Zimmermann (September 2006) Abstract: The paper explores the evolution of ethnic identities of two important and distinct immigrant religious groups. Using data from Germany, a large European country with many immigrants, we study the adaptation processes of Muslims and Christians. Individual data on language, culture, societal interactions, history of migration and ethnic self-identification are used to compose linear measures of the process of cultural adaptation. Two-dimensional variants measure integration, assimilation, separation and marginalization. Christians adapt more easily to the German society than Muslims. Immigrants with schooling in the home country and with older age at entry as well as female Muslims remain stronger attached to the country of origin. Female Muslims integrate and assimilate less and separate more than Muslim men, while there is no difference between male and female Christians. Christians who were young at entry are best integrated or assimilated, exhibiting lower separation and marginalization in the later years, while for Muslims a similar pattern is observed only for assimilation and separation. Christian immigrants with college or higher education in the home country integrate well, but Muslims do not. For both religious groups, school education in the home country leads to slower assimilation and causes more separation than no education at home. While school education has no impact on integration efforts for Muslim, it affects similar attempts of Christians negatively. Text: See Discussion Paper No. 2350 Karl
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Feb 14, 2014 5:38:58 GMT -7
Karl, Yes, there is some sort of segregation taking place, due to the development of Muslim pillars and ethnic nationalistic identities. In Germany and the Netherlands you have for instance an Ottoman Turkish ideology of the Greater Turkey, advocated by Turkish ultra-nationalists, who see a greater Turkish empire of Turkey, the homeland, the Turkish Diaspora communities in Europe and the Central-Asian Caucacian Turkic former Sovjet republics. Turkish nationalism ( Kemalism) and Sunni Islam merge in this ideology. Neo-Ottomanism (Turkish: Yeni Osmanlıcılık) is a Turkish political ideology that, in its broadest sense, promotes greater political engagement of the modern Republic of Turkey within regions formerly under the rule of the Ottoman Empire, its predecessor state. By the way a majority of the Dutch and German Turks are moderate people and not supporters of the Great Ottoman idea or Islamic fundamentalism in the sense of Salafist Islamism. They are simply working hard, studying or making a living for their families, like other people do too. But a radical minority amongst them is a concern to the Dutch and German authorities. And they are monitored by the legal system, the police and secret services. ( The Dutch and German police have their own intelligence agencies) Next to that you have the competition of the Arabic Sunni-Islam in Europe, mainly advocated by the Wahabist sect within Sunni Islam from Saoudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. An other name for them is Salafism. They are very influential amongst Arab and non-Arab muslims in Continental Europe, the Middle-East, Northern-Africa, Africa, Asia (Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and the Phillipines), the Caucacus (mainly Chechenia) the USA and Great-Britain. This also counts Al Qaida. In Europe converted European Muslims, Berbers from North-Africa, Arab people, Turks and African and Asian muslim migrants are under their influence. The thread of terrorist Islamist cells in Europe mainly comes from people from Northern-Africa ( Morocco, Algeria, Tunesia, Libyia and Egypt), converted muslims and immigrants from Arab and Muslim countries. You have Turks, Kurds, Pakistani, Somalian people and people with a Chechen background who can be a thread too. I don't know a lot about the activities and influence of Shia Islam in the world. But I am certain that the Islamic republic of Iran, the Lebanese Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia movements will have their influence in Europe and the USA. For some reason I have the impression that the thread of radical Shia movements is less than the thread of extremist Sunni Muslim movements in the West. The Sunni Muslim Islam is the majority in the world. And the Saoudi influence in the world, in Europe and the USA is huge. ( larger than many politicians, analists and journalists think or want to believe) I think there is a difference between the Saoudi religious authorities and private (funded) initiatives of religious groups and movements. Wikipedia says this about the foreign relations of Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia is a non-aligned state whose foreign policy objectives are to maintain its security and its paramount position on the Arabian Peninsula, defend general Arab and Islamic interests, promote solidarity among Islamic governments, and maintain cooperative relations with other oil-producing and major oil-consuming countries. Saudi Arabian policy is focused on co-operation with the Gulf states, the unity of the Arab world, solidarity with Muslim countries, and support for the United Nations ( UN). In practice, the main concerns in recent years have been relations with the US, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, Iraq, the perceived threat from Iran, the effect of oil pricing, and increasing the influence in the Muslim world of the Wahhabi form of Islam through overseas donations. Additionally, relations with the West have been complicated by the perception that Saudi Arabia is a source of Islamist terrorism. The Wahhabi form of Islam is also perceived in the West as being a source of Islamist extremism. Relations with the US and other Western countries have been further strained by the perception that Saudi Arabia has been a source of Islamist terrorist activity, not just internally, but also world-wide. Osama bin Laden and 15 out of the 19 September 11 attacks hijackers were Saudi nationals, though some officials argue that this was planned deliberately by bin Laden in an attempt to strain U.S.-Saudi relations, and former Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA) director James Woolsey described Saudi Arabian Wahhabism as " the soil in which al-Qaeda and its sister terrorist organizations are flourishing." Some in the U.S. Government also believe that the royal family, through its long and close relations with Wahhabi clerics, had laid the groundwork for the growth of militant groups like al-Qaeda and that after the attacks had done little to help track the militants or prevent future atrocities. Cheers, Pieter en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Wolvesen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_Movement_Partyen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Ottomanism
|
|
|
Post by JustJohn or JJ on Feb 14, 2014 7:23:23 GMT -7
WorldPost John Feffer Co-director, Foreign Policy In Focus The Greatest Threat to EuropePosted: 02/13/2014 5:01 pm EST This year marks the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I. Today, Europe has left war behind. In place of jostling empires, there is the European Union, a modern family beset by the usual bickering but nothing that a smothering bureaucracy can't handle. Even Sarajevo, where the assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand sparked world conflict in 1914 and a ghastly siege claimed thousands of lives in the 1990s, is relatively quiet. But Europe is not peaceful. It faces a grave threat to its identify as a prosperous, multicultural space. Perhaps you think that I'm talking about the Eurozone crisis and the consequences of financial ruin that can still be felt in Greece, Portugal, and the rest of the economic periphery of the continent. Or that I'm referring to the prospect of the European Union's collapse if the United Kingdom hands in its membership card (if such a thing as the UK still exists after September when Scotland votes on independence). Or that I'm concerned that the far right will win big in the upcoming European parliament elections in May and Euroskeptical parties will exert greater influence over an institution that they'd basically like to abolish. These are all troubling trends. But Europe faces a deeper and more disturbing threat. If we look a little closer at the agenda of the extreme right, we get warmer. Parties as diverse as Jobbik in Hungary, the National Front in France, and Golden Dawn in Greece have identified a common enemy -- the Other, the non-European, the foreigner. Much of the vitriol of the xenophobes has been directed toward Muslims over the last dozen years (a reprise of several centuries of anti-Muslim and anti-Turkish sentiment). Immigrants from South Asia, the Middle East, and Africa have also suffered their share of abuse. But the people who are the most vulnerable and the most victimized in Europe today are the Roma. Their experience of racism and discrimination is the single most powerful argument against the notion that Europe is a kinder, gentler world power. The xenophobia that connects movements and political parties on either side of the old Iron Curtain threatens the very modern identity of Europe -- the entire complex of institutions committed to rule of law and human rights, as well as the economic bargains designed to "harmonize" (to indulge in Eurospeak) the economic differences that persist between and within European countries. Anti-Semitism, August Bebel once said, is the socialism of fools. Today, Idiots International has fully embraced the anti-Roma agenda. Like Jews in the first half of the 20th century, the Roma are stateless. They have been discriminated against since practically the beginning of their arrival in Greece nearly a millennium ago, after an undocumented migration across Byzantium from their point of origin in India. Various state apparatuses -- Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian -- tried to force them to give up their nomadic lifestyle. They were rounded up and interned in 18th-century Spain. The Nazis killed several hundred thousand Roma in an oft-forgotten chapter of the Holocaust. Today, Roma represent about 10 percent of the population of Romania. Large numbers also live in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and the former Yugoslavia. With 10-12 million Roma in Europe overall, they are Europe's largest minority group. But there is little strength in numbers. They are a heterogeneous community divided by nationality, language, customs, and historical experience. They also experience more discrimination than any other minority group in Europe. This anti-Roma racism is largely directed toward Eastern European Roma. When the EU moved eastward, first to the northern tier of Central Europe and then to the Balkans, many Roma moved west, to escape discrimination or to find work or both. They often encountered the same racism they thought they'd left behind. The Italian government in 2008 and the French government in 2010 deported large numbers of Roma, primarily from new EU members Bulgaria and Romania or non-EU areas of the Balkans. Although Roma faced considerable prejudice over the years in Western Europe, a measure of multiculturalism prevailed in the West during the Cold War years. In a recent New Yorker article, Adam Gopnik describes the situation for Roma in France: "The Roma have not just contributed to French culture out of proportion to their numbers -- the great Manouche guitarist Django Reinhardt, for instance, created one of the few styles of jazz entirely outside America -- but have even become a sort of exotic ornament of the French state, with a special administrative category all to themselves." That exoticism extended to cultural stereotypes of Roma as "free spirits" who sustained a Bohemian lifestyle long after Bohemia had become a staid part of Czechoslovakia. In some ways, the Cold War was a pause in the hostilities conducted against the Roma in the east as well. In Communist Eastern Europe, Roma certainly did not live in a workers' paradise. They had to submit to the same social engineering as the rest of Communist society. But they did achieve some progress. They had jobs (albeit often unskilled labor), their children went to school (albeit often lesser quality schools), and there was some social mixing in the new apartment complexes built by the state. With the end of Communism, even that modest progress vanished. Unemployment surged, skyrocketing above 90 percent in certain areas. Many have compared the situation of Roma to that of African Americans in the United States prior to the civil rights movement. There are some similarities. But as civil rights activist Michael Simmons, who has worked on Roma issues for many years, told me in a 2012 interview, "if you're in Eastern Europe, even today, Roma are invisible. They don't clean hotel rooms. They don't carry your bags. They don't drive taxis. They aren't the orderlies at the hospital. They don't even have what I call the 'colored jobs' in the United States. The result is that they don't have those dysfunctional 'positive' relationships with the majority culture that are so common in the United States." With a surge of nationalism also came a spike in anti-Roma sentiment, bringing to the surface what had been latent for many years. Attacks against Roma spread throughout the region. In 2008 and 2009, a group of right-wing extremists went on a killing spree in Hungary, their victims including a five-year-old child. Last year, three of the culprits received life sentences. But the investigation was, frankly, an embarrassment -- the police tried to dissuade the family of two of the victims from reporting the attack and then urinated on crime scene evidence -- and it's still unclear whether there was high-level state involvement in the killings. A new report by Harvard's FXB Center of Health and Human Rights, documents these frightening developments in Hungary. Widespread organizing by neo-Nazi groups, a persistent pattern of violence against Roma, a national government that is indifferent to these trends, and widely held racists beliefs by the majority population all contribute to a situation dangerously similar to the pre-genocidal conditions that existed in Bosnia in the early 1990s. What makes the situation in Hungary different from other countries in the region with high levels of anti-Roma sentiment -- for instance, Slovakia, where a neo-Nazi recently won election as a regional governor -- is the flow of traffic between the extremists and the mainstream. "The Hungarian Guard, for instance, was established by Gabor Vona, and he was also president of Jobbik, a political party with influence in parliament," observes Magda Matache, a post-doctoral research fellow at Harvard's FXB Center. "Mainstream political parties are now trying to have a discourse as popular as Jobbik's. They are competing to see who is more extreme rather than who is more democratic." Many Roma have simply left. In 2009, 39 Roma fled the Hungarian village of Janoshalma after being threated by the Hungarian Guard and asked to leave the country by the mayor. They applied for political asylum in Strasbourg. Others have stayed and fought back. Bela Racz, who works with the Open Society Fund in Budapest, told me last year of what he and others did to keep the Hungarian Guard away from their village. They blocked entrance to the village with their cars and threatened the Guard back. "Some villages did exactly what we did, blocking with cars," he recounted. "Other villages set up parallel demonstrations, which I think is a mistake. They demonstrate, we demonstrate, and then we shoot at each other? No, we should just block the village. We have the right to protect ourselves if the police show no interest in protecting us. We should just say no to racism and to these Guards." One obvious liberal solution to the problem is education: tolerance trainings, inclusion of Roma sources in school curricula, desegregation. But it's not the uneducated who by and large join Idiots International. "We've done research on the type of people who are more likely to be discriminatory," Maria Metodieva, who works on Roma issues in Bulgaria, told me last year. "The most educated people, in terms of higher education, discriminate the most. This is ridiculous. Once you have a good education, it means that you've been studying in a mixed environment and you know much more about diversity and cultural pluralism. The illiterate, not having even primary education, are not supposed to know much about these things." Organizations like the Open Society Foundation have spent considerable funds to provide education and training for Roma. At one level, this strategy has been a great success, measured by the number of Roma NGO workers, political representatives, and EU officials. But the gulf has, if anything, widened between Roma and non-Roma society. "The better-educated, better-prepared, smarter Roma are considered an even bigger threat to the status quo than the illiterate poor," Roma activist Orhan Tahir told me in 2012 in Sofia. "They say that it is better to have illiterate poor people, who can be more easily manipulated than to have a class of well-educated Roma, who could compete for the same resources." In Sofia, last December, Roma in Bulgaria were fed up with the government's failure to address their concerns. They occupied the office of the deputy prime minister and demanded that she meet with them. The protestors want Roma to be able to learn the Romani language in schools; they want to participate in a debate on a new constitution; they want a new ministry for minority issues. Waves of protests have rolled through Bulgaria over the last year. But Orhan Tahir doesn't see the Roma Occupy Movement and these protests joining hands. "These groups perceive themselves as 'elitists,' and many of them do not welcome the civic participation of minorities because they are afraid of minorities," he wrote to me in a recent email communication. "Indeed they believe that one of the minorities, the Turks, is over-represented in this government, and the other large minority, Roma, in their view has voted for the Communists. So they consider the minorities 'guilty' in some extent for the current political configuration. This narrow way of thinking in terms of ethnicity and class is among the reasons for the lack of mass support for the protests." As for Hungary, everyone is waiting for the elections in April. The polls show the right-wing party Fidesz with a commanding lead and Jobbik getting nearly 10 percent of the vote. But Magda Matache remains optimistic. "The Hungarian population might have now a different opinion than what the polls have shown," she told me. "I hope that the elections will resolve part of this problem, and the Hungarian population will show that they as European as other Europeans and share the values of equality of all." But this is not just Hungary's problem. Europe has been changing from below for some time thanks to immigration and low birth rates. Multiculturalism is not a choice in a school curriculum -- it is a demographic fact. The far right -- and many of its quiet supporters among mainstream conservative parties --wants the impossible: the ethnic homogeneity of a bygone (and imaginary) era. The Roma complicate this vision because, except for the few who can "pass," they are a visible reminder of diversity. Whether at a federal, national, or local level, Europe will never fully democratize until the Roma enjoy the same rights, privileges, and opportunities as their European brethren. In 1914, Europe fractured into a million warring pieces. Let's hope that, 100 years later, Europe can manage its differences in a more constructive and peaceful way.
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Feb 14, 2014 9:26:35 GMT -7
WorldPost John Feffer Co-director, Foreign Policy In Focus The Greatest Threat to EuropePosted: 02/13/2014 5:01 pm EST This year marks the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I. Today, Europe has left war behind. In place of jostling empires, there is the European Union, a modern family beset by the usual bickering but nothing that a smothering bureaucracy can't handle. Even Sarajevo, where the assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand sparked world conflict in 1914 and a ghastly siege claimed thousands of lives in the 1990s, is relatively quiet. But Europe is not peaceful. It faces a grave threat to its identify as a prosperous, multicultural space. The fellow does a wonderfully unsuccessful job of presenting a case and a solution. He presents a lot of common-wisdom 'facts' and a scattering of fresh facts, presumably true. He does not tie it all together and draws no conclusion other than "Roma need equality". I would not waste my time reading more of his writings if this is typical of his presentations. One could as easily go to a shooting range and look at a target shot by a shotgun, leaving a wide scattering of holes in the paper. Then you ask yourself, "what is his point?" I see none here other than his weak "we need equality".
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Feb 14, 2014 9:49:54 GMT -7
Ethnic enclaveTurkish guest workers saving money. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, August 1966.In sociology, an ethnic enclave is a physical space with high ethnic concentration; thus these spaces are culturally distinct from the larger receiving society. Their success and growth depends on self-sufficiency, and is coupled with economic prosperity. Therefore, the general definition of an ethnic enclave is a geographically defined space with characteristic cultural identity and economic activity. The term is usually used to refer to either a residential area or a workspace with a high concentration of ethnic firms. Migrant networks provide new immigrants with social capital that can be transferred to other tangible forms. As immigrants tend to cluster in close geographic spaces, they develop migrant networks— systems of interpersonal relations through which participants can exchange valuable resources and knowledge. Immigrants can capitalize on social interactions by transforming information into tangible resources, and thereby lower costs of migration. By stimulating social connections, ethnic enclaves generate a pool of intangible resources that help to promote the social and economic development of its members. Drinking tea is an important aspect of some Muslim migrant cultures, like this Moroccan father and sonEnclave economies have been linked to a glass ceiling limiting immigrant growth and upward mobility. While participation in the enclave economy may assist in achieving upward mobility through increased availability of employment opportunities in the enclave labor market, it may also impede acquisition of host country skills that benefit the immigrant over the long-run. Latency in learning the language and social norms of the receiving country constrains immigrants to activity within the enclave and secludes them from the larger receiving context. Opportunities available to mainstream society can thus be out of reach for immigrants who lack both the knowledge of these services and the ability to access them. Thus, the accelerated path toward economic mobility that lures new immigrants into enclave economies pose a challenge to potential success. Integration into an ethnic enclave may delay and even halt assimilation to the host society, preventing the immigrants from benefiting from mainstream institutions. Turkish flag and Dutch flag hanging side by side in the multi-ethnic neighborhood Kruidenbuurt, Eindhoven.Historically, the formation of ethnic enclaves is the result of a variety of socioeconomic factors that draw immigrants to similar spaces in the receiving country. The lack of access to economic capital and of knowledge regarding residential neighborhoods can constrain newly arrived immigrants to regions of affordable housing. Social dynamics such as prejudice and racism may concentrate co-ethnics into regions displaying ethnic similarity. Housing discrimination may also prevent ethnic minorities from settling into a particular residential area outside the enclave. Government policy toward immigrants is the first mode of reception to the receiving country. Governments generally enforce measures to reduce the amount of "unwanted" immigrants which may potentially pose a burden on the receiving society and economy. The granting of different statuses and visas (i.e. refugee, temporary visas for students and workers) to immigrant groups affects the type of reception immigrants will receive. Aside from immigration control policies, some governments also impose measures to accelerate social and political incorporation of new immigrants, and to stimulate economic mobility. The Turkish Mevlana Mosque in Rotterdam was voted the most attractive building in 2006.A negative public opinion toward immigrants is a good measure of significant policy gaps in the receiving government; however, special interest groups may also constrain political responses to immigration. This is especially true in liberal democracies, where " lobbying by powerful employer groups, religious groups, ethnic and immigrant advocacy groups, and even labor unions leads governments to adopt more expansionary immigration policies, even when the economy goes bad and general public opinion turns hostile to immigrants." Furthermore, governments and special groups in the immigrant-sending country may align themselves with pro-immigration lobbyists in the receiving country. Thus, the policymaking process is complicated by involvement of multiple factions. Nebahat Albayrak, former Dutch-Turksih Labour party State Secretary for Justice in the Netherlands.Coşkun Çörüz (born August 15, 1963 in Konakören) is a Dutch politician of Turkish descent. As a member of the Christian Democratic Appeal (Christen-Democratisch Appèl) he was an MP from May 29, 2001 to September 19, 2012. He focused on matters of security policy, judiciary, police, international law and human rights.Fatma Koşer Kaya (born February 20, 1968 in Çarşamba, Turkey) is a Dutch lawyer and former politician of Turkish origin. As a member of Democrats 66 (D66) she was an MP from September 8, 2004 to September 19, 2012. She focused on social affairs.Ahmed Aboutaleb (born August 29, 1961) is a Dutch politician of the Labour Party (PvdA). He has been the Mayor of Rotterdam since January 5, 2009. He served as State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment from February 22, 2007 until December 12, 2008 in the Cabinet Balkenende IV. He is the first mayor of a large city in the Netherlands who is of immigrant descent or Muslim faith; Aboutaleb is of Riffian Berber ancestry and a dual citizen of the Netherlands and Morocco.
In January 2004, Aboutaleb succeeded the scandal-plagued Rob Oudkerk as alderman in Amsterdam.
Along with another deputy minister, Nebahat Albayrak, of Turkish descent, Aboutaleb was criticized at the time of their announced appointments by Geert Wilders for holding dual passports. According to Wilders and his party, government ministers should not have dual citizenship, which they say implies dual allegiance.Ethnic groups receive various levels of reception by the host society for various reasons. In general, European immigrants tend to encounter little resistance by host countries, while tenants of racism are evinced by widespread resistance to immigrants of color. Increased supply of low skilled immigrants raises concerns of the economic opportunities of the least skilled natives. As the supply of low-wage workers increases, wages for native workers seeking similar employment decrease. While native employees lose from lower wages, employers benefit from lower costs. These lower costs can lead to a decrease in the cost of the good for native consumers (i.e. cheaper goods and services), which may result in an increase of gain to native-owned firms. Ethnic enclaves expand the size of the market, encouraging cross-cultural interactions and introducing Europeans and Americans to a variety of foreign products and cuisines. Source: Wikipedia
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Feb 14, 2014 9:56:44 GMT -7
MigrationMoroccan women in the NetherlandsSince World War II the largest voluntary migrations have involved groups from developing countries moving to the industrialized nations. Some 13 million migrants became permanent residents of western Europe from the 1960s through the ’80s, and more than 10 million permanent immigrants were admitted legally to the United States in that same period, with illegal immigration adding several millions more. Migration today differs in many important particulars from that of earlier times. Down to a quite recent date peoples moved as tribes, nations, or races, moving and settling en masse. Taking forceful possession of extended areas, they maintained their individuality either under colonial systems or as separate groups; they finally established nations. With these migrating groups went their own institutions, language, religion, industrial methods, and political and legal systems. Usually they moved into uninhabited or sparsely settled areas, where no question of amalgamation could arise. With certain exceptions, the Roman Empire being the most noted, migrations have entailed the settling of a highly cultured people among those of a lower culture. In all such cases of migration en masse the native habitat was forever abandoned, and the migrating tribes, thoroughly equipped, entered a new environment and yielded entirely to new influences. In these particulars different conditions now obtain: migration is effected by families and individuals. These go from dense and highly cultured populations where free opportunity is usually closed, taking few possessions with them; their language survives during their own generation, and in the succeeding one is exchanged for the language of the adopted country, though they usually retain their religion. They must fit into a new industrial system, however, unlike their own. As a rule, they renounce their natural political allegiance and assume a new political status, abandoning the relations attaching to their former status and assuming new political and contractual relations. Such migration means to the emigrants the death of a nation, so far as concerns them, while to their new country it brings a serious modification, the extent of which depends upon the relative virility of the newly added national element. The secret services of the Moroccan King Mohammad VI keep an eye on the Moroccan immigrants in Western-EuropeThese characteristics of modern migrations have given rise to a threefold movement. In certain lands, as Germany, where migration to America means a loss to German citizenship, attempts have been made to colonize, and thus save the migrating persons to German citizenship and culture. Those nations, moreover, which they enter look with increasing caution and suspicion on the numbers and character of the incoming population. When once admitted, the problem presents itself of granting them citizenship. To what extent shall the immigrant assume the rights and duties of an acquired nationality? The problem of migration is thus inextricably bound up with a political one. Sources: Encyclopedia Britannica and Catholic Encyclopedia P.S.- The German example is an old example. More recent examples are Turkey and Morocco. The Turkish and Moroccan governments want to keep control over Turkish and Moroccan migrants in Western-Europe for various reasons. One reason is that they want to keep the loyalty and connection to their former citizens. Another reason is fear of extremism and organised crime of their former citizens.
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Feb 14, 2014 13:03:42 GMT -7
Kaima(Ron), Karl, Nicetoe, John, Jaga, Eric,
We have to cherish, welcome and congratulate those immigrants who managed to speak, write and read Dutch exellently, who made their own career in business, civil service or another paid job. The migrants who moved up the social ladder, or continued succesfully the family owned business of their father or grandfather. Many have integrated and assimilated wonderfully. They stil have their ethnic background, family name and religion (Islam), but they are part of the Dutch reality, the European reality of the environment they live in.
But in the same time we have to have a close eye on those who refuse to integrate and who didn't assimilate. Those who refuse to learn the language of the country they came to as guests. Those who turn their neighborhood in to an ethnic enclave (ghetto), and disconnect it from the Dutch environment. These people drive out and intimidate Dutch civilians (often a minority in their own old neighborhood) and moderate (integrated) compatriots. Those who refuse to accept the rules, society, ethnics, values and general human behavior between individuals and groups, should be monitored closely. Because they reject the society and thus country and people, who had given them permission to enter their country. If they don't want to live with and accept Dutch and Germans as equal and decent, why are they in the Netherlands or Germany then. What is the reason for their existance here then?
Thank god we have a lot of good migrants, who have become teachers, coaches, politicians, lawjer and business people. I know a few of them. Very reliable, hardworking, honest people. Their name is sometimes smeared by the actions of compatriots with less good intensions. More and more of these moderate and good Moroccans speak out agains the radicalism or criminal behavior of some of their own. They are fed up being hijacked by the unwilling, drop outs and counterproductive compatriots.
Cheers, Pieter
|
|
|
Post by Nictoshek on Feb 17, 2014 8:21:10 GMT -7
Now here's the ideal perfect image of a soldaten. He may be an actor, but still a fine soldaten nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Feb 17, 2014 10:51:06 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by karl on Feb 17, 2014 11:09:24 GMT -7
Nictoe
Yes indeed so, the young solder is handsome and wears his uniform very well, an actor yes, his character, yes very well protrayed. I have seen this film some time ago, it was well done. The ending was sad for all the solders as protrayed, died in the end.
Karl
|
|
|
Post by Nictoshek on Feb 17, 2014 11:53:49 GMT -7
You have to hand it that actor Thomas Kretschmann who plays all those memorable wartime characters so well, that off screen.....he sure is one hell of a fine ladies man. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kretschmann
|
|
|
Post by karl on Feb 17, 2014 19:43:38 GMT -7
You have to hand it that actor Thomas Kretschmann who plays all those memorable wartime characters so well, that off screen.....he sure is one hell of a fine ladies man. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_KretschmannNictoe Yes, of course, Herr Kretschmann, upon your photo of him, was a slippage of the mind, for the life of me, I was unable to recall his name. Withen the manner of his roles, I have always admired him in those films he appeared in. Yes, he is a role model of what a young officer should appear with his good looks and proper manner. With out maintenance of focus, it would be easy to be distracted by the lovely lady at his arm, for she displays a very nice chest view. Thank you for presenting and, the reminder of my memory slippage.. Karl
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Feb 17, 2014 23:15:11 GMT -7
Guys,
be careful with the pictures of nudity. I had to eliminate this almost naked woman....
|
|