NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, it's interesting to see such an article and study done on this issue in particular. It's both frightening to see that I've been correct about this because I'm worried about the future of this issue, and fantastic to be able to use this article against all those who like to ignore these problems as if they don't exist and scream racist to anyone who claims these problems exist. You know who you are, I shall not name names.
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1408830,00.jpg

Survey Shows Alarming Lack of Integration in Germany

By Katrin Elger, Ansbert Kneip and Merlind Theile

A third of all children born in Germany belong to immigrant families, but many immigrants are poorly integrated into German society. A new study has shown that Turks in particular are faring poorly in Germany.

A new study has delivered a damning verdict on the integration of Germany's immigrants, concluding that an alarmingly high percentage of them live in a parallel world with poor prospects of a decent education and career advancement.


The study presented on Monday by the Berlin Institute for Population and Development is based on annual population statistics and finds that Turks in particular, the second largest group of immigrants after ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, are faring badly, even after decades living in Germany.

It shows that foreigners who come to live in Germany tend to remain strangers, even after 50 years and three generations in some cases. There are even problems among those who hold German passports.

It's a disturbing trend for Germany. The country needs immigrants because Germans aren't having enough children. The population is shrinking and aging and its productivity is in danger. If the immigrants, who tend to have more children, are poorly educated and can't find jobs, they'll end up costing the state money rather than supporting it.

A separate study by the Bertelsmann Foundation estimates that failed immigration is already costing the country up to €16 billion per year.

Fresh Insight Into Immigration Trends

The Berlin Institute based its study on the annual official micro- census of 800,000 citizens in Germany -- one percent of the population -- in which people are asked about what kind of accommodation they have, their jobs, education, income and nationality.

Since 2005 people have also been asked to state what country their parents came from. That means that for the first time it's possible to identify trends for people who have obtained German citizenship but also have an immigrant background. Previously, there was no way to separate out naturalized Germans.

Now, immigrants from Turkey can be compared with those from Italy and Africa and with ethnic German immigrants from Eastern Europe.

The researchers at the Berlin Institute developed an "Index for the Measurement of Immigration" which shows how well or badly an immigrant group is anchored in German society. Various criteria flow into the index, such as education levels, job prospects and the extent to which immigrants and Germans are getting closer, for example through marriage.


The study has also examined whether the children of immigrants behave differently from their parents. For the first time, there are figures to assess whether integration is taking place. Of all the immigrant groups in Germany, the southern Europeans from Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece, who made up the first wave of so-called "guest workers" who came to Germany after World War II, have done best in terms of integrating themselves.

The so-called Aussiedler, ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, most of whom who came to Germany in the 1990s, are the biggest single group of immigrants, and they have also done relatively well. Their sons and daughters are making good use of the education system and the proportion of them with higher education degrees is greater than that of the German population.

Turks Poorly Integrated

But immigrants from Turkey, the second biggest immigrant group in Germany making up almost three million people, are very poorly integrated. They come last in the Berlin Institute's integration ranking and the difference between them and the Germans is greatest -- they are worse educated, worse paid and have a higher rate of unemployment. And it doesn't make much difference how long they've been living in Germany.

If your name is Ümit rather than Hans or Gülcan rather than Grete, you're less likely to climb the career ladder. Some 30 percent of Turkish immigrants and their children don't have a school leaving certificate, and only 14 percent do their Abitur, as the degree from Germany's top-level high schools is called -- that's half the average of the German population.

And because immigrants tend to have more children than the Germans, the problem is likely to get worse in the future. Today a third of all children born in Germany are born to immigrant families.

But why do foreigners remain foreign in so many cases, and why are Turks finding it hard to integrate themselves, even the ones born in Germany?


There are two sides to integration. In the ideal case there's a majority that welcomes the immigrants and the minority that wants to become part of its new homeland.

But many Turks who came to Germany as guest workers decades ago didn't want to become part of German society, they wanted to earn money there and return home after a few years. That didn't happen, though. The Turks stayed on, but it seems that their original attitude hasn't changed. They formed ghettos and didn't establish much contact with Germans, and all that made it harder for their children to find a place in German society.

According to one recent survey, two thirds of immigrant children still can't read adequately at the end of their fourth year in school. The situation is especially bad in big cities with high proportions of immigrants such as Berlin, Hamburg and Bremen.

And the majority? What have the Germans done wrong regarding the integration of Turks?

"We invited the guest workers and thought they would leave again soon," said Reiner Klingholz, the head of the Berlin Institute. But education is the main factor, and language is the key, he says. "For too long we were used to the fact that we have primary school classes where 80 percent of children can't speak German," says Klingholz.

Recent international surveys have shown that children from families with a poor educational background and weak language skills have particularly bad prospects in the German school system. "For 30, 40 years the Turks weren't offered enough" in terms of education, says Yasemin Karakasoglu, who researches immigration trends at Bremen University. But the government has started taking action since 2000, changing immigration law and conducting regular meetings with immigrant groups.

There's even some movement on a key demand by immigrants from outside the European Union -- dual citizenship. While EU citizens and Swiss people living in Germany have no trouble obtaining two passports, it's far harder for the children of immigrants from outside the EU. They have to decide between the ages of 18 and 23 which nationality they want to keep.

The chairman of the Turkish Community in Germany, Kenan Kolat, says Turkish immigrants should have the option of permanent dual citizenship. "If Turks in the second generation had the right to have dual citizenship, that would definitely promote their integration," says Kolat. "They wouldn't be forced to decide for or against Germany."

Turks Need to Make More Effort, Says Analyst

Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble responds by saying: "Integration also requires people to take a decision. They have to want to integrate themselves." Turks born in Germany could become German if they so desire, says Schäuble.

But there are many factors affecting such a desire. Xenophobia, for example. A survey by the Allensbach polling institute found that more than 50 percent of Germans still think the country has too many immigrants. On the other hand, though, it is tempting to wonder how much of such an attitude results from the Turkish tendency to congregate in insular neighborhoods in Germany's big cities.

Reiner Klingholz says immigrants and their children should be expected to make more effort to get an education and to speak German as well as to accept Germany's legal order and cultural norms. "We can no longer accept that someone refuses to take part in sports lessons on religious grounds," he says.:hail:

A study by the Essen Center for Turkish studies in 2006 found that 83 percent of Muslims of Turkish-origins described themselves as religious or strictly religious. "Religiousness has increased," the authors of the study wrote.

Is Muslim Faith a Hindrance to Integration?

What does that mean for integration? Does Islam, the faith of most of the Turks living in Germany, prevent immigrants from finding their way into German society?

Author Serap Cileli, herself the victim of a forced marriage, says: "Faith plays a major role in the failed integration of Turks." For more than 10 years she has been helping Muslim women who have become victims of domestic violence. "Every day I see the suffering of Muslim girls and women who never get a chance in their conservative Muslim world to take part in German life," she says.

A study commissioned by the German Families Ministry in 2004 showed that a disproportionate rate of Turkish women in Germany suffer from domestic violence. Arranged marriages are another factor. A quarter of Turkish women who responded to the survey said they had only met their husband at their wedding, and 9 percent they had been forced into marriage.

Critics of Islam see the religion as the source of the problem because it underscores patriarchal structures in which the men can derive from the Koran the right to dominate their wives. And the women in turn see themselves committed by the Koran to tolerate their suffering.

Bassam Tibi, co-founder of the Arabian Organization for Human Rights, says it's impossible for Muslim immigrants ever to truly integrate under these conditions. "No democracy can allow the inferiorization of women," he says.

But Ursula Günther, a lecturer on religion at the University of Hamburg, warns against clichés. "The broad majority of Germans has the false impression that all Turks are orthodox Muslims," she says. Most religious Turks, though, don't listen to fundamentalist imams.



Gradual Change

In fact, Germany's Turkish community is quite pluralistic. Some are in favor of women wearing headscarves. Some are against it, some wouldn't contemplate marrying a German, others don't have a problem with bi-cultural relationships.

Reiner Klingholz says it's impossible to measure the impact of Islam on integration, but he doesn't think it's a lasting hindrance. "50 years ago in Germany no one could have imagined that Catholics could marry Protestants, but these days no one talks about it any more," he says.

Slowly, very slowly, things are changing. The percentage of Turkish girls in Gymnasium -- the highest form of secondary school in Germany's three-tier high-school system -- is increasing and now exceeds the percentage of Turkish boys. Education standards of second-generation Turkish immigrants also increasing, at least compared with that of their parents.

And Turkish immigrants increasingly regard Germany as their country. "As recently as the 1990s two thirds of Turks wanted to return at some point," says immigrant researcher Yasemin Karakasoglu at Bremen University. "But this attitude has changed: More and more Turks really want to stay here forever."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,603588,00.html


http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1416723,00.jpg

Stick them all in the Hauptschule and you reap what you sow.

Stick them all in the Hauptschule and you reap what you sow.
Read the whole article, if you would.

I think both the Turk and Germany are at fault for the lack of integration of their immigration groups.

Read the whole article, if you would.
Yeah, I did. Basically it goes thusly :

"Germans reckon there are too many immigrants, immigrants therefore feel unwanted and retract from society, and this, along with their disposition to be more Muslim than other Germans means they don't integrate as much, thus making the whole bloody thing circular"

*edits* Also the Economist's quite frankly laughable ideas about the Gastarbeiter show who they side with.

And?

I think both the Turk and Germany are at fault for the lack of integration of their immigration groups.
Equally, though?
"Germans reckon there are too many immigrants, immigrants therefore feel unwanted and retract from society, and this, along with their disposition to be more Muslim than other Germans means they don't integrate as much, thus making the whole bloody thing circular"
But also, before that, it shows that the Turkish immigrant workers who came to Germany, never tried to integrate because they were going to leave. But they didn't leave, they stayed and that mentality stayed with them.....and that directly impacts the way the Turkish community has isolated itself into, as the article puts it, "a parallel world."
*edits* Also the Economist's quite frankly laughable ideas about the Gastarbeiter show who they side with.
Please, expand on this? What ideas exactly, and why are they laughable? I'm not actually aguing here, just don't know exactly what you're hitting on.

This was written by Der Spiegel. I read them too, not just The Economist. :p

The state has no responsibility to integrate immigrants.

Equally, though?

To an extent more the fault of the German government for not seeking to help the Turkish community integrate. But to a lesser extent, it's the fault of the Turks for not striving to integrate.

The state has no responsibility to integrate immigrants.
None? Shouldn't the state try to preserve and protect social harmony, to an extent? (Though they could do this by limiting immigration, too, redarging this issue)
To an extent more the fault of the German government for not seeking to help the Turkish community integrate. But to a lesser extent, it's the fault of the Turks for not striving to integrate.
Well one of the vote-options was that, almost word for word, yet you voted differently from what you just said.

None? Shouldn't the state try to preserve and protect social harmony, to an extent? (Though they could do this by limiting immigration, too, redarging this issue)
It is not the fault of the state that certain blocs of immigrants decide to disturb the peace. No one is forcing them to integrate (though life would no doubt be easier if they did) but if they break the law as a result of their social position it is the role of the state to punish them to the fullest extend of the law.

None? Shouldn't the state try to preserve and protect social harmony, to an extent? (Though they could do this by limiting immigration, too, redarging this issue)

Well one of the vote-options was that, almost word for word, yet you voted differently from what you just said.

And that is a problem?

Equally, though?
Pretty much.
But also, before that, it shows that the Turkish immigrant workers who came to Germany, never tried to integrate because they were going to leave. But they didn't leave, they stayed and that mentality stayed with them.....and that directly impacts the way the Turkish community has isolated itself into, as the article puts it, "a parallel world."

Please, expand on this? What ideas exactly, and why are they laughable? I'm not actually aguing here, just don't know exactly what you're hitting on.
Basically ignoring the fact that they were told they were going to leave, then blaming them for 'not wanting to integrate', and then this never happening. It's not exactly hard to understand that you aren't going to integrate all that much (although they were taught German and all) if you're told you're not going to be allowed to stay, and then the long-term consequences of this when this policy is reversed. You have Turkish and Yugoslavian workers and then their young families not being trusting of the state for two reasons - one, they were originally told they'd be kicked out by the state, and then because they reneged on this 'promise' which means they'll lie about anything.

Puts both sides in a very difficult situation, and the fact that most immigrant children end up in a Hauptschule, which is basically the start of a depressing life of being turned down for most jobs you apply for even if you get the Abschluss at the end of things isn't helping.

The Turks should probably try a bit harder to integrate, but as I see it, most Germans would probably respond that they were 'religious or very religious' in a poll, although it might well not be as high as 83 percent, the largest or second-largest political party in Germany wears its religious nature on its sleeves.
This was written by Der Spiegel. I read them too, not just The Economist. :p
:eek:

The state has no responsibility to integrate immigrants.
Doch.

You don't want a bunch of immigrants who don't speak the language and don't know of the laws and customs of a state, and it's the state's job to make sure that people at least try to integrate, or you have knock-on problems in a load of areas.

It is not the fault of the state that certain blocs of immigrants decide to disturb the peace. No one is forcing them to integrate (though life would no doubt be easier if they did) but if they break the law as a result of their social position it is the role of the state to punish them to the fullest extend of the law.
Then why shouldn't there be someone forcing?

I agree with the below, though:
"but if they break the law as a result of their social position it is the role of the state to punish them to the fullest extend of the law"

And that is a problem?
Yes. You voted C and the explanation you gave for that was almost word-for-word D. How are you not seeing that? :p

Yes. You voted C and the explanation you gave for that was almost word-for-word D. How are you not seeing that? :p

That's not a problem. I didn't read the whole poll so I voted for the option I thought was an approximation of it. I gave you my answer didn't I? That counts more than just the poll option.:wink:

Doch.

You don't want a bunch of immigrants who don't speak the language and don't know of the laws and customs of a state, and it's the state's job to make sure that people at least try to integrate, or you have knock-on problems in a load of areas.

I think it would only be the responsibility of the state to integrate them if the state was responsible for bringing them to the state originally. If these Turks came to Germany of their own accord (and I assume they did, unless Germany practices slavery and no one told me so) then they should take it upon themselves to welcome themselves to their new homeland. I have no doubt that Germany publicizes their laws and probably caters certain services to these immigrants already to help them - I can't see Germany as being an unwelcome host. The Turks themselves decided to distance themselves from mainstream society.

I think it would only be the responsibility of the state to integrate them if the state was responsible for bringing them to the state originally. If these Turks came to Germany of their own accord (and I assume they did, unless Germany practices slavery and no one told me so) then they should take it upon themselves to welcome themselves to their new homeland. I have no doubt that Germany publicizes their laws and probably caters certain services to these immigrants already to help them - I can't see Germany as being an unwelcome host. The Turks themselves decided to distance themselves from mainstream society.
WELL.

The Turkish came as a German-government sponsored programme to work for a bit in the 1950s when there was like 1% unemployment and the Wirtschafftswunder and aaaall of that. They were taught a bit of German and the odd custom but that was about it, as it was assumed they'd be kicked out when things got worse economicall, but then the centre-left got voted in and that didn't really happen. See also the similar situation in France with the north-African lot there.

But I still see it as the German government doing them a favor. So why does the government have to keep doing them favors until they decide its time for them to assimilate?

Well, it's interesting to see such an article and study done on this issue in particular. It's both frightening to see that I've been correct about this because I'm worried about the future of this issue, and fantastic to be able to use this article against all those who like to ignore these problems as if they don't exist and scream racist to anyone who claims these problems exist.

People call you on your racist positions, not that you "point out these problems exist." No one ever said its easy for immigrants, in Germany or elsewhere. Your bigotry shows when you attempt to assign blame, and you blame the immigrants, their culture and religion; and it shows when you propose your anti-immigrant solutions.

Now I find it very interesting the 'indicators' of assimilation. The problems you are supposedly complaining about, and their indictators - in both "dynamism" and "assimilation" for example, indicators are a lack of -
bicultural marriages, German citizenship.

So you would be happy if more Turks intermarried with more ethnic Germans, and got German citizenship?

Cool! Me too. But I feel icky about any government trying to 'incourage' certain types of marriages, don't you?

I think both the Germans and Turks are a bit at fault. I know when I lived in Germany almost every German I know had some pretty serious attitudes about the Turks, and most of the Turks I knew (which really wasn't many, to be honest) didn't care much for the Germans either. The question is, of course, which one is the chicken and which one is the egg? And even then, which came first?

Doch.

You don't want a bunch of immigrants who don't speak the language and don't know of the laws and customs of a state, and it's the state's job to make sure that people at least try to integrate, or you have knock-on problems in a load of areas.

Zugestimmt. Das ist genau was ich sagen würde.

Pretty much.

Basically ignoring the fact that they were told they were going to leave, then blaming them for 'not wanting to integrate', and then this never happening. It's not exactly hard to understand that you aren't going to integrate all that much (although they were taught German and all) if you're told you're not going to be allowed to stay, and then the long-term consequences of this when this policy is reversed. You have Turkish and Yugoslavian workers and then their young families not being trusting of the state for two reasons - one, they were originally told they'd be kicked out by the state, and then because they reneged on this 'promise' which means they'll lie about anything.

Puts both sides in a very difficult situation, and the fact that most immigrant children end up in a Hauptschule, which is basically the start of a depressing life of being turned down for most jobs you apply for even if you get the Abschluss at the end of things isn't helping.
I think you'd only be correct in this, if the article (and indeed the entire problem) were focused on the immigrants who were not born in Germany, the immigrants who were the guest-workers. But the sad fact of the matter is, these are, as the article claims, even 3rd generation. There comes a point when one must realize that nobody gives a shit what happend generations ago that you claim was unfair and that you use a reason to make life more difficult. The problems now a days with the lack of integration are current, and though some can be traced back to the fact that the original Turks move to Germany should have only been temporary, many of them are fresher than that. For example, as the article points out, the religion and culture.

The Turks should probably try a bit harder to integrate, but as I see it, most Germans would probably respond that they were 'religious or very religious' in a poll, although it might well not be as high as 83 percent,
I strongly doubt that, though it obviously depends on the region. Bavarians will be much more religious than citizens of Hamburg, for example. Even still, religiosity will not be as high as in Turkish immigrants. But to be honest, it's irrelevant for all religions are not equal. There is a much different meaning, both cultural and religious, when one say he's very religious and that is being applied towards Islam rather than Christianity.

the largest or second-largest political party in Germany wears its religious nature on its sleeves.
As a name, but it's not really that religious. A name doesn't really matter that much, rather what stands behind that name. Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
:eek:
That your shocked that I read other things than The Economist or that I enjoy Der Spiegel?
That's not a problem. I didn't read the whole poll so I voted for the option I thought was an approximation of it. I gave you my answer didn't I? That counts more than just the poll option.:wink:
It's not a problemmmmmmm. I just thought it was funny that you voted one way and answered another. I appreaciate your contribution nonetheless. :wink:

But I still see it as the German government doing them a favor.
You really don't have any idea of the history of this, do you?
So why does the government have to keep doing them favors until they decide its time for them to assimilate?
Because it's not going to happen of its own.

It's definitely mostly the Turks' fault. When my family came to Australia, we integrated, and we've been here about the same length of time as the Turks in Germany. It just shows that if you want to integrate, you will.

You really don't have any idea of the history of this, do you?
Of course not. But as you explained it, the Germans brought them in to fill jobs because there were no Germans to do so. They let them stay. As far as I know Germany is better off than Turkey, so I don't understand what you mean. Please explain further so that I might come to an understanding.

Because it's not going to happen of its own.
Here in the US, immigrants from Latin American countries assimilate within one or two generations, and by the third generation the ability of the "immigrant" to speak Spanish is negligable. Why can't it happen on its own?

Well, it's interesting to see such an article and study done on this issue in particular. It's both frightening to see that I've been correct about this because I'm worried about the future of this issue, and fantastic to be able to use this article against all those who like to ignore these problems as if they don't exist and scream racist to anyone who claims these problems exist. You know who you are, I shall not name names.


http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1416723,00.jpg

"Study" from a biased think-tank that happens to share some of your racist views is still biased and racist.

My favorite bit of nonsense is the following, which you bolded, underlined, and hailed:

Reiner Klingholz says immigrants and their children should be expected to make more effort to get an education and to speak German as well as to accept Germany's legal order and cultural norms. "We can no longer accept that someone refuses to take part in sports lessons on religious grounds," he says. :hail:

The main problem is failure to participate in sports lessons?? :rolleyes:

It's definitely mostly the Turks' fault. When my family came to Australia, we integrated, and we've been here about the same length of time as the Turks in Germany. It just shows that if you want to integrate, you will.

It shows that there is literally a world of difference between Germany and Australia, and between your culture and Turkish culture. Leave it to you to pick the most asinine examples.

The main problem is failure to participate in sports lessons?? :rolleyes:

It's a symptom of the failure to integrate. Sports is a pretty big deal in Germany.

it's a symptom of the failure to integrate. Sports is a pretty big deal in germany.

roflastc

It shows that there is literally a world of difference between Germany and Australia, and between your culture and Turkish culture. Leave it to you to pick the most asinine examples.

Yeah, the main difference would be that people here hated us, while the Turks were generally accepted.

People call you on your racist positions, not that you "point out these problems exist." No one ever said its easy for immigrants, in Germany or elsewhere. Your bigotry shows when you attempt to assign blame, and you blame the immigrants, their culture and religion; and it shows when you propose your anti-immigrant solutions.
I hope you'll find it delightful, that when people like you call me a bigot, it has absolutely no meaning nor affect. In fact, I feel like I am pursuing with the right course of action if you are fundamentally opposed to it.

So you would be happy if more Turks intermarried with more ethnic Germans, and got German citizenship?
I would be happy if the Turks who do not wish to integrate leave, the ones that wish to stay integrate and get strive for citizenship, and the ones who hope to marry German women do so when they become German themselves, culturally, so that they don't bring a German woman down into a possible inferior way of life that oh, so often plagues the wives of Turkish immigrants.
Cool! Me too.
Really? Noted.

But I feel icky about any government trying to 'incourage' certain types of marriages, don't you?
I didn't say a thing about government in the above.

It's a symptom of the failure to integrate. Sports is a pretty big deal in Germany.
Yeah, and I didn't participate in PE because I was lazy and crap at it.:rolleyes:

Yeah, and I didn't participate in PE because I was lazy and crap at it.:rolleyes:

I don't know about you, but here, PE was mandatory. Like every other class.

I don't know about you, but here, PE was mandatory. Like every other class.

Yeah, but I was good at forging my mums handwriting.

Yeah, the main difference would be that people here hated us, while the Turks were generally accepted.
Please, you're really not doing me any favors here.:p
"Study" from a biased think-tank that happens to share some of your racist views is still biased and racist.
I'll hope you you'll write and complain to Der Spiegel that they are biased and racist. You're ridiculous and I love it.:)
My favorite bit of nonsense is the following, which you bolded, underlined, and hailed:



The main problem is failure to participate in sports lessons?? :rolleyes:
I find it interesting that you pick that part of my bolded, underlined, and hailed section instead of this, which sums up my views perfectly:
Reiner Klingholz says immigrants and their children should be expected to make more effort to get an education and to speak German as well as to accept Germany's legal order and cultural norms.

Yeah, but I was good at forging my mums handwriting.

I don't know about you, but here, PE was mandatory. Like every other class.

----------------------------

What a non-essential arguement. :p

----------------------------

What a non-essential arguement. :p

One could say the same about yours. ;)

I hope you'll find it delightful, that when people like you call me a bigot, it has absolutely no meaning nor affect.

Oh, gosh, you got me. I was hoping to change the world by pointing out the blindingly obvious. Now all I'm doing is pointing out the blindingly obvious! Whatever shall I do?

In fact, I feel like I am pursuing with the right course of action if you are fundamentally opposed to it.

Oh, well it's good to know that if I'm opposed to, say, genocide, you'll always be around to sing the praises of mass murder.

I would be happy if the Turks who do not wish to integrate leave, the ones that wish to stay integrate and get strive for citizenship, and the ones who hope to marry German women do so when they become German themselves, culturally, so that they don't bring a German woman down into a possible inferior way of life

And you wonder why people call you a bigot? Honestly?


Your own source stipulates one 'problem' is a LACK OF BICULTURAL MARRIAGES. Therefore, marriages between two cultures is the solution. Now, maybe you'd like to disagree with your own source, or try and pretend that "everyone adopts German culture" is really the solution to "not enough bicultural marriages."lol.

I didn't say a thing about government in the above.

Oh? So when you said,

Then why shouldn't there be someone forcing?

You didn't mean government should be "someone." Who, then? Community-oriented citizens in the middle of the night?

I'll hope you you'll write and complain to Der Spiegel that they are biased and racist. You're ridiculous and I love it.:)

Um. Nice try, but Der Spiegel didn't write the study on which the article is based. :rolleyes:

I find it interesting that you pick that part of my bolded, underlined, and hailed section instead of this, which sums up my views perfectly:

Um. You are the one that bolded, underlined, AND hailed the patently ridiculous quote about sports lessons. Don't blame me if your own handiwork makes you look stupid.

I don't know about you, but here, PE was mandatory. Like every other class.
Miss the point much?

Um. You are the one that bolded, underlined, AND hailed the patently ridiculous quote about sports lessons. Don't blame me if your own handiwork makes you look stupid.

I find it hilarious anyone still takes TAI seriously. He's not so blatantly racist as OcceanDrive was, but he's more persistent.

I find it hilarious anyone still takes TAI seriously. He's not so blatantly racist as OcceanDrive was, but he's more persistent.

Ahh, the 67th Amendment: "Let's ignore a legitimate issue because I don't like the guy who posted it".

also, pollfail. Let's see... blame the Turks, blame mostly the Turks but some Germans, blame Turks and Germans equally, blame Germany but some Turks, blame Germans. Wait, where's the option for those of us not wishing to assign blame to ethnic groups because that's a sleazy and bigoted thing to be doing in general? Oops, it doesn't exist.

also, pollfail. Let's see... blame the Turks, blame mostly the Turks but some Germans, blame Turks and Germans equally, blame Germany but some Turks, blame Germans. Wait, where's the option for those of us not wishing to assign blame to ethnic groups because that's a sleazy and bigoted thing to be doing in general? Oops, it doesn't exist.

Well, someone's to blame.

Ahh, the 67th Amendment: "Let's ignore a legitimate issue because I don't like the guy who posted it".

Ah, yes, the whine of the "ignored" bigot --who dislikes vocal opposition to his fallacious spin on self-made "issues."

Well, someone's to blame.

For what exactly?

Ah, yes, the whine of the "ignored" bigot --who dislikes vocal opposition to his fallacious spin on self-made "issues."

Non-integration of immigrants isn't a issue now?

Ah, yes, the whine of the "ignored" bigot --who dislikes vocal opposition to his fallacious spin on self-made "issues."

Poor oppressed right wingers. They can't make fun of the evil brown people without being called on it.

That time again, I see.

Well, someone's to blame.

"Germans" is not "someone." See I believe in this little thing you and TAI apparently don't - personal responsibility.

Non-integration of immigrants isn't a issue now?

Depends. Is "integration" an objective, but one-sided good in which all societies and its members should strive to be like the past?

Depends. Is "integration" an objective, but one-sided good in which all societies and its members should strive to be like the past?

Integration is where you subsume your identity to the state and conform absolutely to societal norms. Seems to be the definition they're using anyway.

Integration is where you subsume your identity to the state and conform absolutely to societal norms. Seems to be the definition they're using anyway.

Yes. You generally do that when you live in another country.

A Westerner wouldn't go to Turkey and walk around in a bikini, so I don't see why Turks should come to the West and wear tents.

Yes. You generally do that when you live in another country.

why?

why?

Because the majority is always right, the minority is always wrong. Usually a criminal and some type of heathen too.

Yes. You generally do that when you live in another country.

A Westerner wouldn't go to Turkey and walk around in a bikini, so I don't see why Turks should come to the West and wear tents.

Have you ever been on holiday to Turkey?

Plenty of Westerners walk around in bikinis.

Have you ever been on holiday to Turkey?

Plenty of Westerners walk around in bikinis.

Fine, Saudi Arabia then.

A Westerner wouldn't go to Turkey and walk around in a bikini

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00685/islamic-tourism404_685469c.jpg

Fine, Saudi Arabia then.

But we're not talking about Saudis, we're talking about Turks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00685/islamic-tourism404_685469c.jpg

I dare say neither of those ought be in a bikini. Then again bikinis to me never seem to be cut correctly to be flattering.

But we're not talking about Saudis, we're talking about Turks.

Shh. If you're very quiet you can hear the sound of goalposts moving.

Fine, Saudi Arabia then.

goalpost shifting much? I believe the topic was turks, not saudis.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00685/islamic-tourism404_685469c.jpg

Yeah yeah. Considering that fanaticism is Turkey is only held back by the military, that doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

These Turks should conform to their society, you don't see westerners going to Turkey and bringing their culture with them, like bikinis!

Actually, Turkey is a major turist destination for many europeans, and a lot of Turkey has developed industry specifically to cater to European tourists, including many bikini, and, in fact, topless beaches. Not to mention nightclubs and bars, even though alchohol is forbidden in Islam.

Well, they wouldn't do it in Saudi Arabia then!

Fairly sums up that ludicrus little tet-a-tet eh?

But we're not talking about Saudis, we're talking about Turks.

Way to miss the point. The point was, "We conform for you in your countries, do likewise".

Way to miss the point. The point was, "We conform for you in your countries, do likewise".

And that point was proved wrong. Westerns don't conform to Turkish societal rules when in Turkey.

What's your point again?

Fairly sums up that ludicrus little tet-a-tet eh?

Non-integration is non-integration, the point stands. I could use China, Madagascar or Mars as an example at the point would be the same.

The point was, "We conform for you in your countries, do likewise".

yeah, a rapidly disproven point.

And that point was proved wrong. Westerns don't conform to Turkish societal rules when in Turkey.

Does Turkey explicitly say "We frown on bikinis"? No? Because the government wants Western tourist dollars? Then shut the fuck up.

Here's an example: would a Westerner go to Turkey, insult Ataturk or the state, and expect that Turkey let that slide?

Does Turkey explicitly say "We frown on bikinis"? No? Because the government wants Western tourist dollars? Then shut the fuck up.

Ahhh, the sound of a poster realising he's made a bloody stupid argument but refusing to back down because he just has to be right.

Turkey is an Islamic country, they also allow drinking, nightclubs and stripclubs. Perhaps you should be less concerned about the impact of immigrants in a country you don't live in and more concerned about this general spread of the shitty parts of western culture across the globe.

Here's an example: would a Westerner go to Turkey, insult Ataturk or the state, and expect that Turkey let that slide?

I do find it funny that the poster who constantly decry islamic cultures as being "uncivilized" suddenly insist that western nations behave exactly like they do when faced with cultural differences.

It seems a horribly backwards argument, to critique a society for elements of its culture you don't agree with, then argue that we should be like them.

Ahhh, the sound of a poster realising he's made a bloody stupid argument but refusing to back down because he just has to be right.

Turkey is an Islamic country, they also allow drinking, nightclubs and stripclubs. Perhaps you should be less concerned about the impact of immigrants in a country you don't live in and more concerned about this general spread of the shitty parts of western culture across the globe.

Fine. You know what? Fuck the West. Any culture too stupid to let anybody and everybody through the borders and not regulate it at all deserves to be wiped out.

Fine. You know what? Fuck the West. Any culture too stupid to let anybody and everybody through the borders and not regulate it at all deserves to be wiped out.

Immigration is regulated in all European countries.

What you mean is: "Any culture too stupid to let anybody and everybody through the borders that I don't like deserves to be wiped out.

Immigration is regulated in all European countries.

What you mean is: "Any culture too stupid to let anybody and everybody through the borders that I don't like deserves to be wiped out.

And I don't like people who want to live like they do in the old country and not integrate with Westerner norms.

And I don't like people who want to live like they do in the old country and not integrate with Westerner norms.

ahh, the old strawman, "westerner norms", as if such a thing existed.

And I don't like people who want to live like they do in the old country and not integrate with Westerner norms.

Define Western norms.

Define Western norms.

things that those dirty muslims don't do, obviously.

Define Western norms.

Being Christian.

Needless to say, that article has its biases. It appears to be assuming the failure of the Turks to 'assimilate' is purely their own fault rather than recognising problems of race and class opportunity that may restrict their scope to succeed and thus become fully integrated. While I don't dismiss the article as presenting some valid viewpoints, thats only part of the picture, and effectively absolves the German government from trying to do any more about it, which isn't going to help much.

The way the terms assimilation and integration are used in the article, as far as I've interpreted it, suggest that its not just about learning the language (which I would see as the absolute minimal definition) but also about education and employment, in which case no doubt many Germans are also not assimilated, and about abandoning loyalty and identification with Turkey, which to be honest I don't think they have an obligation to do. How could they demonstrate their 'Germanness'? What is it to be German? Should they wear Lederhosen and eat Sauerkraut every meal?

The fact they largely live in certain poor areas together can also be taken as a class mobility issue (having entered at the bottom, it takes a few generations to climb out) and that racism and Islamophobia may be issues leading to discrimination. Indeed, in such a situation, living together and providing a mutual help network is a perfectly reasonable response to the situation.

Being fair to the article, it ends on a positive note by saying that some slow progress is being made. When a group enters at the bottom of the class pyramid, with little knowledge of the language, its going to take time.

In short, I'm not saying the Turkish immigrants are free from blame, but the article seems to be rather harsh in shoving all the blame on the immigrants, rather than engaging in a full discussion of the deeper structural causes, alongside perhaps a certain amoung of agency of the Turkish immigrants in perpetuating the situation. Still, you need this sort of article to balance the opposite tendency on the left to argue that its all down to structural causes. As ever, the truth's somewhere in the middle.

Define Western norms.

Having a pinkish tone to their skin?

Being Christian.

And white.

(beaten to it, I see).

And I don't like people who want to live like they do in the old country and not integrate with Westerner norms.

Says the Australian who supports the Soviet Union (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=568770) and thinks human rights are a waste of time?
(http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=556094)

Um... okay...

Define Western norms.

Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, not stoning homosexuals or murdering rape victims, that sort of thing.

Of course, that's pretty much nonexistent among the Turks, who really are entirely beyond that kind of 9th century bullshit so it's a moot point... realistically, I would say assimilation is not inherently necessary because Turkey has a pretty strong tradition of democracy and secularism. Acculturation is a good idea for everyone, so that should be encouraged, but forcing them to entirely assimilate is unnecessary.

Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, not stoning homosexuals or murdering rape victims, that sort of thing.

Of course, that's pretty much nonexistent among the Turks, who really are entirely beyond that kind of 9th century bullshit so it's a moot point... realistically, I would say assimilation is not inherently necessary because Turkey has a pretty strong tradition of democracy and secularism. Acculturation is a good idea for everyone, so that should be encouraged, but forcing them to entirely assimilate is unnecessary.

Dude, just drop it. Go with the flow, whatever will be will be.

Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, not stoning homosexuals or murdering rape victims, that sort of thing.

....

This, of course, brings up the debate as to whether or not Latin America and Eastern Europe are part of the Western world. Neither of these regions have had an abundance of these things historically.

This, of course, brings up the debate as to whether or not Latin America and Eastern Europe are part of the Western world. Neither of these regions have had an abundance of these things historically.

No, they're usually not.

This, of course, brings up the debate as to whether or not Latin America and Eastern Europe are part of the Western world. Neither of these regions have had an abundance of these things historically.

Honestly you'll be hard pressed to find anywhere that had much of those things historically.

This, of course, brings up the debate as to whether or not Latin America and Eastern Europe are part of the Western world. Neither of these regions have had an abundance of these things historically.

how much history are we talking here? In the scope of human existance, such concepts are a relatively new device when employed on a mass scale

Turkey has a pretty strong tradition of democracy and secularism.
No, no it doesn't. In the last 50 years there've been 5 coup d'états, and only in the last 90 years have democracy and secularism really been a part of Turkish society.

the same sort of problem happens in england.......foreign people tend to live in an area where others of the same ethnicity or similar live.....i would imagine that they feel safer in numbers....and of course this in itself causes problems of racism in some cases and a lack of understanding of the cultures and beliefs of these people due to not intergrating....however......europeans are not exactly known for their efforts on accepting foreign people are they?........neither group is to blame wholy or partly as it is in our nature as humans to be wary of the unknown.

europeans are not exactly known for their efforts on accepting foreign people are they?
Err?

Bit of a sweeping statement?

I put most of the 'blame' on the Turks. As with a house guest, it is only polite to conform to the rules of the house you are staying with. Now, this doesn't mean that the Turks need to give up their entire identity. No immigrant should be forced to do that. In fact, a society would lose out if they required their immigrants to conform completely to their own cultural norms. Societies need to have an amount of fluidity to them. They need to be able to flex and bend and change over time, as need be.

On the other hand, some of the responsibility lies on the host country as well. In this case, the Germans need to have a set of rules they want immigrants to follow, and they need to ensure that the immigrants are following them. If they do not, then there needs to be some sort of program to help them out. If that does not work, then some sort of punishment should be enforced, such as deportation for a period of time. Re-admittance would be only allowed if said immigrant(s) were able to show competence in the areas that were previously lacking.

I put most of the 'blame' on the Turks. As with a house guest, it is only polite to conform to the rules of the house you are staying with.

The funny thing about Germany is, is that being a free democracy, the "rule" is that the turks have a legally gaurenteed right to practice their culture as they see fit, as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others.

No, they're usually not.

Why not?

Honestly you'll be hard pressed to find anywhere that had much of those things historically.

So, from a historical perspective, could we then say that Western Civilisation is a modern phenomenon?

how much history are we talking here? In the scope of human existance, such concepts are a relatively new device when employed on a mass scale

Thus, Western norms and western civilisation are also relatively new. Does that make sense?

.... As with a house guest, it is only polite to conform to the rules of the house you are staying with..... Re-admittance would be only allowed if said immigrant(s) were able to show competence in the areas that were previously lacking.

As an immigrant to Canada, I never got the hang of discriminating against the First Nations people. I should have, because it's part of the Canadian culture and I should really integrate. But I just can't do it right. I keep thinking that they are as good as the rest of the people I met here.

How long should I have to stay out of the country for this lack of competence in this area?

i think you will find that many european countries are racist.....to almost extreme proportions......i do mean central and eastern europe...as years of oppression and a lack of education in these matters, communism has left them with no understanding and people there a resentfull of other ethnic groups. of course things will improve but im sure the current financial climate will create problems

The funny thing about Germany is, is that being a free democracy, the "rule" is that the Turks have a legally guaranteed right to practice their culture as they see fit, as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others.

What is considered interfering with the rights of others? Some might argue that the language barrier is an interference. I am not arguing that they should drop their entire culture and become entirely German, but I have come to realize that if a person(s) wants to move to a new country and enjoy the benefits of that society, they should adapt to that society in what ever way said society deems fitting.

So, from a historical perspective, could we then say that Western Civilisation is a modern phenomenon?

Western civilization has been around for about three thousand or so years, or about half of history. Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, etc. have been around for a couple of hundred. So no.

As an immigrant to Canada, I never got the hang of discriminating against the First Nations people. I should have, because it's part of the Canadian culture and I should really integrate. But I just can't do it right. I keep thinking that they are as good as the rest of the people I met here.

How long should I have to stay out of the country for this lack of competence in this area?
Is it written law to discriminate against the First Nations people?

What is considered interfering with the rights of others?

That which the law says it is.

but I have come to realize that if a person(s) wants to move to a new country and enjoy the benefits of that society, they should adapt to that society in what ever way said society deems fitting.

Then you've come to realize something silly, and potentially dangerous, once you start mucking about in ideas of social values. "what society deems fitting" in a democratic government is reflected in the laws of the country. If they want to "enjoy the benefits of that society" they need only do what every other benefit enjoying person is required to do. Obey the law. Requiring, demanding, or expecting anything short of that is simply cultural imperialism dressed up in fancy clothing.

Is it written law to discriminate against the First Nations people?

so, then the boundary is the law then? Good, then surely you agree with me that there's absolutely no reason for anyone to be required to conform themselves to any culture, short of what the law requires them to do?

That which the law says it is.



Then you've come to realize something silly. "what society deems fitting" in a democratic government is reflected in the laws of the country. If they want to "enjoy the benefits of that society" they need only do what every other benefit enjoying person is required to do. Obey the law. Requiring, demanding, or expecting anything short of that is simply cultural imperialism dressed up in fancy clothing.

I really am not seeing myself as much in disagreement here, to be quite honest. I think immigrants should enjoy the same rights as citizens, and should have to obey the same rules. I believe I was under the assumption that they were not obeying law, and that a lot of law is determined from country to country based on culture. For a generic example, it is American culture for people to have universal suffrage. On the other hand, Saudi culture prohibits women from having suffrage (I'm not sure if this is true or not. I am just making up examples to try and convey my thought). Thus, some laws of America would be geared to the cultural ideas of universal suffrage, while some laws of Saudi would geared towards the cultural ideas of limited suffrage. Am I making sense? Because, as I said, I don't see myself disagreeing with you at all.

so, then the boundary is the law then? Good, then surely you agree with me that there's absolutely no reason for anyone to be required to conform themselves to any culture, short of what the law requires them to do?

This was what i was thinking, but wasn't saying, I suppose.:)

I really am not seeing myself as much in disagreement here, to be quite honest. I think immigrants should enjoy the same rights as citizens, and should have to obey the same rules.

Well if we're talking "the rules" to be the rule of law, fine. EVERYONE should have to, immigrant or no.

On the other hand if the rules are more like "they should act more german!" then no, I am against that. As I said, it's cultural imperialism in fancy clothes.

I can't speak directely for Germany but I'm Dutch, and I know how the problem goes with our Maroccans and other immigrants.

Mostly Marroccans.

I always notice that a lot of the north-african immigrants have problems they cause themselves. They don't have jobs, they don't speak proper Dutch, they live in crappy shitholes, they do drugs, they beat up people in the streets, they are most often criminals, their religion brings along threats of terrorism and extremism and they do pretty much anything to ruin the life and safety of hard working, white skinned Dutch citizen's who's ancenstry have been here in the Netherlands for ages.

It's not OUR fault they fuck up. We give hem all the chances to make something of themselves get jobs learn our language and culture etc. I mean when I see a dark skinned and/or foreign immigrant of marroccan here who has a proper job, raises his own kids, pays taxes and doesn't do crime, in other words has integrated succesfully and adapted to our way of life, I am super-proud of the guy. In fact more so than I would be if he were an autochtoon Dutch person. But unfortunately most immigrants aren't like this.

I chose option 1.

I always notice that a lot of the north-african immigrants have problems they cause themselves. They don't have jobs, they don't speak proper Dutch, they live in crappy shitholes, they do drugs, they beat up people in the streets, they are most often criminals, their religion brings along threats of terrorism and extremism and they do pretty much anything to ruin the life and safety of hard working, white skinned Dutch citizen's

Funny, if you replace "Moroccans" with "black people in Detroit" and "Dutch" with "English" or "Americans" as appropriate that sounds almost exactly what I hear rednecks here say.

Western civilization has been around for about three thousand or so years, or about half of history. Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, etc. have been around for a couple of hundred. So no.

So, then can we say that those criteria are not a good description of western norms?

Is it written law to discriminate against the First Nations people?

Historically, yes (http://www.dd-rd.ca/site/_PDF/publications/indigenous/sheetsWomen/6en.pdf).

So, then can we say that those criteria are not a good description of western norms?

Yep.

Yep.

They are CURRENT Western norms.

They are CURRENT Western norms.

Sort of.

Regardless, their temporal status makes clear that they may evolve further. For example, due to an influx of immigrants with different "norms."

EDIT: What part of "Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, not stoning homosexuals or murdering rape victims, that sort of thing" are Turks refusing to accept?

EDIT: What part of "Democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, not stoning homosexuals or murdering rape victims, that sort of thing" are Turks refusing to accept?

While I do not endorse some of the comments in this thread, one could make the arguement that by beating their wives and not allowing their women to take part in the public square (such as voting), they are refusing to accept democracy and human rights.

That being said, misogyny is hardly exclusive to the Turkish immigrants.

I'm glad these things are discussed openly and not suppressed due to political correctness and/or Germany's past.

And it really sucks that children in primary schools cant speak German properly. Native language is very important. Eg:

"The size of the vocabulary disadvantage in a non-native language....The test is vocabulary-based and may or may not be knowledge-based, and PROHIBITS the use of reference aids. Typical examples are the Concept Mastery Tests (by Lewis Terman) and the W-87 (used by the ISPE).

In this situation, one will score 30 to 35 IQ points below one's true level in verbal ability, assuming of course one does not commit fraud by using reference aids (in which case one will score far ABOVE one's true level in verbal ability even in a non-native language)."
http://www.paulcooijmans.com/onint/lang_disadv.html