World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Ameribro here. I've hosted a German exchange kid. She was really, really worried about immigration and "preserving German culture". I pointed out to her that:
Culture is not a fixed thing, it's always drifting a little bit, with or without immigrants. That's why old people always complain about how different everything is.
Germany is actually younger than the US as a state by about a century, and contemporary Germany has really only existed since either the end of WW2 or the fall of the Soviet Union, depending on your view. (IMO, the collapse of East Germany is non-trivial. Her mom was an East German and described to us how they had an entirely separate culture with different groceries and everything and all that just vaporized into nothing when the wall fell, replaced with West German culture almost overnight). So, what does it really even mean to be defending German culture?
There's always hardship when a new group of people arrive, but over time you usually end up with something that's better than what you had before if you can learn to embrace it. US culture has, in spite of our issues with racism, tangibly benefitted from immigration over the centuries.
She wasn't receptive to it. A lot of Europeans who hold anti-immigratiom views insist that it's different for Europe when they have immigrants than it is for the US. I've yet to have one persuasively explain why that's true and not just whiny exceptionalism.
I mostly agree with your conclusion, but this is a very american (I.e. ignorant) response to her concern and i am not surprised she wasnt receptive. I think you underestimate the difference between a country like yours (which has always been a 'salad bowl' of cultures united by a commitment to liberalism) and mine (Germany, which is essentially a big tribe of tribes). This difference is even more stark if you look at a place like Denmark.
Here are a few of your points that gave me this impression:
Her concern is (to me) obviously independent of the state we happen to live under. Germaneness is not tied to a political entity. East Germans were German, Volga Germans are German and the German speaking people under the hre were German. ("German" Americans are not German btw.) This also makes your comment about
baffling (to me).
The us is in many ways a much worse country than Germany (or almost any EU country). I don't see why we should strive to emulate that model.
I think the question that really needs to be answered is how you plan on enforcing cultural normality. If, as you say, Germans have had a strong identify regardless of historical causes and conditions, it sounds like they've figured their culture out throughout the decades and centuries without someone pointing a gun at them over it. So then why should the force and violence of the government be necessary now, and to what extent? Are we just talking arresting brown people, or should we start arresting anyone who speaks something besides German in public, since they're eroding the culture too?
I also wanted to respond to your remark about emulating the US. You don't give rich old white men enough credit, they've managed to turn the country into a shambling wreck all while keeping everyone else locked out of governance. Maybe if we'd had those other voices, we wouldn't have Donald Trump soliciting a billion dollar bribe to roll back all of our environmental protections.
The fuck are you on about.
If you want to get a handle on this I suggest you start with concepts such as the assimilation capacity of a population as well as the possible speed of different kinds of natural cultural drift. If you want to avoid to avoid fuelling xenophobic ressentiment, what you need to make sure is that cultural drift caused by new arrivals is lower than what people accept, in that case people become more tolerant of that kind of shift, though of course that has a limit (and that's fine). OTOH if you exceed it, people become less tolerant of shifts. In other words: Culture is a non-newtonian fluid. You create resistance by pushing too hard, if you go in gently there very well might be no resistance at all.
The erm force applied to that non-newtonian fluid is more or less number of arrivals multiplied by germane cultural difference multiplied by economical impact. When Germans flock to Sweden the Swedes worry about those "closed up and private" people, they're somewhat taken aback by directness but secretly also somewhat glad that there's someone actually complaining in public, not just in private. In the numbers that we're talking about the Swedes aren't worried in cultural terms, though there's some gripes among some around housing prices in rural areas (not among the Swedes selling the houses, of course). Berliners are way more worried about Swabian arrivals.
And, really, let's take Sweden as an example because they've been so... Swedish about the whole thing. Over decades their immigration worked just fine, they had a certain number and that number didn't exceed the assimilation capacity, and then Swedes said "we are the best so of course we'll take in more" and more came and assimilation failed -- and the Swedes, being Swedes, never complained in public. It's a high-trust environment, of course you trust others, even if government policy led to, one way or the other, segregation: Arrivals live in one place, native Swedes in another. Which then makes it even harder for the new arrivals to even acculturate much less assimilate, leading to more segregation, leading to more difficulties. At some point a dam broke and Swedes stopped complaining in private and complained in public -- the backlash. Which led to people who were born in Sweden from perfectly assimilated parents suddenly found themselves on the outside of their own culture.
If, instead their politicians had started early saying "we need to actively work against that segregation, we need to change our public housing policy to make sure that neighbourhoods are mixed, and if that doesn't suffice we need to limit the number of new arrivals" things would've went very differently -- such a policy would have increased assimilation capacity. But that would've implied things such as Sweden not being perfect which is unthinkable to a Swede... at least to say aloud. Fucking swots.
What I'm on about is that there are plenty of people who would be quite happy to make it the police's business to enforce cultural norms. Governments probably should do more to ensure plentiful housing, but assimilation is something that just happens over time. The US has had its own assimilation woes many, many, many times, it's never been the happy melting pot we tell the world we are. We've had cultural enclaves and backlashes and all of that, but what always happens is that the assimilation takes hold within a generation or two, regardless of how the older generations might feel about it. It's something people are quite capable of figuring out for themselves, without getting the cops involved.
Imo, people should be free to live and work where they please. Borders are the tools of tyrants, imo, but I don't think we're ready for that conversation.
And it's going to stay that way, or become worse, if migration is mismanaged.
There is no political border surrounding Franconia. Well maybe district borders, but those are fuzzy and approximate when it comes to culture. Noone is stopping anyone from crossing in or out. But if suddenly Bavarians, culturally Bavarian that is not just as in the state, started to mass-migrate into Franconia boy would you see backlash: Franconians are perfectly entitled to want to stay Franconian instead of becoming Bavarian. Different language, different traditions, different mentality, different majority religion, different Idendidäd.
Yes, I'm familiar with what you're talking about about. We've had similar backlashes even within the US before. The thing is, it's something people can, have, and do figure out without arresting anyone. People are smart and generally want to do what they believe to be the right thing and have a peaceful life, that's broadly true across our species.
You're the only one around here talking about arresting people. Maybe you share -- culturally -- more in common with some people that you dislike than you realise or you wouldn't be preoccupied like that.
As I said elsewhere, I'm speaking as a citizen of a country who has repeatedly and severely fucked up, and continues to do so, in the hopes that I might save someone else the embarrassment of becoming a citizen of such a country. To wit, I must ask how you plan on enforcing immigration controls without law enforcement.
Oh no. You weren't talking about border guards, you were talking about arresting people for having brown skin, or speaking different languages, for the "crime" of "eroding the culture".
Heck I erode Italy's culture every time I'm there simply by being convinced that pineapple on pizza is a perfectly valid thing to do. So far, none of them ever suggested arresting me.
Saying "I want cops but the difference is that this time they're the good guys and don't hurt anyone" doesn't really move the needle for me. You can't use the power of the state to use its force on people only it's totally rainbows and sunshine this time.
Who said that? Who, here, aside from you, is talking about cops? Are those cops here in the room with us right now?
You, unless you want the law to enforce itself via magic. So, again, how are you enforcing these immigration rules without cops? Oh, wait, by calling cops "guards"? Call them the rainbow patrol for all I care, a cop by any other name is still a cop.
We do have borders, yes. We have an asylum process, we have an immigration process, we have a process for working permits, we have a naturalisation process, it's all very well regulated and yes you can get through all of that without ever coming into contact with anyone in a uniform, short of a border guard.
What we don't, and won't, have is what you propose, and that is arresting American tourists on the subway for loudly speaking English. Or making it more difficult to open a Nigerian restaurant than a German one. That's all your imagination, you've been told so multiple times by multiple people, and you still don't seem to be able to understand it.
I want to be clear: I couldn't give a crap about whether Americans get arrested. Nationalities are a construct made up by tyrants; people are people, and they deserve to not come to harm regardless of where they happened to be born.
So, it sounds like you're proposing, what, no changes? What exactly is it, then, that people want to in order to deal with immigration, if not more cops and more aggressive laws?
There's some room for better policies, integration courses etc but much of it is simply the east not being as experienced at integrating people combined with them still feeling fucked over by reunification.
In such a situation it then doesn't exactly help to build a centre for 200 asylum seekers in a village with 300 inhabitants. Don't recall the actual numbers but there's been a couple of these "WTF would you ever do that" situations. Might even have been AfD fucks doing that they certainly aren't above employing accelerationist tactics. Might've been inexperience and carelessness. Might've been a bureaucrat who has beef with the district administrator.
Oh: We need to re-work the history curricula. Make room for things like the Armenian genocide. Mandatory language development screening for kids and if necessary mandatory Kindergarten are already in place in a couple of states, it's generally a good idea not just for immigrant kids, you don't want kids to start primary school at a disadvantage. Muslims definitely should continue the process of naturalising Islam, that is, continue the move away from source-country Islams (plural) towards a domestic one. Can't find English articles about the discussion/process within Germany right now but this might be of interest. Bit out of date it's been taking up speed but it's giving an overview.
Besides the point. Immigration does not necessarily lead to "bad" legislation.
Unfortunately we do have such narrow minded people in Germany. Even sadder they apply this mindset onto their kids
And Germany's population, and with that the economy, would start shrinking without immigration. That's what a fertility rate of 1.7 gets you. Things would go downhill fast enough.
People would just start blaming the politicians for the rampant inflation and reduction in services that a scarcity of workers creates, and then vote in some fascist to "fix" it, first and foremost without allowing immigration. He will overthrow the media and judiciary and "fix" it by starting wars with the neighbors or doing ethnic cleansing at home.
All countries are going to go sub-replacement within a couple of decades. Aside from our constant inability to reform the pension system Germany is actually in quite a good spot: Those 1.7 are very stable, there's no grand fluctuations, and no real reason to suspect it will suddenly crash. It's a rate which, yes, leads to a degree of gerontocracy but it's not catastrophic for the economy or pension system in the sense that improvements in productivity can make up for it.
I suspect it will rise again and then hover around 2 but for that to happen spooks like climate change related hesitancy will have to go (will happen with time, the earth can easily sustain the overall projected population levels) and the sources of immigration will have to dry up to a noticeable degree, which will also happen with time.
Culture is identity. Isn't that obvious from looking at different people all over the world? It is true, there is a clash of cultures because everyone is proud of their identity. Nationalism is extremely powerful because it is human instinct to look upon kinship. Humans are social animals.
Sure, but you don't need the force and violence of the state to enforce identity. It's something people are quite capable of figuring out on their own without being at gunpoint.
Now tell that to the native americans and see how well they take it.
"if we don't do to other people what we did to native Americans, they'll do to us what we did to the native Americans" is a reasonably common white supremacist talking point in the US, often presented adjacent to the great replacement.
I don't agree with your analysis. German culture clearly predates WW2. You're conflating political entities with cultures and that's not how any of this works
Preserving German culture and worrying about immigration - you had an AfD or nazi kid in your home.
Mostly the same thing.
Agreed.
Why do people need to act the way you think they do?
Why can a group of people not enjoy the way they live and want to keep it. Why are you right for saying a country should be forced to change?
I'm making an observation that any resistance to change is just wishful thinking. Even if you tried very hard to preserve a culture as it is, the causes and conditions that created that culture are also subject to change, and so the culture that arises from those causes and conditions will change as well. You've attached yourself to your idea of what your culture is (or should be), and decided that since you prefer that idea, then it's acceptable to use force against other people to attain it.
I, personally, think that using the might of the government to enforce cultural values is not only crazy, but also stupid, deadly, and wasteful. Not everyone agrees with me, and that's fine, you're free to disagree and join the ranks of other whacko authoritarian countries that use violence to enforce cultural norms. But that's not the kind of place I want to live, myself.
By the way, I noticed your username, Wanderer. That wouldn't per chance be a reference to one of the names of Odin, would it? I know Hedonism's quite popular among, well, certain groups, so it caught my attention.
You seem to conflicting everything I had said and what the argument is about. No one is saying the government should force culture to remain static. That's such a ridiculous premise and such a bad faith comment.
The issue is Germans enjoy their way of life and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Germans have seen the culture change with an influx of immigrants that do not reflect or adapt to German culture.
No one should dictate how a country should change but it is being forced to change by immigrants in a way that Germans do not want. If Germans want their culture, they do not want people coming over and bringing another culture that is replacing their own why is that bad? Why should an American try to control a foreign culture? Should have the right the live how they want and Germans culture and liberty differ to that if others and that is in jeopardy.
My name is based on the fact that I love experiencing other cultures, travelling, living in different places. Also that I Wandered over from Reddit so it's a bit of a mixed comment. I'm not sure what you are alluding to. Can you be more clear?
Wanderer is one one of the names Odin uses while travelling the earth. Hedonism is also quite popular among Neo Nazis. It is an unfortunate truth that Nazis end up embracing and adopting things that other people also enjoy, so I was trying to ask about it politely.
I'm not saying that Americans should control your culture. All I'm saying is that it sounds like you want to use the force of government to steer your culture to be a certain way and to force compliance, and that's a very dangerous thing indeed. Such movements, however well intentioned they may seem in the moment, often get co-opted by people with bad things in mind. Where do you draw the line on what a good German is? Someone who speaks German? Someone who eats German food? Someone who demonstrates a strong Christian faith? Maybe the government decides that good Germans don't join labor unions, and if you question the government, well, that's not being a good German, is it?
And how far should the government go to guarantee German culture? Does it stop with preventing just Slavs and Brown people from immigrating, or will you remove the ones who've immigrated already? What about the children who grew up there and are German in all but skin tone, should the government kick them out too, or do you separate them from their family? What about if people speak French in public, should they be arrested? (Yes, ofc, but that was a bad example) These kinds of things never end well, imo. I'm just trying to suggest that you don't step on the rake, not control you, but don't let me get in the way of a good time.
Well I don't know anything about that.
The fact the think having an immigration policy is enough to make someone a Neo Nazi is an incredibly low bar. It's this sort of stupidity that is pushing people away from the left.
You are conflicting things. I don't know where you are getting this all from. You must understand that German culture exists. You must understand than at least some Germans, if not most like their culture. This is about people that are not German with a culture that is not German coming to Germany and pushing out German culture. That's what people have an issue with. If German culture changes no one has an issue with that, it's the fact that change is being forced by outsiders that is the issue.
All your arguments are just ridiculous. I'm not talking about German government we are talking about culture. I honestly can't understand why you are changing the narrative.
Again. On about different things. It's like you live in 1984 and not the real world. Why do so many people pretend immigration doesn't affect a country? Why live in that denial?
If something like a "German culture" ever existed, it never existed isolated and unchanged by other cultures. It's a short-sighted illusion to think that. And that illusion is used to justify racist and xenophobic positions. Culture is defined by communication, by change and exchange, and thrived when borders were crossed peacefully.
On the question of Nazis, I must beg your pardon. I know an actual IRL Nazi (or perhaps more), because I knew them before they were Nazis. What I now know on hindsight to be bad faith questions about cultural preservation and immigration was my initial introduction to their new ideology.
As for my concerns about the government, I raise them because I am telling you that you're asking for a one-sided coin. You want government policy to enforce a German culture without the authoritarianism. This is a nonsense thing that belongs in the realm of dragons and unicorns. I am speaking to you as a citizen of a country who has fucked up horribly many separate times and continues to do so, in the hopes that I might help prevent another horrible fuck up.
Reducing immigration is not an authoritarian policy. Its crazy you think it is.
That's a basic government policy.
On the question of Nazis, I must beg your pardon. I know an actual IRL Nazi (or perhaps more), because I knew them before they were Nazis. What I now know on hindsight to be bad faith questions about cultural preservation and immigration was my initial introduction to their new ideology.
On the question of immigration, I think what's being asked for here isn't just modest controls. You might say that, but the language about Germans feeling forced out of their own country would suggest to me that the order of the day is something a little more robust. I think I can be forgiven for that estimation. You can't have it both ways, if you start giving the government extra power to start flexing on immigrants and non-conforming cultures, it's eventually going to get used against you, too. You're never so deep in the in-group as you might think.
The number of people going for cultural enforcement narratives is tiny compared to those being somewhat at unease at the speed of change, or concentration of change in particular areas -- "Kreuzberg isn't Germany" kind of thing no it was never Germany in the first place it's always been Prussian and they're not getting any less civilised with immigration, either, Berliners have always been rude. They're fucking proud of being rude, it's what passes as culture in that excuse for a city.
The AfD, sure, is talking about deporting Germans with foreign surnames -- prompting wide-spread protests by everyone else. Conservatives may or may not get their underwear in a twist over pork-free options on the menu, the question they're asking themselves is "will I be allowed to eat pork in the future". There's a feeling (and do I need to emphasise this: feeling) that their dietary habits are under attack by Muslims on the one flank, and the Green party and their "vegan dictatorship" on another. Meaning: The reaction is not tied to immigration as-such, it is simply a resistance to change, or advocacy. It's perceived as political, and it arguably even is -- Greens want their veggie day in canteens to lower overall meat consumption, while Muslims are saying "yo we don't want to choose the vegetarian option every day can you folks eat something else but pork for once". And it's not like Rinderrouladen would be any worse without pork so that's not an issue, at least not a culinary one.
The solution? Keep things simmering on low flame. Mind the rate of change, mind the reaction, don't call people racist or climate deniers or whatnot for wanting their pork chops. Pork chops are good. Noone is going to take away pork chops. Pork chops will exist in the future. You don't alleviate fears by getting out the rocket stove.
On the flipside you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone on any side of the political spectrum who argues that there should be pork Döner. In fact, it's illegal to call a vertical pork skewer Döner: You can have veal or lamb, also poultry but then you have to explicitly mention the type of meat. Turks brought it here, everyone likes it (even Nazis!), Turks (by and large) don't eat pork and not necessarily for religious reasons, Döner never contained pork, pork doesn't belong in Döner just as Rostbratwurst isn't made with goat meat.
The left has always been good at identifying structural issues, the right at hitting emotional chords. The left needs to get better at it, much better. People are worried about pork chops being under attack? Then, simultaneously with your veggie day initiative, say that certain traditional recipes should be protected, along the lines of "don't let Nestle and Kraft tell you how to make your pork chops! Defend our culinary tradition!" and voila noone's going to worry about pork chops getting outlawed. Simple as fucking that.