Ever since I saw the news that adult diapers outsell baby diapers in Japan (2011!), it's been fun to check in on their attitudes to immigration. I wish this article delved into it a little bit more.
> This was attributed by criminologists to the subgroup consisting of men aged 16–29 is disproportionately large at 34% of the total [number of immigrants] and that young males are overrepresented as criminals in all parts of the world, rather than to their ethnic origin.
It seems pretty clear to me that the benefits of immigration outweigh this, as long as the total amount of crime stays at a low level, which subjectively seems to be the case.
Now there might be many reasons for that, poverty probably plays, etc. But the outcome is fairly obvious.
From Wikipedia. So no, not even gonna read that article.
But contrarely to what people think, crime isn't IMHO the worst of them. The worst is the feeling that the cultural norm of the country, as well as its "visual" identity has shifted from a european country to a (mostly) african one ( and please read the rest before making hasty judgments on what i'm saying).
To understand the problem, imagine going to a few remote rural areas in japan in 40 years and each time only see tall 7 feet blond and blue eyes people, speaking swedish and not finding sushis or ramen anywhere.
I like all cultures, and i believe there's great things everywhere, but that's why i'm also a bit sad to see "traditional" France (whatever that means) disappear.
This is delusional, and yes, I did read the rest of your comment.
We can't legally compile ethnics statistics in France, so all we have to rely on is our personal feeling, which is of course very subjective ( and this has been the counter argument to my type of argument for a very long time). But it has reached such a level now that nobody is contesting that diagnosis. People give it different names depending on their political orientation ( "creolisation" for the left, "grand remplacement" for the right), but it's basically the same conclusion.
This is bullshit, because even if France made it illegal (it's obviously not) other groups would definitely still do it. France is still 86% white people, mostly french. Nobody is being replaced anywhere, because immigration is tiny everywhere.
"Due to a law dating from 1872 at the start of the Third Republic, France has prohibited the collection of data on a citizens race, ethnicity or their beliefs such as religion through national censuses,[47][48] however estimates have been made of the ethnic and racial demography of the country in the present"
We're talking estimation as it is indeed illegal, no matter how crazy it may sound like. Estimation is highly dependant on who's doing the estimation, and for what purpose, and as you can see in the article itself, the topic is highly controversial among specialist.
Now, if you were living in france for the past 40 years, and had regularely travelled across the country, you would see that in that particular case, the situation is very obvious, and the only circle left still debating the issue is demographic specialists.
Politicians and media used to deny the issue and flagged anyone mentioning it as racist, but things have recently changed and we finally start talking about it like grown ups.
Your claims appear to be based on suggesting that you (and, in a laughable falsehood, the wide range of opinion in French society) knows for a fact that this situation exists, but if anyone does not agree with you, that is merely their opinion, since it is impossible to measure.
Have you ever been to any suburb, not just in Paris ( which already has some suburbs with close to 99% non-french inhabitants) but in pretty much any average sized city in the country ?
based on your saying I can only assume you only lived in the central part of paris, and went on holidays in the west coast such as bordeaux or brest. Because all the rest of the country is pretty much in transition.
This is not the political culture of Vercingetorix, nor of Charles de Gaulle ;)
I think your categories and your political reflexes prevent you from thinking straight. Everybody in the world would have a broad understanding of what "french" means (or "japanese", "americans", "italian", etc). For some reason you pretend to ignore there are some cultural norms that are associated to a nation ("cultural" in the broadest sense, which includes the way you look). I believe because this fact scares you or have been associated to a taboo.
Those taboos prevent you from addressing questions, and not addressing the issues don't make them magically disappear. Worst, you risk leaving those questions to people that have a political agenda.
I am perfectly capable of understanding and discussing what can be meant by 'Frenchness', and what I mean by it.
However this is most of the time a total waste of time, because the reason the person is arguing against the obvious is not because of intelligent caution, but rather out of scare.
So sorry if i'm not going this route with you. If you're sincerely curious i suggest you go on a bike ride in Argenteuil on a friday.
What are the words you are scared of using if you answered this question?
Why won't you use them?
It's a mix of the way you dress, your body features (yes, skin color is one of them obviously but that's far from the only one), your language, all your daily habits, the food you eat, author you've read, etc.
It's the general picture people have in their mind when they think of an archetypal "french". Doesn't mean all french are like that, obviously. Much like i'm pretty sure you could find japanese with natural blond hair who never eat raw fish.
You may also argue that this image of french people is completely outdated, and that the metropolitan french population has evolved in the past 50 years. But that's precisely my point.
The movement of people causes an interchange of culture.
For some reasons it doesn't seem to having worked that way in the last decades (and it would be really interesting to know why).
In some far distant world where people in France no longer eat baguettes or people in Japan are not synonymous with Sushi, those people still exist in French and Japanese culture. (And those ideological totems still exist as legacies in French and Japanese culture, they're just no longer practiced).
And I'm not even going to begin to address the influences that France and Japan have had on other cultures (the entirety of Africa and Asia). The cultures of the places that France and Japan have influence have not been "superseded". They are still the culture's of those lands. They just have outside influence.
This sounds to me as a bit tautological. If we move 200 millions from china in 1 month, you wouldn't say "french culture is about eating rice, and french people generally look like chinese".
Culture sometimes change intrinsically, but sometimes because of huge foreign influence or demographics ( invasion being historically the most influencial one). Doesn't mean you can't observe the change when it happens and judge it.
to me, that sounds great actually
https://en.japantravel.com/shizuoka/izu-shuzenji-british-vil...
Nothing to worry about in Rotherham
Nothing to worry about in Parisian Banlieues https://www.lepoint.fr/education/laicite-pres-d-un-enseignan...
Of course there's a difference between bringing people with a degree for example and letting any kind of migration happen (which for the most part wasn't the case during the migrations of the XXth century to the US)
This is not to say immigration doesn't have its advantages and that criminal issues are not only due to recent arrivals (quite the contrary)
There's also a cultural aspect to it. It used to be just extreme-right speech but IMO It's time to stop looking elsewhere and face the problem.
In Spain it's only insecurity, and controlled to a certain degree, but in Barcelona is noticeable, and in Madrid is beginning to bein noticed. Is nowhere the level of France but it's definitely growing. A lot of people is looking up north and wondering if we should take this more seriously, so we don't end up like our northern neighbours.
They often don't have the education that the city demands nor the language skills (It's pretty damn easy to get a job if you speak the 2 national languages perfectly but don't have a degree for example). All in all they don't really fit the niche of sustaining the social security net as is often brought up as the core advantage except for the fact that they have more children which is tied to a brand of persistent social conservatism ....which isn't really wanted either.
All in all it feels like immigration is happening too fast to avoid this group setting itself appart in various ways leading to (self)-segregation and probably persistent social strife down the line.
• Iraqi brutally rapes & tortures/torments 14yo and 21yo [1]
• 11yo children (Afghan and Syrian) raping 10yo [1b]
• Afghan Islamist stabs woman (unprovoked) -> half paralyzed [2]
• organized crime (55% suspects are non-German, 5% unidentified) [3]
• Islamist terror attack [4]
• violence in public open-air baths, mass brawl [5]
• primary school pupil threatens teacher with beheading [6] comparing it to [7]
• honor killings [8]
• > 1 billion euros fraud alone with covid test centers by submission of false claims, many operated by Turks and criminal clans (non-Germans)
[1] https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/berlin-frauen-ins-aut...
[1b] https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/berlin-grundschueler-...
[2] https://www.rbb24.de/panorama/beitrag/2022/04/hobbygaertneri...
[3]https://www.bka.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Publikationen/Jah...
[4] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anschlag_auf_den_Berliner_Weih...
[5] https://twitter.com/austausch_info/status/153881355654778880...
[6] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/extremismus-berlin-musli...
[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Samuel_Paty
[8] https://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/kriminalitaet/berli...
An alternative answer to this situation, of course, is to observe that the demographic problems in question are largely overrated, and that the productivity gains of the last century will keep old people from having to live under bridges and eating cat food.
Canada is too big, land area wise for the population it has to support major infrastructure.
So we need constant stream of new souls to collect taxes and help prop up the next group
Because of the vast distance between inhabitable area, it is very Costly to support connected infrastructure without the population needs to support it
Meanwhile, 80 years ago we had no problems literally covering the entire country with brand new highways and giant dams and bridges everywhere, so many that we don't even inspect them all right now. We could build infrastructure perfectly fine when we taxed high incomes and invested heavily in infrastructure.
Canada is not a poor country and could very well afford such infrastructure as well.
Whereas Europe has a much bigger issue with the refugee crisis and illegal immigration.
Canada is not doing fine. There are major problems with wage suppression and lowering standards of living, as well as dwindling access to housing and medical services. The Canadian economy has become a bubble propped up by massive influx of immigrants to hide glaring systemic issues; it's not sustainable, and in recent years has become a growing source of controversy.
Lots of companies rely on the Temporary Foreign Worker program to fill menial minimum-wage jobs, often paying those TFWs below minimum-wage and abusing them. Similarly, the student visa program is a backdoor for lots of companies (particularly delivery & logistics). I also used to work at a government-sponsored employment centre where I met hundreds of skilled new-immigrants who gave up everything to emigrate, only to arrive in Canada and realize they'd been deceived about their prospects (e.g. the barriers to recertification).
I am not against immigration — both my spouse and I are children of immigrants — but it's important to differentiate between reasonable immigration policies and excessive ones designed to prop up a failing system by constantly injecting new bodies. Canada's immigration system is the latter; it predominantly benefits the rich and nobody else.
Canada's big businesses, protected by their political friends, and largely controlled by a few old-boys-clubs is to blame for that.
> dwindling access to housing and medical services.
Dwindling access to housing is because NIMBYs refuse to build any.
Access to medical services continues to be the same thing that Canadians have complained about for decades. Everyone bitches about it, but all-in-all, they are fine.
> The Canadian economy has become a bubble propped up by massive influx of immigrants to hide glaring systemic issues; it's not sustainable, and in recent years has become a growing source of controversy.
'It's become a controversy among the fringe-right' is not a sufficient metric for telling me that there's a problem. All sorts of normal things have a tendency to turn into controversies for those folks.
What are the actual issues? Money laundering through the Canadian real estate markets? That's not an immigration problem, that's a ML problem, and it could be fixed by not selling permanent residencies to 'investors' building sham self-dealing companies.
Ontario's health-care system is collapsing. In the past year several emergency rooms have been forced to close, and 9-11 calls have gone unanswered or faced severe delays.
People are not fine. It's a multi-faceted issue, sure, but ramping up immigration is pouring fuel on the fire.
> 'It's become a controversy among the fringe-right' is not a sufficient metric for telling me that there's a problem. All sorts of normal things have a tendency to turn into controversies for those folks.
It's disingenuous to write-off any concerns about immigration about immigration as right-wing histeria. I quite left-leaning, pro-immigration, and believe in having strong social programs; however, Canada's current immigration policy is a band-aid covering an ever-growing wound.
E.g., https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/1049ykb/opinion_its...
> What are the actual issues? Money laundering through the Canadian real estate markets? That's not an immigration problem, that's a ML problem, and it could be fixed by not selling permanent residencies to 'investors' building sham self-dealing companies.
A major "actual issue" is that Canada's economy is largely predicated on real estate continously growing 20% year-over-year. Real estate is one of the, if not THE, largest sectors in several provinces. Millions of people don't have a retirement plan beyond "sell my house for 5-10x what I paid for it", and having massive levels of immigration definitely plays into that (far more than foreign home ownership does).
It's not black and white, we should stop treating every problem as such.
- https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hardest-c...
- https://pressat.co.uk/releases/the-top-ten-toughest-immigrat...