Let me reiterate it, because it is crucial: liberal policy of pretending that the problem doesn't exist is what created all those garbage political organization. Which, interestingly, are often co-financed by Russia.
Also it's not a maths problem that somehow some people got wrong, it's a problem with entire neighborhoods where it's dangerous to go to.
Also, we kind of discuss travelers, somehow I think this group doesn't have their own neighborhoods....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_area
Granted, it's not nearly as bad as say south american favelas, where the government has no power whatsoever, not even to charge for utilities. But the point is that such places used to not exist at all in some countries.
BTW, this is not just a "white people" problem. Perceived or real lack of safety creates unsavory political options everywhere. If tomorrow, somehow, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict were to be magically resolved, Hamas would probably disappear overnight.
And hell, one can even spend vacation in some favelas. Jesus...
Edit: From your own source
>> The increase is reported to be due to better reporting, not a changing situation.[5] The overall trend is that these areas are improving.[6]
>> Work on improving the areas requires cooperation with several parties like local landlords and organisations, but fear of gentrification may cause problems.[10] -> If done well, that cpupd adress some.of the underlying social problems, I fear it might just lead to even more gentrification and make everything worse for everyone. Except rich investors, that is.
So seriously, what the heck?
Of course, most of Europe’s Roma are themselves now a sedentary population that deserve effective invention to improve infrastructure and quality of life instead of being automatically labeled criminals. But a population of travelers remains.
Again, the fallacy people make is assuming that any Roma is a criminal, when the Roma today are a largely sedentary population, and one deprived of effective public services. But some level of theft among groups maintaining a traveler mode of life is exactly what one would expect after centuries of documented interaction between travelers and sedentary populations (and not just in Europe and not just involving Roma).
Also, viewing something as part of a culture, and actually doing it are still two different things. Also, I'd love to see claims like thqt, when if backed by interviews, further being put into context by actual numbers, especially from a field sociologist. You know, the whole strong claim, strong evidence thing.
I’m not linking to said friend’s research here lest I dox her and myself on a subject that seems contentious enough for some HN readers to possibly cause trouble for her.
Crime exists, different crimes are committed by different groups. Saying those crimes are inherent, dor whatever reason, to certain groups is just a bad take. Those groups migjt be more prone to commit certain crimes due to circumstances, but than those circumstances need being further analyzed. And yes, property crimes, with an already frightingly low rate of successful police investigations, is easier for people being constantly on the move.
One thing that is also true: marginalized, discrimintaed and sidelined groups are more likely to commit crimes. So, one reason would be to offer alternatives, and as a society accept them as they are. Doesn't mean zero crime will be committed, but then again crime is a general problem that will never ever go away ever.
Edit: You just created this account for what exactly?
Of course you can throw your hands up and say that "crime is part of their culture", and find a basis to support racism. You can also spend resources on integration and education. Today, gipsies in Spain can work like gadjés without being shamed by fellow gipsies (or to the contrary even get praised for making a career), and all without losing their cultural identity.
As for the claim that "ignoring the problems" is a "liberal policy" - that's a made up strawman.
2) You're wrong. Example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_area
> In April 2019, the publication of the list by police was criticised by municipality politicians as it was stigmatising and dissuaded investors. Police responded that they saw no reason to make the list a secret, and that the list served the purpose of providing a uniform basis of evaluating districts across the country. Interior minister Morgan Johansson stated that the list will continue to be public information.
You can find many other such examples if you try.
This was true 20 years ago. But I found that the meaning of the word has shifted more and more since then.
Funny enough, 'neoliberal' has also shifted a lot over its life, but that shift happened much earlier.
A 'neoliberal' used to be someone who like the 'social market economy', like Ludwig Erhard. Instead of both unfettered 'Manchester capitalism' and socialism.
Of course, these days 'neoliberal' ostensibly means someone who wants markets über alles, but is mostly used as an insult against anyone who dislikes markets slightly less than the speaker.