Hacker News Reader

Comment by ndsipa_pomu | Hacker News Reader

I'm not saying that people shouldn't want to integrate, I'm saying that "demanding" it is problematic. Imagine grandparents being brought over from a different country and they don't speak the language - should they be forced to attend language school? What level of language ability would be considered the minimum and does that also include reading/writing?

By all means provide encouragement and resources so that people can adapt to their new situation, but don't demand it.

View on HN

I think that most people arguing for integration are fine with grandparents being left to their devices. Where they get antsy is when the next generation grows up self-segregated into their own distinct culture.

Yeah, I know. That’s why I say that no one is ever happy with where you set the limit. I think demanding A2 in language is reasonable, for example. Yes, demanding, even if it’s in a reasonably long timespan. We demand much more out of everyone born in the country, don’t we?

I think most liberals have the intuition that laws should apply equally to citizens and non-citizens, and I think that's where a lot of the discomfort comes from when we talk about immigration. A citizen who doesn't meet those demands imposed on non-citizens (e.g., language, cultural assimilation, etc.) will never be at risk of deportation, simply because they were lucky enough to be born in the country.

However, it does seem that this Swedish party is willing to "repatriate" even Swedish-born citizens, so at least they're consistent.

It doesn't say that at all, Swedish-born citizens means at least one of the parent IS already Swedish, they aren't citizen at birth if none of the parents are swedish and that's just normal almost everywhere in the world.

You wouldn't expect your child to be Pakistani if you get birth over there as 2 German individuals.

Jus soli is pretty much the norm in the Americas, so it's more of an Old World / New World thing.

Yeah but US laws are irrelevant and is just one country and 85% of the rest of the world doesn't practice this kind of norm.

What I'm saying is that it's not just US. If you look at the map, almost the entire Western hemisphere is jus soli.

Sweden is not and is a very progressive country.

> I think most liberals have the intuition that laws should apply equally to citizens and non-citizens, and I think that's where a lot of the discomfort comes from when we talk about immigration. A citizen who doesn't meet those demands imposed on non-citizens (e.g., language, cultural assimilation, etc.) will never be at risk of deportation, simply because they were lucky enough to be born in the country.

What you said makes no sense. Vanishingly few liberals believe laws should apply equally to citizens and non-citizens. If they did, they'd be for the complete abolition of visa/residency conditions altogether, simply allowing anyone to immigrate to the country. I doubt that even in the US more than 5% of people believe this. Any European country it'll be <3%.

Any visa/residency condition is a demand not imposed on citizens. Language and cultural assimilation aren't any different from other such conditions.

A2 is a depressingly low bar.

A2 is a pathetically low bar. I say this as someone who had to do A2 Dutch to pass the citizenship exams, it is a pathetically low bar to pass. I have some friends who passed the citizenship exam and can barely order food at a restaurant, yet alone hold/follow conversations.

See? Whatever bar you set, someone is upset. I agree with you, but demanding A2 is maybe a starting point, and incentivising B1 works well.

One issue is how the standard applies to different languages. A2 in French is enough to get by around Brussels, but B1 in Dutch is barely enough to understand people where I live now (dialects are to blame as well, of course).

Familiarity with one Latin-based language means other Latin-based languages “sound understandable”. I’ve no other connection to make with Dutch. But okay, that’s just personal experience.

My Polish great-granddad didn’t have a home to return to following WWII and the Iron Curtain- they forced him to learn the language.

Because not everyone in the UK could even hope to bend to work with Polish as a language in 1946.

> Imagine grandparents being brought over from a different country and they don't speak the language - should they be forced to attend language school?

Yes.

> does that also include reading/writing?

Yes.

> What level of language ability would be considered the minimum

C1.

> they don't speak the language - should they be forced to attend language school?

I disagree. They should learn the language of their own accord or get kicked out.

> C1.

Yes! And I would expect immigrants in citizen-facing jobs in the public sector to be at C2.

> I disagree. They should learn the language of their own accord or get kicked out.

I can't agree, even though we likely have the same goals. You want to filter for people who work very hard to do their best to integrate. You don't want to filter for being good at self-studying languages. Most people just suck at self-studying through not much fault of their own, they were raised that way. It can also be incredibly useful for non-language integration purposes, as it gives them hours of direct contact hours with natives which - again, for the dedicated ones, which are the ones we want to stay - often leads to social contact and further integration.

I get where you're coming from, but the tax dollars needed for such language schools are really negligible, and I've seen with my own eyes the benefits to integration that couldn't be had without it. It's just a good cheap investment. I'd still apply the same final bar as you would, FWIW.

Most natives aren’t C2. Heck, a vast proportion of natives aren’t C1. Your standard is silly.

B2 is conversational + able to hold a discussion about theoretical concepts in multiple temporal forms. That’s plenty.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com