A - Austria

The Republican Party backs Republika Srpska
http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index....nav_id=1218550

Walter Long7 said:That is the million-dollar question... Why would a single country like Japan receive 40 asylum requests from Syria during 2015 and just smoothly reject every single one? Why don't they want migrants, much like the Koreans and other Eastern nations?
Why would they dump millions upon millions into pro-natalist schemes and dating camps to boost birth rates, rather than spending that money on educating, feeding, and housing foreign migrants?
It’s almost like they’d rather face collective extinction than accept other nations and fundamentally alter a culture that took centuries to build—much like the mindset seen during World War II.
Time will provide the ultimate answer as these two divergent policies play out in the near future..

I think Japan is a pretty radical Monoculture, with all its pros and cons. It's a really complicated topic, but we have enough facts to see what the "benefits" of a Japanese Monoculture might be (some guy like Breivik even touched on them in his manifesto), but when it comes to global impact, you'll see that isolated monocultures actually contribute pretty modestly to the world. For example, all 363 American Nobel laureates are either immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Societies that contribute to progress usually have between 10 and 30 Nobel laureates per 10 million people. Monocultures (like Japan, China, South Korea, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc.) are under 2 Nobel laureates per 10 million. The West chose its path a long time ago, which is why it's where it is—with all its ups and downs. And those isolated monocultures have somewhat hitched a ride on the progress of multiculturalism, some more successfully than others. But I guess that's probably a different topic since it doesn't have much to do with Austria or migrants, but rather with—Monoculture.

Nathan Morris3 said:I think Japan is a pretty radical Monoculture, with all its pros and cons. It's a really complicated topic, but we have enough facts to see what the "benefits" of a Japanese Monoculture might be (some guy like Breivik even touched on them in his manifesto), but when it comes to global impact, you'll see that isolated monocultures actually contribute pretty modestly to the world. For example, all 363 American Nobel laureates are either immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Societies that contribute to progress usually have between 10 and 30 Nobel laureates per 10 million people. Monocultures (like Japan, China, South Korea, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc.) are under 2 Nobel laureates per 10 million. The West chose its path a long time ago, which is why it's where it is—with all its ups and downs. And those isolated monocultures have somewhat hitched a ride on the progress of multiculturalism, some more successfully than others. But I guess that's probably a different topic since it doesn't have much to do with Austria or migrants, but rather with—Monoculture.

An intriguing thesis, and the data even more so.
One might argue that it is perfectly natural for all Nobel laureates in the USA to be immigrants or their descendants, given that virtually the entire population consists of immigrants or their progeny; the USA has always been an immigrant nation. This begs the question: was the American case factored into the broader average, because if it was, then it significantly skewed the result.

Mark Clark6 said:An intriguing thesis, and the data even more so.
One might argue that it is perfectly natural for all Nobel laureates in the USA to be immigrants or their descendants, given that virtually the entire population consists of immigrants or their progeny; the USA has always been an immigrant nation. This begs the question: was the American case factored into the broader average, because if it was, then it significantly skewed the result.

I didn't really want to start a huge debate about this, which is why I mentioned it has its "pros and cons." Globalization is basically like tearing down fences, while isolationism is the opposite—like setting hard borders (take South Korea, for example). I guess both extremes are kind of bad. Sure, exchanging people, culture, and knowledge definitely helps things grow, but then again, being closed off might help "preserve" a specific culture.
I used the US as an example with a little sarcasm there; obviously, all Americans (aside from Native Americans) are immigrants or descendants of them. But it's also true that the US probably wouldn't be what it is today without immigration, and it's still a magnet for the smartest people on Earth because it provides an environment that actually welcomes them. On the other hand, in Japan, you can barely communicate because hardly anyone speaks English (just as an example), and they don't really care about other cultures. That maybe explains why they fought such brutal wars in the past where they treated other cultures quite inhumanely. But again, I don't think monoculturalism is inherently good or bad.

As for the list, here it is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tes_per_capita

The US, with 11 laureates per 10 million, is actually pretty low on the list. Most of the top ones are countries with high levels of multiculturalism. If we just look at countries with more than 5 laureates:

Sweden: 31 / 10 million
Switzerland and Norway: 30
Norway: 25
Denmark: 25
Austria: 25
UK: 19
Ireland, Israel, Germany, and Netherlands: 15
Israel: 15
Germany: 13
Netherlands: 11
US and France: 11
France: 10
European Union: 9
...
Japan, South Africa, and Russia: 2
South Africa: 2
Russia: 2
...
World 1.24
...
Hong Kong: 1
Turkey: 0.3
South Korea: 0.2

The most isolated countries, like South Korea or Saudi Arabia, aren't even on the list because they haven't really made much in terms of modern contributions.

I'm not saying multiculturalism is directly tied to "progress" (there are outliers, and everyone has their own reasons for them), but it doesn't seem like a coincidence either. It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation, which is a conversation for another time. But it seems like societies that didn't actively fight against diversity have contributed more to human development than those that stayed monocultural. That's probably why even PhDs or refugees or economic migrants are dying to move to places like Japan, South Korea, or Russia.

If we want to keep talking about this, maybe we should start a new thread so we don't go off-topic.

It’s honestly quite curious how the mainstream media outlets lately seem to bypass these unusual incidents entirely. Instead, you find the details leaking out through various niche left-leaning blogs, and it isn't until things really reach a boiling point that the major networks finally decide to cover them... much like how they only started reporting on those New Year's Eve siren malfunctions after the fact.

http://www.krone.at/welt/fluechtling...t-story-548434

Unusual incidents? Seriously, do we really need a disclaimer on every single thread stating that linking individual crimes just to spread hate or fear by twisting facts isn't allowed...

Just a few more "unusual incidents" that seem to be the specialty of Afghans and other immigrants:

San Diego: Ratko Mercer masturbating in the Library of Congress

Washington, D.C.: Ratko Mercer masturbating in front of three girls outside a school

Washington, D.C.: Masturbating in a cafe in front of a minor

Makarska: A Pole masturbating on the waterfront in broad daylight

San Diego: Masturbating in a parking lot between two high schools

Pittsburgh - Masturbating at a rock concert

Italy - An American masturbating on buses filled with schoolchildren

Key West: A Washingtonian walking along beaches, forcibly touching women, and masturbating

Savannah - A pervert masturbating in front of high school freshmen

Please, stop spreading intolerance this way. Thanks.

To my colleagues posting these kinds of links:
The issue is that for some reason, people only share links when an immigrant commits a crime, while crimes committed by Americans seem to get swept under the rug. Even though the facts suggest there are more American offenders. Regarding the issues with certain immigrant groups, we've talked about them before, and I think we all agreed those problems exist. American society is pretty wealthy—not just in money, but in terms of what we have to talk about—so forcing this one single topic over and over isn't really constructive, at least not like this.
But what some people are insisting on posting here right now doesn't feel like objective reporting. It feels more like spreading hate and intolerance that leans toward collective guilt. I guess it goes without saying how much damage that kind of thing can cause.

If you want, maybe we could discuss which laws should be changed or updated to help minimize the problem and improve integration. It's not like there aren't constructive things to talk about, even if spreading hate is definitely the easier path.

There’s really no denying that the massive influx of immigrants—much of it largely unchecked—has driven up crime rates, and it’s a conversation we absolutely need to be having... It’s also worth noting that the rate of both felonies and minor offenses tends to be disproportionately higher among immigrant populations.

The real issue arises when people twist these facts to stir up fear and hatred. The reality is that the vast majority of immigrants aren't criminals at all; even those grim, unverified statistics floating around in old internet memes suggesting that anywhere from 1% to 4% of immigrants commit serious crimes—or slightly higher numbers for petty stuff like shoplifting—only ever represented a tiny minority.

As for why it’s considered taboo to call out specific cases, I’ve heard that excuse a million times, and honestly, it’s just nonsense... It isn't "wrong" or dangerous, because we’ve yet to see anyone start posting links specifically targeting Americans who happen to be murderers, rapists, or thieves, despite them being far more numerous in pure numbers.

A study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences last summer looked at a sample of 900 refugees:

37% expressed a preference for single-sex schooling and gender-segregated swimming lessons.

While 90% view democracy as the ideal form of government, about 40% believe religious penalties should be integrated into state laws.

Additionally, 20% are opposed to women having the right to work.

Source:

http://www.krone.at/oesterreich/fuer...z-story-550253

frozenranger52 said:A study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences last summer looked at a sample of 900 refugees:

37% expressed a preference for single-sex schooling and gender-segregated swimming lessons.

While 90% view democracy as the ideal form of government, about 40% believe religious penalties should be integrated into state laws.

Additionally, 20% are opposed to women having the right to work.

Source:

http://www.krone.at/oesterreich/fuer...z-story-550253

I mean, you wrote a headline that doesn't even match the actual numbers in the article—classic media spin. The facts show most people aren't actually having issues with how liberal Austrians are, especially since you included stats that totally contradict your own point.

Well, maybe if 37% of those surveyed are from Afghanistan, coming from tribal communities, it makes sense that 100% of them are used to separate schools and religious laws. I guess it's just hard when people arrive from tribal backgrounds. So, the result isn't really a surprise to me. It seems like the data is being cherry-picked or twisted just to push a certain narrative, probably for both sides. But, I suppose if we want to fix things, we really need to look at these numbers more carefully.

Nathan Morris3 said:I mean, you wrote a headline that doesn't even match the actual numbers in the article—classic media spin. The facts show most people aren't actually having issues with how liberal Austrians are, especially since you included stats that totally contradict your own point.

Well, maybe if 37% of those surveyed are from Afghanistan, coming from tribal communities, it makes sense that 100% of them are used to separate schools and religious laws. I guess it's just hard when people arrive from tribal backgrounds. So, the result isn't really a surprise to me. It seems like the data is being cherry-picked or twisted just to push a certain narrative, probably for both sides. But, I suppose if we want to fix things, we really need to look at these numbers more carefully.

Which ones exactly? I was simply quoting the headline of the article.

It seems problematic to me that a single individual is pushing for something akin to religious law in our country, or that there's debate over women's right to work, or even that more than a third of people favor gender-segregated schools.

Perhaps you should decide whether you think there's an issue here or not, and then write a post that maintains a consistent stance from start to finish...

EDIT: I have updated my original post so it doesn't look like I am "manipulating the media." Unfortunately, there isn't a direct link to the study within the article itself, but if that is absolutely necessary, I suppose I could track it down somewhere...

frozenranger52 said:Which ones exactly? I was simply quoting the headline of the article.

It seems problematic to me that a single individual is pushing for something akin to religious law in our country, or that there's debate over women's right to work, or even that more than a third of people favor gender-segregated schools.

Perhaps you should decide whether you think there's an issue here or not, and then write a post that maintains a consistent stance from start to finish...

EDIT: I have updated my original post so it doesn't look like I am "manipulating the media." Unfortunately, there isn't a direct link to the study within the article itself, but if that is absolutely necessary, I suppose I could track it down somewhere...

I guess it's generally risky to cite outlets like NASA, Cronkite, Fox News, or CNN, because they tend to do exactly what I mentioned.
If the data shows over 50% don't have issues with our values, you don't see an issue with a headline suggesting (most) refugees do?
Plus, those media sources leave out the fact that 37% of respondents are from Afghanistan. It’s funny how the number of people wanting separate schools is also 37%. That's kind of like mixing up meat and cabbage when making stuffed rolls 😁.

It's hard for me to wrap my head around one person wanting to implement Sharia law in this country, or questioning women's right to work, or the fact that over a third want gender-segregated schools.

Well, yeah, it's problematic, but the media twists the picture by leaving out crucial details and misrepresenting others. I truly believe that way we just move further away from actually solving anything, since nobody ever bothers looking at the real causes. This link you shared from CNN is probably the best example. The truth is, some people integrate easier than others. We pretty much know who struggles and who doesn't. Mixing it all together and slapping on a headline like they did... I guess it's just counterproductive and destructive for everyone trying to help with integration. It's just bad for society, really.

Maybe pick a side on whether there's a problem or not, then write a post that stays consistent from start to finish.

I've been talking about the fallout from colonialism and poor policy—foreign, domestic, integration stuff... I guess it's not clear which part of my stance you mean? Of course we see the consequences. Maybe someone else wrote something different and you're just confusing me with them.

Nathan Morris3 said:I guess it's generally risky to cite outlets like NASA, Cronkite, Fox News, or CNN, because they tend to do exactly what I mentioned.
If the data shows over 50% don't have issues with our values, you don't see an issue with a headline suggesting (most) refugees do?
Plus, those media sources leave out the fact that 37% of respondents are from Afghanistan. It’s funny how the number of people wanting separate schools is also 37%. That's kind of like mixing up meat and cabbage when making stuffed rolls 😁.

It's hard for me to wrap my head around one person wanting to implement Sharia law in this country, or questioning women's right to work, or the fact that over a third want gender-segregated schools.

Well, yeah, it's problematic, but the media twists the picture by leaving out crucial details and misrepresenting others. I truly believe that way we just move further away from actually solving anything, since nobody ever bothers looking at the real causes. This link you shared from CNN is probably the best example. The truth is, some people integrate easier than others. We pretty much know who struggles and who doesn't. Mixing it all together and slapping on a headline like they did... I guess it's just counterproductive and destructive for everyone trying to help with integration. It's just bad for society, really.

Maybe pick a side on whether there's a problem or not, then write a post that stays consistent from start to finish.

I've been talking about the fallout from colonialism and poor policy—foreign, domestic, integration stuff... I guess it's not clear which part of my stance you mean? Of course we see the consequences. Maybe someone else wrote something different and you're just confusing me with them.

I would personally prefer to steer clear of the "controversial" sites, but let's be honest—both you and I know that the mainstream, "unquestionable" news organizations will never actually cover these kinds of stories. We've seen it happen time and again over the last three or four years, in countless instances...

frozenranger52 said:I would personally prefer to steer clear of the "controversial" sites, but let's be honest—both you and I know that the mainstream, "unquestionable" news organizations will never actually cover these kinds of stories. We've seen it happen time and again over the last three or four years, in countless instances...

I'm not quite sure what you mean, but I guess this covers the same topic in a much better way. It hits all the main points without skipping anything, and there aren't any of those "clickbait" headlines, either.

I guess laws are kind of tricky, maybe? It feels like they can sometimes get in the way of things instead of helping. Just my two cents, I suppose.

Sure, there are biased media outlets on all sides, but you're kind of mistaken if you think there isn't actually high-quality journalism out there beyond the trash I mentioned. I guess the issue is that if someone only ever consumes garbage media, their views are probably going to be pretty garbage too. We live in the internet age, so it shouldn't be that hard to double-check things. For instance, when I saw your headline, I clicked the link just to poke around a bit. It only takes a few minutes to tell the difference between junk and actual news. I don't know how you didn't notice that the headline suggests one thing while the numbers you cited say something totally different. At most, it's just a "tendentious headline." I guess I wonder why you weren't acting as a filter yourself instead of posting a headline like that here.

Personally, I usually just stick to checking the Press and Standard. One leans a bit left and the other stays more on the right side, I guess. It's enough to get a general feel for things. But that radical stuff from outlets like the Daily Mail, Sputnik, or CNN... you really have to stay away from that, maybe.

Interesting enough:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/0...131559685.html

It even mentions restricting job market access for people coming from Eastern Europe. I guess.

Kyle Nelson2 said:Interesting enough:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/0...131559685.html

It even mentions restricting job market access for people coming from Eastern Europe. I guess.

Regarding the ban on burkas in public spaces, I guess most sane people wouldn't mind. But the fact that socialists agreed to rules where you can't work in certain institutions if you cover your hair is just a sign that even they are turning into populists. They'll probably just say, "well, we had no choice."
The US is dealing with two big issues right now: integration and radicalism. If this proposed "identity crackdown" is meant to help fix those, it might actually backfire. Sure, extremists and radicals will love it, but what about the rest of us who just want a normal society with integrated people?

That part about restricting Eastern Europeans seems more like populism than reality, since nothing happens without Brussels' approval. I suppose they just have to pretend they want it to win over the Republican Party. It feels like everyone is becoming a populist.

Now that the Democrats have made their move on the Mexican vote, it looks like the Republican Party is setting its sights on American voters. Back in mid-February, Sebastian Kurz from the Department of State hosted an American-Austrian gala in Vienna 😁

coastalbison6 said:Now that the Democrats have made their move on the Mexican vote, it looks like the Republican Party is setting its sights on American voters. Back in mid-February, Sebastian Kurz from the Department of State hosted an American-Austrian gala in Vienna 😁

I guess the issue with most of this stuff is how certain things always seem to get dragged into it

It’s just that Kurz doesn't really seem to have much of a feel for those kinds of things. Last time, he "teamed up" with those radicals/alt-right types from that American global congress (the former president Rastigorac from the Libertarian Party), and if I understood correctly, most regular Americans were pretty furious, myself included. Is there any organization in Vienna that isn't weighed down by ideology? The Republican Party seems to be copying the Freedom Party a bit too much, and maybe even the Democrats are starting to do it too.

Where can I find info about that meetup in Vienna?

Nathan Morris3 said:I guess the issue with most of this stuff is how certain things always seem to get dragged into it

It’s just that Kurz doesn't really seem to have much of a feel for those kinds of things. Last time, he "teamed up" with those radicals/alt-right types from that American global congress (the former president Rastigorac from the Libertarian Party), and if I understood correctly, most regular Americans were pretty furious, myself included. Is there any organization in Vienna that isn't weighed down by ideology? The Republican Party seems to be copying the Freedom Party a bit too much, and maybe even the Democrats are starting to do it too.

Where can I find info about that meetup in Vienna?

personal invite