Our Norwegian correspondent Vikingskog sends an abridged translation of a news article, along with his commentary. He says:
There’s a news article in Norway today that says that people who speak Norwegian as mother tongue (Norwegians) may become a minority in Oslo schools by 2021.
Obviously, that’s a mild statement with some political correctness to it. It’s not a matter if it will become like that; it’s just a matter of time. So there is no “may”, just “when”.
Vikingskog has translated the most interesting parts of the article:
Norwegian-speaking students are a minority at 58 elementary schools in Oslo, as shown by the results from a recent study.
During the last five years the number of schools in which Norwegian-speaking students form a minority has increased by 18, from 40 to 58.
In 2000, 31% of the students in Oslo were immigrants.
Today (2010) 40% of the students in Oslo are minorities. The number of non-Norwegian students in Oslo has increased by 1% each year, which means that Norwegians will be a minority in Oslo schools in 2021, if the trend continues.
AP politician Jan Bøhler [AP is the party of the current prime minister, and the party with the most power] says that they should ensure that every school has at least one-quarter Norwegian students.
Vikingskog adds these comments:
What Jan Bøhler wants is to spread the immigrants out, which will just make the development even more severe, since then we will become a minority faster in all regions of Norway, instead of just the Oslo area.- - - - - - - - -
Regarding the percentage increase: it’s ignorant to think that it will increase the same amount every year. Since they have a birthrate of 4.0 it will just multiply even faster the more numerous they become, so the number will increase even faster then that.
Jan Bøhler is naive and thinks they somehow can stop Norway from becoming Islamic, without first stopping immigration and starting to send people home.
And, of all the politicians on the Left, Jan Bøhler is actually the one who is most critical of immigration (one of the least politically correct), which makes it even more depressing, since what he says is so narrow-minded and pointless.
He thinks it can all be solved by spreading the Muslims around in Norway, but he doesn’t realize that there are too many of them and that segregation is already too widespread. They can’t get the birthrate down and they don’t send people home and they don’t stop the immigration.
To stop Norwegians from becoming a minority in Oslo schools, they must stop the immigration at once, send back everyone who can be sent home, and try to make others want to move home. That is what is necessary, whether people like it or not. Without doing that, we can’t stop it.
It’s high time that politicians realize this and grow a spine. But I don’t think they will. None of the politicians will do what’s required — the right wing want to institute a stricter immigration policy, which would obviously be better, but that will just slow the situation, not stop it. Even if they stop immigration entirely, the Muslims will still become more numerous than us because of their birth rate, which shows no sign of decreasing.
There is also another article today, which you may find interesting.
One of the ministers from AP (who is responsible for immigration) says that he wants the EU to control Norwegian immigration policy.
And he proclaims that will decrease the amount of immigration and make it easier.
The elites in AP want us to join the EU. They have their own agenda, even though a large majority of AP voters do not want to be in the EU.
AP do everything they can to sneak EU laws and so on into Norway, and I think they will succeed in sneaking in so much that people will eventually think that we might as well just join the EU, since we will by then have most of the EU’s laws and rules.
Finally, however, since the EU’s immigration policy is becoming more and more transnational and controlling, plans such as those the minister advocates will make it nearly impossible for us to stop the immigration completely. Denmark already got in a lot of trouble with the EU some years ago when they instituted their strict immigration policy.
I think that the right wing will almost certainly win the election next time (in three years), but it remains to be seen if that will help anything at all. In the long run, I doubt it. I think what is happening in Europe can’t be stopped by politicians, because no politicians are brave and politically incorrect enough to do what must be done, which is to get 80% of the Muslim immigrants out of here.
So I believe the situation will just keep getting worse and worse, until it eventually becomes civil war or at least very violent. Even though we are a people who have legendary great patience, and are extremely naïve and passive here in Scandinavia (especially Norway and Sweden), our patience will run out eventually, and by then we will have a lot of frustration built up.
50 comments:
I wonder if the Norwegians have lost, or given-up, all of their viking heritage and spirit. I hope that they pick up their swords again, and soon.
there you have it, the biggest problem of Europe:multiculturalism and demographics.
"If we be nice to them, then hopefully they wont treat us like it says to in the book they believed revealed to them by God."
This is the Norweigan governments official line.
"AP politician Jan Bøhler says that they should ensure that every school has at least one-quarter Norwegian students."
I thought they should ensure that every school has at most one-quarter non-Norwegian students.
And it’s not only the Norwegians! The entire Europe is going to “hell in a handbasket” they way things are going now. But judging by the amount of blogs on the internet on the subject; it’s amazing that the net hasn’t broken down by now.
FrP won't save them simply because their leader Siv Jensen is a BILDERBERGER!! God this is very frightening!!
On its way to your country.
http://patdollard.com/2010/03/the-faces-of-islam-via-creeping-sharia/
Those photos at that link should send a chill through everyone.
Oh boy...S you should have included a graphic warning label on that! But, point made.
No infidel needs to speculate on how he will be treated once his country lapses into Muslim dominance. There are 57 Muslim states to observe that illustrate our future.
In 0 out of 57 do non-Muslims have the same rights as Muslims.
Many have been ethnically cleansed of other cultures/religions. Once majority Christian countries now persecute the small remaining rump of Christians as in Egypt. Lebanon is following the same path.
Non-Muslims must live as dhimmi following sharia precepts (no Bibles, public affection, women driving, women must be swaddled etc.). In fact, even when Muslims are a small minority as in the USA, they demand that all citizens must share their respect of Mohammed to the extent of banning any criticism of him, Muslims or Islam.
To understand how stupid we westerners are not to laugh in the face of such demands, imagine the mirror image of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia demanding that Saudis show Jewish faith respect and stop publishing blood libel cartoons...
That's how girls who don't obey are treated. Not just as bad as animals, but worse.
Sick.
And why don't reporters talk about this?
Indeed laine.
Gregory, you need to read up on some history. Before they converted to Christianity, the Vikings used to go on slave raids and sells slaves to arselifters. They founded Dublin and cities in Russia for this purpose.
So the Viking roots is something to be avoided. Instead, they need to reawaken their Christian spirit and get rid of the socialists.
Indeed Gary Rumain.
Here, here!
One of the first things that have to happen in Norway before the current trend can be reversed is that there has to be a change in terminology. The media and politicians have got to replace the word asylum seekers with illegal immigrants. This has got to happen because the majority of the people who are applying for political asylum in Norway are illegal immigrants who don’t meet the criteria as they are defined by the UN, nor do they meet the criteria set out by the Norwegian government, but they are allowed to stay on humanitarian grounds, or they are accepted under the current liberal family reunification laws.
If these people had been dealt with like illegal immigrant instead of asylum seekers it would have been much easier to deport them. Today anyone who can utter the word ‘asylum’ in Norway are entitled to have their asylum application processed by the relevant government agencies, and this process can take years with all the appeal options that are open for the asylum seekers and their lawyers. The asylum seekers are also entitled to free housing in designated asylum centres and are given a monthly ‘allowance’ of approximately US $250.00.
The public opinion would also change if these individuals were referred to as illegal immigrants rather than asylum seekers. Various liberal politicians wouldn’t be able to justify the continual arrival and continual stay of these illegals in Norway by referring to Norway’s obligations under various UN treaties.
And to all the American commenters who seem to think that this situation in Norway has arisen because people in Norway are somehow softer than in the US you couldn’t be further from the truth. If we were to use that kind of logic, the Americans would be among the softest people on earth considering all the tens of millions of illegals that are currently being allowing to remain in your country.
Not everything was bad during the viking age. Females in Scandinavia where a lot more equal to the males. As christians they where pretty much subjugated to the males like in islam although not that bad.
Aside from that I'm proud of the polytheistic pantheon our ancestors created. I loved Snorre's Edda when I was a child. There are many beautiful and suspensful stories in it. Both the norse myths as well as the greek myths are beloved to this very day. Some of those characters has even been retold and reinterpreted in new mediums in our time. I'm thinking of Thor and Hercules in the Marvel Universe. That tells a lot of how powerful those ancient stories really are. And one thing could we probably agree on. The muz wouldn't give a hoot to preserve it to future generations. If we loose the war against the mahoundians we will loose a lot more than just lives. We will loose all our historical and cultural heritage.
Any American has no right to talk about how Europe is getting Islamized considering you are invaded by Mexico and not do anything, especially since there complaining about it won't get you a jail sentence for "promoting hatred" or whatever and you actually own guns.
Robin, why would the immigrants care about your historical and cultural heritage? I mean, they're not Norwegians.
kristisk, you just need to do away with asylum completely. Or do like my country does, pay asylum seekers horibly enough that they live. I think they get $30 or whatever in my country per month.
EV, supposing that all the Muslims and immigrants become Christian tomorrow. How will Norwegians not become a minority in their own country?
Since they wont, the question is moot.
I had a nice elective class on Norse Mythology at Uni.
Nothing wrong with celebrating your heritage.
When you start talking about ditching your Christian heritage and reviving the old pantheon, is when you are simultaneously dissing your heritage, while headed to nutterville.
RV, the point is that, while I favor strong action to correct the Muslim mistake, Im not hard line on genetic purity...moreso on cultural homogeneity....without being a purist in that either. Its a more moderate position, although my position would hardly be classed as moderate by the Left. What I advocate is sensible tolerance. Norway will still retain some diversity, but wont be threatened with ethnic minority status and certainly not minority status of its culture.
You seem to be under the impression that Christians are all open borders multiculturalists. That is false. Though what is left of European Christianity probably makes it seem so.
EV wrote,
"Nothing wrong with celebrating your heritage.
When you start talking about ditching your Christian heritage and reviving the old pantheon, is when you are simultaneously dissing your heritage, while headed to nutterville."
Very well put, EV. I completely agree: the pagan past is only somewhat less dark and confused than the modern, atheist present.
EV wrote,
"I'm not hard line on genetic purity...Norway will still retain some diversity"
How? Genetic diversity depends upon genetic distinction. Genetic distinction depends upon genetic purity. Genetic purity in a multiracial environment depends upon genetic endogamy.
If the Norwegians pretend that genes do not matter, how will they avoid intermarrying with genetic others? And if they intermarry with genetic others, then in what sense have the Norwegians and foreigners remained distinct? And if the Norwegians and foreigners are no longer distinct, then in what sense has Norway "retained diversity"?
I'm afraid that "genetic" consciousness and endogamy is the only way out of this mess. We can thank the Left for having burst that particular bubble.
But, maybe you have a different problem with what I have said: the words "genetic purity" make you think of Nazis and white power types. The connotation is highly unfortunate. But it's an emotional one, not a logical one. There is no reason that a self-confident, ethnically or racially endogamous people must behave like barbarians toward everyone else. Particularly not if they are Christians.
The Nazis were an aberration. Usually, the result has been the noble self-sacrifice upon which civilization is built. A very racially conscious white American president sent hundreds of thousands of racially conscious white men to fight to the death to preserve the American union and prevent the spread of black slavery. Is that the morality you are afriad of?
EV, I won't get into it, but without European people you don't have European civilization. I agree though, genetic purity is just as insane as the diveristy thing and I didn't advocate that - there's a difference in between self preservation and killing off all non-Europeans that are in Europe. And I know that not all Christians are open borders multiculturalist, but most Christians don't really care about the survival of European people(it's not in the Bible so from a theological standpoint, they shouldn't either). Here's the thing though - you don't care so much about neither genetic purity nor cultural homogenity. Then what do you care about? Besides Islam being a threat to Christianity, obviously.
You can even look at the US. When it was a mostly European country with the European culture as dominant and enforced, it was a great country. In that context, diversity isn't a problem and that should be the goal. This also ensures a high degree of endogamy. By the way, Europe was always nationalistic and everything worked inside that framework - Christianity, liberalism. What Hitler did isn't really nationalism considering that his thing was just an imperial project and he didn't care that much about the German people.
bartholomewscross, they don't. If Norwegians marry foreigners, they will give birth to a new ethnicity if the people they marry are really distinct genetically.
In case you havent noticed, groups within political boundries can still maintain distinctive characteristics.
No one is forcing anybody to marry outside their group. However it isnt my idea of liberty to legally prevent people from doing so.
Before this devolves into yet another pissing match between the "proposition nation" people and "ethnic nationalists", let's remember what we all agree on, to wit: without mass immigration, none of this would be an issue.
An ethnic nation is hardly likely to lose its distinct genetic or cultural identity if no more than a trickle of foreigners is allowed to enter and settle in a country.
If we all agree on that, then the rest is up to each nation to determine for itself. Individual countries can be "proposition nations" if they want, but without mass immigration, their gene pool will still not change radically.
The United States is indeed a "nation of immigrants", historically speaking, but that can no longer continue. The country is now settled, and a rational (and restrictive) immigration policy is absolutely necessary if we are to avoid internecine conflict, political fragmentation, and a descent into collective poverty.
Baron Bodissey,
I apologize for my impertinence: I am a new poster and should take particular care not to violate any unspoken rules here. I guess I hadn't realized that this topic has already been thoroughly hashed out. I do appreciate that you have allowed my comments to stand.
And yes, I think it is true that we have the Left to thank for having made this an issue. I do wonder though--and I hope I am not trying your patience here--if the horse has not already left the barn, so to speak. If mass immigration is already a done deal, would it be good to discuss how we should now live with it?
On a different subject to which RV alluded,
"Any American has no right to talk about how Europe is getting Islamized considering you are invaded by Mexico and not do anything, especially since there complaining about it won't get you a jail sentence for "promoting hatred" or whatever and you actually own guns."
But that's because the government isn't what keeps Americans silent on this issue. Moral conviction does. Most Americans believe it is morally wrong to think that ethnicity or race is important in any area of life, citizenship included.
OK, that's my fourth and last on this thread.
"Most Americans believe it is morally wrong to think that ethnicity or race is important in any area of life, citizenship included. "
bartholomewscross, its not about race, it's about culture.
Culture, its about culture.
I have no problems with ethnic pride, and I think that the Left has browbeaten Euro Ethnicities into a negative view of theirselves, their culture, their religion, history, tradition and so on and so forth. Which is contemptible.
Euro ethnicities should regain their ethnic pride and confidence, and that of their groups and tribes.
As bartholomewscross said, this doesnt mean that you have to be hostile to other groups. Islam and muslims are a whole nother category, because they are anathema and endemically hostile to Euro Ethnics and their religion(s) and culture(s). More drastic measures have to be taken in regards to them.
This ethnic pride and Christian revival, should also be in concert with increased procreation. Start having children to perpetuate your culture, maintain ethnic and cultural supremacy within your countries and give immigrants something to assimilate into. Ditch the cultural and moral relativism (however that doesnt mean you have to be intolerant). Egyptian copts are not the problem that Arab Muslims are, to a large extent. Though Christian Lebs are problematic in Australia from what I understand.
Ethnic pride and confidence and baby booms dont have to be mandated via government. This is the peoples problem, the grassroots. Now I know the self hating Lefty professors at Uni and in the education system are polluting peoples minds, that has to be addressed as well.
But the key is not to turn into the Nazis, while choosing a better sensible path forward. Islam and Muslims are a seperate issue and some harsh policies will have to be implemented with regards to them, no doubt.
Hope that makes sense.
You can see in Europe as well as the US, that groups arent really mixing all that much, but tolerance of others (and not this diversity promotion crap, or legal and material aid to the maintainence of seperate identities and cultures)..that is not tolerance that I am talking about. That is the twisted Leftist version of social engineering, dividing and conquering, promoting resentment and pitting groups against one another to vie for public goods, legal preferences, and so on and so forth. Which is dissasterous.
The same fate of being outnumbered awaits english speaking citizens in Toronto.
Years of political ethnic cleansing disguised as multiculturalism have gradually erased what was once a proud history of pioneering and nation building.
Now politicians fight over ethnic votes and are only too eager to throw our traditions and values under the bus whenever necessary.
Baron and all,
Sure, we have to stop the insane immigration, however..
I like this argument between the proposition folks and the ethnic nationalists as you call them. It seems like an argument worth having.
I don't believe that our causes such as immigration stand a chance with the "ethnic nationalists" mindset, first and foremost because European nations are multi-ethnic already.
Escape Velocity is right. Over emphasizing ethnicity is a warped view. Let em go at it Baron.
You New --
I don't object to this particular discussion. Not at all.
What I object to is its insane repetitiveness. The same people repeat the same points in thread after thread and never get any closer to convincing those who disagree with them of anything.
After a while it becomes pointless, and I'm willing to bet that people who want to see more variety in our discussion abandon the thread in disgust after 5 or 6 iterations of essentially the same thing.
That's why I suggested injecting a new angle into what's being said here. We all agree -- or most of us do -- that mass immigration into the West needs to be halted. If that happens, the rest becomes moot, because neither the genetics nor the culture of our countries will be changed without infusions of more aliens.
Unless, of course, the Left continues to hold sway. Then they will continue to attempt to destroy the traditional cultures of the West, just as they always have. In that case, however, they will also want to import swarms of new Third-World people to help them in their mission of destruction, and we will be right back where we started.
Which is why the Counterjihad begins at home, with a concerted effort to dethrone and neutralize Socialism in all its variants. That is the real disease -- it's the AIDS of our culture. Islam is the virus of opportunity, the pneumonia which is taking hold now and will eventually finish us off if we don't take action against the core Marxist infection.
What do you propose Sweden do with its Lapplanders?
AIDS is a fitting description of the WesternLeft.
The headline could read "Norwegians will themselves into a minority in their own country". We are witnessing mass cultural suicide, like lemmings carrying out their own destruction.
Kritisk and Rebellious, you did not have the equivalent of the impossible American Mexican situation of a huge Muslim nation with a large criminal element sharing a long border with millions determined to cross it. The only way to keep them out is to build a reverse Berlin Wall and be prepared to shoot the interlopers. (Admittedly, there are things the US should be doing to discourage them and deport them i.e. not allow them to work, the opposite problem from your layabout Muslims.)
Completely unnecessarily, your socialist leaders went out of their way to import or pander to fake refugees of the most troublesome least hard working cultural group in the world.
All of Scandinavia could have been ignored and safe up in its northern reaches but when its lax attitude toward 3rd world immigration along with the most generous Welfare policies in the world became known, it was game over. Why do you pay people so much not to work? The Muslims you got are allergic to work and rich men on your Welfare by their home country standards. What you pay for and over generously you get more of.
In a recession, all countries have to make economies. Why not cut Welfare sharply? It would disproportionately affect and discourage Muslims. But that's not what your elites want.
Baron, the US wasn't intended to be a propositional nation. Being American was defined in terms of race, ethnicity, culture and religion and later on in the 18th century America had to define itself ideologically to justify it's independence from the British. The founding fathers, for example, didn't consider the 'Indians' Americans, but merciless savages whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction. National interest is dictated by national identity. Also, in order to maintain a propositional nation, you need to disperse the immigrants in between the native people and have their descendants get assimilated through intermixture. I don't see how this leads to the survival of the ethnic Norwegians.
Getting back at the founding fathers time, Robert Yates said that the manners and interests of a people should be similar in a republic and if not so, the representatives of one part will continually clash with the ones of the other. The whole idea behind state rights was to separate different people in order to not have them clash, since everyone would have been in favour of its own interests and customs, since the laws and customs of each state were different. Also, a lot of people in America's history, including Lincoln, planned to send the blacks back to Africa, for a reason. Still, I really like how you put it - that nations can be propositional, as long as there's no mass immigration. But if a nation is a proposition nation, anyone who believes in that creed is accepted inside the nation, regardless of his ancestry. By the way, the US is already at the point where conflict and fragmentation are inevitable in the future.
bartholomewscrss, you don't need to kill off or destroy the other people and have a 100% pure place. It's just that when the creators of the culture who inhabit their own land will be proud of their culture, they will discriminate
against the other and see them as different. It's both inevitable and healthy and it's not the same as the stupidity of Hitler. Also, a lot of the Mexicans are illegal. Nothing is keeping you from kicking those out since it's not about ethnicity, but the problem is bigger than that. As I said earlier, national interest is given by national identity and most Europeans and people in the Anglo countries have no idea who they are(if we are just Christian people who believe in discrimination being bad, equality and fairness or whatever, then Mexicans are just like you, more or less). As Sun Tzu says, you must know yourself and your enemy(for example, related to Islam).
laine, the behaviour of Mexicans in the US is similar to the one of the Muslims in Europe, minus the ideological twist. Still, I would have solved the border situation fairly easily - 2500 snipers and a few miles in the US territory as no go zone would have been enough. Another thing, welfare only works in homogenous societies. Otherwise you will have a group leeching on the other(US is here today).
EV, I like how you constantly make certain suppositions that I never proposed. Not allowing people to marry who they want by law is wrong, but certain kinds of marriage can be seen as immoral, which was the case everywhere until recently (for example, marrying outside your culture and race, just like it was seen as immoral to have sex outside of marriage or cheat on your husband and by the way, when you empower a people through it's culture this always is the case because culture isn't divorced from ethnicity and it's impossible to do so because it's a product of it). This is still viewed as such in more rational places that didn't go through extensive brainwashing about how differences are just social constructs. Your biggest problem though is that you think that Africans are black skinned Europeans and that Arabs are just a bit swarthy Europeans. Also, I don't see why any rational being should get into a breeding contest just because people are here. It's a lot easier to make them leave peacefully.
By the way, here's some math for you. If you have a country with 8 million Europeans and 800,000 Muslims or non-Europeans and we have the current birth rates of 1.5 for Europeans and 4 for Muslims then in 3 generations(four generations for Muslims since they reproduce earlier) we will have a total of new borns of 10,9 million out of which 6,4 million will be Muslim. So 60% Muslim. If we get our birth rates to 2.5 kids per woman and we reproduce as early, in the same timeframe(four generations for both) we will have about 22 million newborn out of which 6,4 will be Muslim, so 30% Muslim. This is without any immigration and as you can see, it's not that much of a difference considering that the effect on society would be similar. Obviously, the solution would be to abolish the welfare state since a lot of this reproduction(just like in Africa) is done on European labour, but don't believe this will be a peaceful process. The birth rates collapsed not because of Christianity becoming not important in society, but because people have no reason to. When the baby boom happened people had in the back of their mind the way their parents had it with no public retirement systems and welfare to help them when they're old so they needed kids for it(which allowed them to leech on the kids of others and this is why Chinese prefer to have boys, for example). Also, there were big tax deductions for people who had children so reproducing was a good investment, while now it's a liability. Another thing, provided Europeans start to reproduce again in the second version, you really don't see any conflict based on shortage of land? The only reason this doesn't happen now is because Europeans are whipped and not stand up for their interests, which would happen if they were proud of their heritage.
laine, I forgot to say, but if I was dictator in the US(since you won't do away with welfare in the democratic context, unless you go bankrupt) I would do away with the welfare-warfare state, the academic-industrial complex and all the other industrial complexes. But again, I'd probably get assassinated for it. lol. Anyway, I won't answer any more comments on these topics due to Baron's request.
RV --
You won't get any argument from me. You're preaching to the converted here.
You must not have been reading my stuff back when I wrote about it (whenever that was), but I helped establish my "racist" credentials by doing so.
America is based on an idea, but it is a European idea, not a Chinese or Abyssinian one. And it's specifically a Northern European idea.
The English, the Irish, the Scots, the Welsh, the Swedes, the Danes, the Norwegians, the Dutch, the Germans, and even the Poles and the Czechs were able to assimilate fairly seamlessly because they shared a common Northern European culture, regardless of the language differences. The Greeks and the Italians were a little more difficult to digest, but they also made it into full assimilation OK.
As we move further afield it gets more difficult -- Albanians, Lebanese, Filipinos, and so on. It doesn't mean that they can't assimilate, too; just that there is more of a barrier.
Then there are the Muslims, who basically won't assimilate at all unless they apostatize first.
And, funnily enough, the French did not assimilate well. Wherever there were sufficient numbers of them, they retained the language and culture, even when it was to their detriment economically. Some French ethnics in New England were distinct well into the second half of the 20th century. Children remained monolingual in French past school age.
Very strange.
Laine said..
“Kritisk and Rebellious, you did not have the equivalent of the impossible American Mexican situation of a huge Muslim nation with a large criminal element sharing a long border with millions determined to cross it. The only way to keep them out is to build a reverse Berlin Wall and be prepared to shoot the interlopers.”
Well, that’s not exactly the case. For instance, if you travel down to the southernmost tip of Spain, you’re able to see the mountainous terrain of Morocco quite clearly. I recon if you had a speed boat you’d be able to cross that stretch of water within ten to fifteen minutes without any difficulties. You could even cross it at night undetected in a dingy or on an inflatable zodiac, and believe me there are more desperate people in Africa trying to reach Europe than there are Mexicans trying to reach the US.
On the southeastern front you’ve got Turkey, who shares a border with both Iran and Iraq. There are tens of thousands of people trying to get into Europe by means of that route. And when these individuals reach Europe (EU) it’s very easy for them to travel to the northern European countries and apply for political asylum. It’s easy because people who are inside the EU can travel freely without producing passports or any forms of ID when they reach a national border. The EU opened up the borders in the mid 90’s.
The amount of asylum seekers (illegal immigrants) who each year show up in Norway and apply for political asylum, last year that figure was close to 18 000, also confirms that it’s unproblematic for them to make their way up to Norway once they’re inside the EU. An asylum seeker could in theory jump onboard a bus in Spain and get off when he arrives in Norway and run to the nearest police station and lodge his application. The immigrant population only shot through the roof in Norway after the EU closed down the manned border posts, before that we only had a moderate numbers of asylum seekers showing up on our doorsteps.
And yes you’re completely correct in your claim that the generous welfare payments attract asylum seekers to our shores, and this will have to stop. But then again as long as corrupt individuals are making enormous fortunes on smuggling people into the western world it’s going to be very hard to stop this illegal movement of people. People smuggling is the second most lucrative criminal activity today, only surpassed by drug trafficking and it’s not that unreasonable to suspect that some of that money falls into the pockets of some very powerful and influential individuals in the western world, who are very keen on hanging on to the current status quo.
AP politician Jan Bøhler [AP is the party of the current prime minister, and the party with the most power] says that they should ensure that every school has at least one-quarter Norwegian students.
ummmmm, hello?
Well, that’s not exactly the case. For instance, if you travel down to the southernmost tip of Spain, you’re able to see the mountainous terrain of Morocco quite clearly. I recon if you had a speed boat you’d be able to cross that stretch of water within ten to fifteen minutes without any difficulties. You could even cross it at night undetected in a dingy or on an inflatable zodiac, and believe me there are more desperate people in Africa trying to reach Europe than there are Mexicans trying to reach the US. -- kristik
However there isnt a flood of Mexicans to Canada.
RV, I agree with your prognosis. I agree with strict limitations on immigration, and even encouraging Muslim emmigration, including deportation if necessary.
But its up to the Euros to procreate, which is at the core of their problem (well, that and Leftwingism).
EV, I agree with you about having kids. It's just that birth rates take care of themselves without immigration. Anyway, you have to realize that Europe is ten times more crowded than the US so we don't really afford a breeding contest. Also, civil war or at least unrest is inevitable due to the future bankruptcies of a lot of European countries and other factors. As long as Europeans will be taxed to death, they won't have kids. And as long as we will be able to not have kids because of welfare.
EscapeVelocity said...
“However there isnt a flood of Mexicans to Canada.”
Why go to Canada if they can find what they want in the US? I’ve been to both countries and there isn’t really that much difference between the two. Canadians and Americans speak the same language and they share the same way of life.
Asylum seekers come to Norway because of the welfare benefits. If Mexicans in general were given political asylum rather than being treated as illegal immigrants, I’m sure that a lot of them would have gone to Canada instead of the US.
Im sorry RV, if you cant be arsed to procreate to sustain your culture and civilization because of high taxes which you continue to vote for.
Europe is doomed.
Ill quote Tony Judt...
"A social democratic vision of the good society entails from the outset a greater role for the state and the public sector. The welfare state is as popular as ever with its beneficiaries: nowhere in Europe is there a constituency for abolishing public health services, ending free or subsidised education or reducing public provision of transport and other essential services."
Canada has a more generous welfare system and bennies, as well as being easier on asylum seekers.
EscapeVelocity said...
"Canada has a more generous welfare system and bennies, as well as being easier on asylum seekers."
Well Mexicans aren’t treated as asylum seekers they’re foremost treated as illegal immigrants and therefore they wouldn't be eligible fore benefits. They choose the US, because it’s closer to home and there are large Spanish speaking communities in the US, which is not the case with Canada.
Well....maybe the Morwigens will stop blaming Israel for all the problems in the world and start solving their own problems at home!!!!
Post a Comment