Yep, the national identity in European countries is still being overwhelmingly questioned by ones ethnicity, even if you are a fully-fledged citizen.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The rise of the far-right in Europe (and world) is worrying me a lot - what to do?
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
- Status
Yep, the national identity in European countries is still being overwhelmingly questioned by ones ethnicity, even if you are a fully-fledged citizen.
Kill Your Masters
Member
Of course you can, as far right equates muslim to brown/arab looking people. If there would be strict controls on muslim immigrants you can bet that people of certain color and looks will be the main target. How else do you think the far right wants to control immigration? Its all color.
Darth Ghandi
Banned
What I'm saying is equating a political group who most usual crimes are disturbing the peace and vandalism with a group whos most usual crimes are violence towards people and hate speech IS A FUCKING JOKE!
You really should stay away from this cause you are obviously ignorant.
Now you are just broad brushing shit with statments lik "religious terrorists" and "Being labled a racist".
Again what specifik policy are you worried about? Cause this meta bullcrap about "the debate" is getting old.
Passports?
People in here act like we're in the 70s with all-white cities and 10 muslims in there who are oppressed. There are more than enough cities that suffer from migration politics (Molenbeek, Berlin, Marxloh, Malmö). My city of birth has 20% non-Germans in there (not counting people with migration background).
Darth Ghandi
Banned
Are you saying that POC don't face oppression and racism?
Royal_Phalanx
Member
You still believe Germany is an open door even though I pointed out the EU Blue Card scheme earlier? It isn't easy for a non-EU citizen to move to the EU. You need an education and skills. Even for EU citizens you need a job to take advantage of free movement. Look to the policies of the post war reconstruction era if you want something to blame.
Kill Your Masters
Member
Not what I meant.
Exactly. Non-EU citizens have to go through a tight rigorous process, be skilled and well educated, lots of paperwork involved. Refugees are a whole different thing.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
More information on EU blue card: https://www.apply.eu/
So yeah, the idea that the EU will let anyone in is blatant bullshit. You need minimum earnings to even qualify for it in Germany in the first place. Not sure how it is anywhere else. Countries like France have taken in very few refugees anyway. It's unknown whether citizens of the UK will have to apply as well under this scheme in the future. Probably will have to if free movement rules are ditched.
badcrumble
Member
Sad that a lot of this thread was people barging in and saying the far right is completely correct.
radios shipping overview
Member
This bears repeating: what is the regressive left? I've only heard this term as a smear used by gater/alt-right types.
dapperbandit
Banned
As I understand it (might be wrong) it's used to describe people who describe themselves as progressives but give people with regressive principles or cultural practices a free pass because they're minorities. Claiming to, but not actually standing up for LGBT rights or feminism etc because it would be problematic to criticize the wrong ethnic or religious group.
It's not a difficult concept to grasp. There are leftists that are championing the causes of women's rights, LBGT rights etc. while at the same time supporting an influx of people from ACTUAL patriarchic honor cultures who go directly against everything these leftists claim to stand for.
In an ironic mirror case, the far right curiously only seems to care about things like women's rights when some immigrant/minority group is perceived to violate them.
The important condition here is *when some immigrant/minority group is perceived to violate them*. The far right usually denies or even outright perpetuate patriarchal culture when it's just by regular (white) Europeans.
The far right only cares about LGBTQ or women's rights when an immigrant or a refugee (read: middle eastern) violates those rights.
petran79
Banned
Last major European immigration wave was during WWII where even 12 million Germans had to be forcefully relocated from East Europe to Germany.
For decades Europe not only was ethnically homogenous but it was also divided in half. It was difficult or impossible for citizens of socialist countries to travel outside, while Western Europeans could travel to those countries.
Those countries for decades, like current Russia, had no real form of democracy. While the 90s was a transitioning period. Hence why you see such breeding grounds for far right policies.
While countries with a strong colonial past like Britain and France have a different sort of racism, tied with neo-colonialism. Germany wants to be the dominant force in Europe, while Russia has her own justified superiority complex about modernizing and civilising the Caucasus and Central Asia.
In 2009 Magnus Ranstorp and Josefine Dos Santos warned the growth of radicalism in Rosengård. Then their study received massive criticism from media and politicians. How right they were.
http://www.expressen.se/ledare/terroroffren-far-betala-for-var-undfallenhet/
Sara Mohammad don't understand how the struggle for women's rights can ignore the honor oppression taking place around Sweden.
She is also very critical of some Swedish feminists who do not seem to care about immigrant muslim women's rights because fear of racist sigma.
http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/kultur...urce=facebook&utm_medium=page&utm_campaign=dn
http://www.expressen.se/ledare/terroroffren-far-betala-for-var-undfallenhet/
Sara Mohammad don't understand how the struggle for women's rights can ignore the honor oppression taking place around Sweden.
She is also very critical of some Swedish feminists who do not seem to care about immigrant muslim women's rights because fear of racist sigma.
http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/kultur...urce=facebook&utm_medium=page&utm_campaign=dn
Wrong choice of words there right?
radios shipping overview
Member
This line of thought implies that by speaking in favor of offering asylum to refugees, you agree with all of their beliefs and would be in favor of legislating those beliefs in their new country of residence. I don't think that's the case at all.
petran79
Banned
after UK leaves the EU it will even worse, with France having to succumb to German demands regarding the economy. France leads the military defense of Europe after all, they cant be bothered in two fronts.
It's not about "legislating those beliefs", but ignoring that they exist and calling people intolerant if they point them out.
radios shipping overview
Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left
A lot of this idea seems to depend on the notion that there are liberals who excuse rights abuses within Muslim communities, and that those liberals promote Islamic extremism/fundamentalism. Is there a demonstrable trend of this kind of thing happening?
This seems like an ideological war being fought over how much we (the left) should hold communities at large responsible for crimes committed by individuals. Is this like when Trump yells about Obama not using the phrase "radical Islam?"
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Seems like it's a case of liberals wanting to avoid stereotyping entire communities in general like what Trump is doing, don't see what's so unreasonable about that fear in the first place, if there's a serious movement of liberals wanting to stop holding individuals to account for human rights abuses then I can agree, but so far I see no real evidence of this being a large proportion of liberals.
Only hear of very isolated cases like a social democrat politician here holding a rally that turns out to be gender segregated in Bradford (don't remember where exactly), which is inexcusable to me as a leftist tbh. The right thing to do would be to demand that people respect each other's rights and treat each other equally or they would refuse to speak there. There are positive things happening though, like our newly elected left wing (and Muslim) mayor declaring that he supports LGBT rights and equality between women and men and willing to confront the more extreme elements of his community to do so.
Only hear of very isolated cases like a social democrat politician here holding a rally that turns out to be gender segregated in Bradford (don't remember where exactly), which is inexcusable to me as a leftist tbh. The right thing to do would be to demand that people respect each other's rights and treat each other equally or they would refuse to speak there. There are positive things happening though, like our newly elected left wing (and Muslim) mayor declaring that he supports LGBT rights and equality between women and men and willing to confront the more extreme elements of his community to do so.
CyclopsRock
Member
I don't think this is really what people mean when they say "regressive left", though. I think it's more an accusation that people have a fear of speaking out about certain transgressions because, in their world, with the language they use and the ideology they have, there's nothing worse than being called a racist, being called a McCarthyist, being called sexist etc. This can happen domestically (turning a blind eye to certain allegations which have cultural associations) or internationally (making the assumption that literally any foreign policy position taken by the US is, by default, the wrong one. Ditto Israel. This leads to bizarre arguments like "Why shouldn't Iran have nuclear weapons?") This manifests itself in a lot of ways, but there are countless instances of politicians and talking heads who'll go and protest G4S's supply of security to some event whilst simultaneously going on Russia Today or Press TV to do it.
KonradLaw
Member
But it's not like that. Far right is actually rising in western europe. Not in eastern one. In east the regular right is in the power and in most countries have been for quite some time, while far right stays niche.
And it's exactly because of communism. Half a century of it have made people allergic to left here so those kinds of parties didn't dominate for decades like they did in many western countries. And far right is a reaction to rule of left. No rule of left in easter europe has made far right a lot less successful, since at most they can point at regular right wing parties and promise to be that, only harsher and with nazi sympathies. That's a lot harder sell.
Plus of course eastern europe is very different and doesn't face the issues far right usually latches on. Enthusiastic patriotism remained in mainstream and those countries also remained ethnically and culturally homogenous. Far right can at most attack any attempts to change homogenous nature of the countries, but this is something vast majority of those societies and mainstream parties support, so it's not something far right can exclusively claim as their own.
"Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it."
It is really sad. She and other women working for the same cause has even been accused of racism, and "spreading rumours" about the suburbs when they've simply been talking about their and other women in the suburbs experiences.
Honor culture has been a problem for a long time and they're now warning that it's increasing. More and more women talk about increasingly strict control by brothers and or families. Not being allowed to go outside on their own etc.
Personally, I think it's a combination of fear of seeming racist and the fact that feminism in Sweden (and I suppose the rest of the west) is very white that has led to it being more or less ignored for so long. Or at least not been given nearly enough attention.
This is a good concrete example of regressive leftism.
The bolded line made me remember a muslim girl in my high school class was not allowed to come to my house to do some work on a class project because I was a guy. This was when we were like 15 or 16.
I think the left are afraid of taking these kind of things because right wing parties use it as ammo for their political agenda. No doubt these issues exist people have to realise we can say we should be helping people seek asylum when they need it but we shouldn't let them impose their cultural norms that fly in the face of our own values in our country. But because their norms are different we shouldnt be shunning them but instead bringing these people into the fold, educating them as to why we don't accept such behaviour. Good integration takes a lot of work (and money id assume) but in the end it benefits everyone, us and them.
I think attacking the left for this internal struggle is unfair and instead we should be helping to aid internal discussion over these issues instead of completely dismissing the left for struggling to resolve these two somewhat conflicting ideals.
well not "unfair" but disingenuous.
I think attacking the left for this internal struggle is unfair and instead we should be helping to aid internal discussion over these issues instead of completely dismissing the left for struggling to resolve these two somewhat conflicting ideals.
well not "unfair" but disingenuous.
His Majesty
Banned
Socialist parties were founded to defend the rights of the workers and unions in Europe. They fought against the influence of the church in society and were diametrically opposed to Christian democratic parties. In Belgium this lead to pillarization, where society was segregated by ideological allegiance. A lot of towns for example had a catholic and a socialist football team.
The irony is that now, years later, the left is championing the cause of freedom of religion to protect religious minorities. This has lead to a standstill in integration efforts in many countries and it often leads to an internal clash between liberalist and regressive policies. One notable example is the opposition of the left to a ban on ritual slaughter. Freedom of religion takes priority over animal welfare apparently.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I thought I had heard Jill Stein given as an example of the regressive left with her hodgepodge of policies.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think the terms regressive or progressive are useful. It's a pretty teleological perspective to suppose that there is some definable line along which we either move forward or backward.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
It's telling when /r/europe turns against liberalism. Many comments sound like The_Donald. And given that Trump and his position on Muslims is despised by US users here, are Europeans really more sympathetic to his anti Muslim migrant views? I think they will be. Someone was downvoted to oblivion on /r/Europe for saying we should blame lunatics instead of tar all Muslims with the same brush for human rights abuses done by a number of them. Replies were along the lines of 'This is the progressiveness that is destroying Sweden'.
I'm a left winger and I feel Europe hasn't been muscular enough,however in defending liberal values of human rights and equality. But Europe is strong and will endure the problems now. I'm confident our liberal values will be defended much more strongly in the future. Is Malmo really that bad? A Swedish guy told me it was 'the best place for partying and for meeting girls', so I think the problems are largely contained in shitty, poor neighborhoods. Doesn't mean people shouldn't be trying to fix them, though.
I'm a left winger and I feel Europe hasn't been muscular enough,however in defending liberal values of human rights and equality. But Europe is strong and will endure the problems now. I'm confident our liberal values will be defended much more strongly in the future. Is Malmo really that bad? A Swedish guy told me it was 'the best place for partying and for meeting girls', so I think the problems are largely contained in shitty, poor neighborhoods. Doesn't mean people shouldn't be trying to fix them, though.
The two sides are extremely different, so the "Both sides" narrative is wholly inappropriate. We know (for Germany) that they differ tremendously regarding politically motivated crime, not only in quantity, but in the crimes committed.
Generally one can say that right-wing extremism as a whole (for Germany, data for the past year) is significantly more active (~2.4 times), targets different groups (foreigners/political enemies) and as a whole in recent history has been much more devastating (see victim statistics). I think estimates for the number of deaths directly due to left-wing extremism since the reunification range from 3-6*, whereas those for right-wing extremism range from 75-178*. It should also be mentioned regarding violent crimes that a direct comparison is again folly and that a more thorough analysis is necessary, given the different setups.
*If we look at official figures for right-wing extremism, we get 75 victims since 1990. It should be mentioned that these are (to my knowledge) for explicitly politically motivated deaths, so I am not sure if e.g. the victims from Munich would count. Significantly higher estimates exist, which go up to several hundred deaths. Again, classification is difficult. For politically motivated deaths by left-wing extremists I could not find any official numbers, though we can count the murders by RAF since 1990, which would put them at 2. Other reasonable estimates put the number of deaths for left-wing extremism since at 6.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I have absolutely zero problems with Iran having nuclear weapons fwiw.
Darth Ghandi
Banned
I don't quite agree.
The left doesn't support the idea of patriarchal ideas being exclusive to POC.
This is what is silly with the far right, on one hand they dismiss the idea of patriarchy (if white men are involved) yet on the other the target POC with the same argument.
CyclopsRock
Member
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Yep. It's hard to take the far right serious when they talk about those issues. Interesting to see how many suddenly started to care after the events in Cologne.
That said, the expression of patriarchy aren't necessarily comparable between cultures. Some cultures are considerably more patriarchal than others.
And "honor culture" seems to be exclusively a problem in some immigrant communities. At least here in Sweden.
Darth Ghandi
Banned
To a certain extent that is true.
There is a world difference between saying they aren't allowed cause they don't share "our values" and saying that we need more resources to inform and educate both as private citizens and government agencies.
I wish that we could have a broader discussion about toxic masculinity and equality with ALL people.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
So it's a problem then. But how do you change their opinions? Their views have been shaped since birth. That's the difficult question.
BarringGaffner
Member
I've only heard this term used by liberals.
it's liberals defending illiberal principals. Mostly used for liberals defending Islamists.
Well, integration is part of the solution. Poor integration has allowed parallel soicieties to form where old and outdated traditions have been allowed to grow. Society at large must be loud and clear that it won't accept unequality.
There also needs to be effective help and protection available to people who are affected by it.
Ethnicity being tied to nationality is in decline in major European nations. To be British, Welsh or Scottish no longer means what it once did. Now it is based by where you were born and accent. However in other parts of the world, ethnicity still tied to nationality. An american cannot move to Japan and be Japanese. An Indian cannot move to Nigeria and be considered Nigerian or African. Some ethnicities and nationalities in Europe still have strong connotations. Irish is still very much pale skin, red hair, etc. Italian has a distinct look and culture, Scandinavian etc. A lot of people consider Russians separate from Western Europeans etc.
We'll see how it shapes out with this resurgence of nationalism and ethnic nationalism.
no it's not.
National identity is defined by how integrated you are. Are you part of society and most importantly: Do you speak the local language?
Being born in let's say Germany doesn't make you German. Speaking German makes you German. In my experience this is actually true for a lot of countries.
Where you're born isn't as important as many on the right and on the left like to claim. It's all about integration + contributing to society (and to some extent not leeching on the welfare system). To most people it's just a simple matter of fairness.
Here are a few examples:
Have you ever heard anyone in Europe complain about migrants from Asia? or from rich Arab countries? Why not?
Have you ever hear anyone complain about eastern Europeans and gypsies? Why would anyone complain about them? they are all white Europeans, right?
No, I'd say European "racism" is first and foremost about a perception of unfairness. There is a strong mentality of "what we have today we accomplished all by ourselves after the war" present. With this kind of mindset how would you react if somebody comes in and expects a free ride (even if that's only perceived)? In this aspect, I fear Europeans are way closer to Americans than some would like to admit. The difference is, that Europeans are way more worried about this because they know the benefits a social security net brings and wouldn't want to lose it. I guess that part is harder to understand if you live across the pond.
And yet... you have to kill the net to protect the net, at least that's the logic some right wing parties seem to apply.
This flies directly against the experiences as a non-White person - you get the question "no where are you really from?", or the "wow you speak so great German", or you are labeled as a "second/third/fourth/fifth/sixth generation immigrant", you don't count as a "real German", etc.. All because of your skin color. And that's just the diet racism. Then you have the full-blown racists that have become the norm in media and news papers and politicians and on the street who call you racial slurs or tell you to leave the country or spit on you or threaten you. Even if you have a job and are born in the country, you are met with these things in the public and on the street.
Your example with "gypsies" and Eastern-Europeans doesn't hold water either - both those 'groups' (if we can even group them like that) are highly racialized and Othered by virtue of the way they look, the way they talk, the way dress, and so on.
But then this is merely an issue of (false) perception and stigmatization of people coming from other countries. They work too, they pay their taxes, they do the same shit as anyone else, even being unemployed or have to go on welfare sometimes. Why should they not receive the same benefits as other people who are also working or who are unemployed?
There is also a false perception in that thinking that what Europeans have was earned through surviving the wars, when in fact that completely overlooks the riches and wealth that the countries have accumulated through colonization and Empire.
KonradLaw
Member
I think it;s because their ancestors didn't work for it. The ancestors of natives did, so those natives aren't happy that others are "free riding". It's perception of course, because sure, a migrant with zero skills and no language knowledge will be a true free rider, maybe till the end of his life. But the reactions to eastern europeans are the same, despite the fact that they are net contributors and if they get a support from goverment it's mostly after they worked for quite some time and will work again soon. Yet both are met with the same attitudes of locals, so it's about feelings, not facts. Altough there's no denying the fact that continued mass migration of kind Europe saw last year would quickly destroy the social security EU countries are able to provide for their citizens. Hence why even very tolerant countries are turning anti-migrant, since it's just not sustainable long term.
That said, I think a lot of european xenophobia comes from actual history. The nations have been through some many wars that there's a lot of bad blood between them and it stays in societies common conciousness forever. It's why in some european countries white people can be more intollerant of other group of white people than they are of people from other races.
dapperbandit
Banned
But dude... it's 2016! Like, wow.
Maybe in your experience, I disagree with mine.
Maybe in your experience, I disagree with mine. It's not even about where you're born but just about how you look and how you speak, so that's why I brought in "ethnicity", in the case that you didn't understand my post because...
... these pretty much indicate it. I've no idea what the point is you are trying to make of them.
So this perception legitimizes racism and assuming the worst on some good percentages of people who partially lived about decades in these countries isn't toxic, amirite??? It also doesn't undermine my conclusion.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked