The Global Refugee Wave and Migrant Crisis

There may be some religious bias involved. And not just about religion. the Middle East tends to be very behind about women and gay rights and well on a lot of social issues.

Just look at how the rich Middle East countries are dealing with the refugee problem.

Cultural differences are not an excuse for Europe to not take in everyone who wish to come... Isn't acceptance Europe's main modus operandi!?

edited 6th Sep '15 11:39:39 AM by Ferbesh

There is a point to be made about Saudia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE not taking in anyone. I get the many reasons why they aren't, but a good compromise solution would be for them to pay Europe's expenses with the crisis.

As for Turkey, I think a major reason why no one is staying there is because Erdogan has made noise about pushing them back into Syria "after the creation of a buffer zone". Since said buffer zone is still being negotiated, one can understand refugees fearing that Ankara will jump the gun and throw them back in before the zone is stabilized or even extant. Nevermind the fact that any Kurdish refugees there (such as that poor toddler and his family) have absolutely no reason to stay in Turkey right now, period.

Also that woman in the video made me feel ill.

Equal rights is and always has been about the middle class, not the poor. Acceptance is always done out of political/economical convenience, not charity.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:42:38 AM by amitakartok

Those countries don't have any obligation though. And west has done enough bad to Islamic world, so it is only right to shoulder the burden to pay off some of the debt of those sins.

You can say that again...

when it comes to how they treat not just women, gays but other men of similar culture, I can understand why some Europeans would be reluctant.

Someone in Italy already posted here about an immigrant head of household demanded to only speak to a male in charge.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:43:55 AM by probablyinsane

But that is their culture... Forcing someone to change their culture goes against European values.

So Europeans should give up their own culture in favor of someone else's? Doesn't that kinda defeat the point?

edited 6th Sep '15 11:50:24 AM by amitakartok

If their culture requires treating women and gays as second class, they have to change especially if they want to live in Europe.

I just hope that the far majority will accept that when in Rome, do as the Romans do. In this case, do as the Germans, Austrians, etc. do.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:47:46 AM by probablyinsane

X3 Nope, we've forced many cultures to change oppressive cultural traditions, you don't get to hide behind "it's muh culture" when you're oppressing people. That excuse is only valid if you're dealing with the Polandball version of Sweden, which isn't real.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:48:27 AM by Silasw

And if they don't? Just kick them out?

Actually, I give up. This is my last post here. I'm glad that at least Sweden respects Islamic rights. And right wingers trying to force gay march right through Muslims neighborhood was called racist and canceled by official government. This kind of ridiculous Islamophobia disgusts me.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:50:23 AM by Ferbesh

Who said anything about kicking them out?

Give then sensitivity training, tell them to suck it up, if what they're doing is illegal then sue/jail them, but there's no need to kick them out.

Positive discrimination is still discrimination. If you give preferential treatment to your own people over foreigners, you'll be seen as nationalist - but if you do the opposite, you'll be hated by your own people. It's lose-lose. This is why European politicians oppose immigration, I think: they don't want to be forced to choose sides.

Also called the Merkel-method.

I'm all for respecting other cultures and religions however my respects ends where those cultures question liberties Europeans had to struggle hard to enjoy.

It seems like Germany has learned from past mistakes and is now offering integration courses for refugees, so that they can learn the language and values they need to adhere to.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:57:29 AM by Zarastro

@Ferbesh - Why are fellow Arab and Muslim nations not obligated but Europe is? The obligation is at the very least the same, though for reasons of distance and ability to assimilate, it is more so until they are at or over capacity....like fellow nations of Lebanon and Jordan, who are not expected to continue to meet obligations anymore because they've already gone above and beyond the call of duty in this matter.

As for culture, both sides have to compromise. The refugees need to be grateful to their hosts by trying to assimilate. That means learning the language, respecting the local Christian sect's sensibilities, abiding by their laws, learning about that nations achievements and histories, putting their children into the school system, etc. The host needs to be flexible enough in the assimilation process or the culture becomes brittle even without a refugee crisis. That means not shaming the refugees for their faith or trying to change that faith, that means not getting on their case for the way they dress, let them speak their language amongst themselves, let them celebrate their celebrations.

In short, those saying refugees can be as they are but the host must change and those saying refugees have to shed everything of their identity in the name of the host's are both wrong.

edited 6th Sep '15 11:58:27 AM by FFShinra

Don't you mean integration instead of assimilation?

I do. Couldn't think of the word at the time. But, point stands, the host culture can't survive for very long if it can't handle people of other cultures entering their realm, refugee crisis or not. And refugees can't pretend they're in the old country forever. At the very least, their children will not be as they are and the better they handle it (that is, integrate the child in both cultures instead of letting them get assimilated completely) the better it is for everyone.

Quite.

edited 6th Sep '15 12:06:20 PM by FFShinra

Especially as kids who want to be part of the host culture but have their old culture strictly enforced on them at home, tend to go a bit nuts. After all, that's where half of ISIS' western recruits have come from.

On which cultural aspects to change, basically the discriminatory ones.

Or the cruel ones. I remember reading that kosher or halal meat is banned in some European countries.

Honestly, kosher and halal banning is a bit overboard in my opinion, I think a legitimate example of when the host is being too imposing on the immigrant culture.

It's the wooden shoes principle, when someone "cultural identity" involves being an oppressive asshole it shouldn't be tolerated.

I don't believe they're specifically banned, my understanding is that they simply have trouble complying with animal welfare legislation.

edited 6th Sep '15 12:11:17 PM by Silasw

. I would have to agree with the ban. Don't like that animals have to be conscious while being bled to death.

edited 6th Sep '15 12:11:48 PM by probablyinsane

You don't have to eat halal. Forcing others not to eat halal (or making it unnecessarily expensive to do so) for your beliefs about animals is where they have legitimate complaint.

EDIT-

This is what I mean about compromise. You have to pick and choose your battles. Fighting with them on every little difference is what leads to problems.

edited 6th Sep '15 12:13:35 PM by FFShinra

. It is unnecessary cruelty. Not to mention that it is harder to control animals when they are conscious as they are being bleed to death.

We had two refugees getting in a stabbing fight because of their clan allegiance. These two escaped war and chaos in their homeland just to bring their conflicts with them.

Personally, I believe in the evolution of culture. People from other cultural backgrounds can enrich our own culture - but only if we are wary of the more toxic elements.