Denmark: Tone of debate makes immigrants want to leave

/33 Comments/in , , /by

During the 2012 U.S. presidential election, Mitt Romney was roundly criticized for suggesting the common sense policy that illegal immigrants would deport themselves if there all the goodies were taken away — work, driver’s licenses and any public benefits, etc. Now it turns out, it may be even easier than that if Denmark is any indication. Just create a negative environment. From “Tone of debate makes immigrants want to leave“:

Immigration, and particularly Muslim immigration, is a perennial issue in the public debate in Denmark [but not in Sweden, see below]. From calls to make it harder for people from Muslim countries to enter Denmark to pleas from business leaders to change the way the nation discusses its newcomers, immigration is constantly under discussion.
But for some immigrants, it has become too much. An opinion poll of Danish-Turks residing in Denmark revealed that three quarters of them have considered leaving Denmark altogether to escape the negative debate about immigration.
In the poll, conducted by the magazine Opinionen, three out of four respondents said that they are either ‘strongly’ or ‘somewhat’ considering leaving Denmark for Turkey. And for nearly half of those who are thinking of leaving, the debate on immigration and Islam was cited as a primary reason. …
Inger  Støjberg of the Venstre party, who had suggested “that Denmark should make it harder for people from Muslim countries to enter the country, said the negative tone that surrounds immigration is immigrants’ own fault.”

“The problems we see with parallel societies, extremism and the oppression of women are the reasons we discuss Islam and immigrants. I hope that the problems go away. If they disappear, so will the debate,” she told Berlingske.
But Støjberg also added that Danes shouldn’t be expected to bite their tongue when it comes to the topic of immigration.
“Denmark is a country in which we openly discuss religion and immigration and that’s the way it should continue to be as long as there are problems,” she said.
Maria Ahmad, a 23-year-old Danish citizen with Pakistani roots, told Berlingske that she is also considering leaving Denmark even though she was born and raised here, has a job, speaks fluent Danish and feels she holds Danish values.
“The debate on immigrants and Muslims never stops and I don’t think it ever will,” she said.
“Politicians and the media, with all of their talk, leave the impression with some people that immigrants just can’t fit in to Danish society,” she added.
Ahmad said that no matter what she does “it feels like it’s not enough to be acknowledged as a Dane”.
The Opinionen poll spoke to 219 Danish-Turks. People of Turkish origin constitute the largest group of immigrants in Denmark,accounting for 9.8 percent of all immigrants and their descendants according to OECD figures from December.
Compared to its near neighbor Sweden, Denmark is a bastion of common sense on immigration. Sweden is a case of pathological altruism on steroids where political elites believe that keeping the immigrants coming is more important than any possible economic or social costs (see “Norway vs. Sweden on immigration: The importance of becoming part of the mainstream.“
Red Ice Creations (which also does great interviews) highlights recent remarks of former Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt:

On Christmas eve, the Former Prime Minister of Sweden, Fredrik Reinfeldt, came out with an anti-White rant saying that Sweden belongs to the immigrants who move there, not the Native Swedish.

He also said that Sweden’s borders are fictional and the Native Swedish are “uninteresting”. …

“Is this a land that is owned by those who have lived here for three or four generations,” he asked, “or is Sweden [a country] where people who come here in mid-life makes it to be and develops it?“

Three or four generations? How about ever since the glaciers receded, about 10,000 years ago (~400 generations).

“To me, it is obvious that it should be the latter and that there is a stronger and better society if it will be open [to more immigration].”

In Sweden, if you do not support mass immigration and Swedish areas being deliberately targeted for “diversity“, you are quite literally seen as a “Racist” and “Neo-Nazi” – an enemy to the government.

Despite the danger of holding a differing view on immigration, especially with a new law coming very soon which will criminalize criticism of immigration; many Swedes are waking up, even if they are still to scared to vote for their views.

Criminalizing criticism of immigration! (Reminds me of when an administrator at CSULB was incredulous when I told him that indeed I opposed immigration — too much for tender academic ears keen on firing people with opposing views.) Things have gotten so bad in Sweden that the two main political parties have colluded to make the Sweden Democrats party, which is critical of immigration and has 49 seats in the Riksdag, powerless and keep immigration off the table at least until the 2018 elections.
One would hope that such a deal would provoke rage among Swedes with any sense of self-respect. But pathological altruism is, after all, a pathology — a pathology that is enforced by all of the informal  mechanisms (moral ostracism that is so powerful among Europeans, especially Northern Europeans) and formal mechanisms (the looming criminal penalties) available.
And is it really so different in the U.S. where legal immigration is on autopilot and a consensus policy supported by the people who run both parties? The U.S. is actually worse off, since there is no significant political force opposing the massive levels of legal immigration and hence no need to quarantine such a force in order to render it powerless, as in Sweden. In Sweden, after all, immigration patriots can look forward to the 2018 elections.
Denmark and Sweden show the importance of elite support for immigration throughout the West. In Denmark, where opposition to immigration is mainstream and integrated into the government, immigration is regularly criticized by politicians and in the media; immigrants are contemplating leaving. In Sweden and elsewhere (including the U.S. where Obama’s amnesty will make illegal immigration an attractive option for tens of millions non-Whites — with tacit Republican support [depressing that Boehner was reelected as Speaker of the House]), elites support immigration and the displacement of traditional White populations.
Nevertheless, it seems doubtful that voluntary deportation will solve the problem. With few exceptions, the vast differences in economic development throughout pretty much the entire non-White world would make life in the West preferable to going home, even in the presence of high levels of native hostility. Given the reality that throughout the West, immigration has been a top-down phenomenon that never had popular support among most Whites, stronger measures to restore the demographic status quo ante are certainly warranted.
33 replies

Comments are closed.