60% of Germans - Islam Does Not Belong In Germany.

[The balkens]

! Are you serious?!?!?!?!?!?! That's just wrong there.

... Having to speak English to become an American citizen?

Its the majority language, has been since the country's founding.

Sooooo it makes since that you have to know it.

[Jolet]

Lol, speaking your original language is discriminatory? Bullshit.

You already have to speak English in order to get your citizenship, anyways.

! Are you serious?!?!?!?!?!?! That's just wrong there.

Uh.

I would think it actually makes sense. Being able to communicate with the larger population is important to be a functioning member of society, right?

[Olerand]

... Having to speak English to become an American citizen?

Yes that's wrong. I understand that one has to speak the majority language to get around, but that shouldn't be a part of achieving citizenship.

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

[Jolet]

Yes that's wrong. I understand that one has to speak the majority language to get around, but that shouldn't be a part of achieving citizenship.

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

Sounds a bit like Switzerland.

Except much much much less stringent.

[The East Marches]

Yes that's wrong. I understand that one has to speak the majority language to get around, but that shouldn't be a part of achieving citizenship.

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

I like it.

[Kubumba Tribe]

Yes that's wrong. I understand that one has to speak the majority language to get around, but that shouldn't be a part of achieving citizenship.

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

That's totally not right at all.

[Kubumba Tribe]

! Are you serious?!?!?!?!?!?! That's just wrong there.

Uh.

I would think it actually makes sense. Being able to communicate with the larger population is important to be a functioning member of society, right?

Yeah, but that shouldn't be one of the ways to attain citizenship.

[Kubra]

Unless there's some pressing need to communicate to the outside, perhaps in the form of kitschy ethnic street markets, most "little x's" will take on these sorts of characteristics.
Depends where you are an who the group is, really. There's nothing stranger than an actual italian in a little italy in a non-capital. Chinatowns in places like New York and Vancouver are pretty anglo friendly, mostly cuz a lot of money flows from em, though do be prepared for quite a language barrier if you try to buy porn (don't, uh, don't ask). Outside of those sorts of places, how good a chinatown is gonna be depends on how rich the neighbourhood is. Chinatowns in asia are a different story, chinese immigrants tended to be the most despised minority in asian countries they resided in, so it's only very recently they've become more open to their host countries. Folks from the remaining chinese community in Vietnam born before 1990 seldom speak a lick of vietnamese, though anyone after is likely to have married into vietnamese families, some of the newer ones don't even speak canto.

Let's return to the topic of arab migrants in Europe. Their neighbs are boring, snoozefests, ain't gonna bring it a single euro of my tourism monies. If Egypt ever gets a stable government they're gonna be the first ones to get my tourism monies, I'll even take those sketchy mafia-run charter flights to one of their coastal resorts.
Wanna force cross-cultural interaction? Hire some local architects and sculptors to make arab neighbs cool, make up a mostly embellished history of the neigbs, make it a place where I'd want to buy greasy kebab for exhorbitant rates, cuz I'm a stupid tourists and think it's possible to get authenticity in the middle of London. They'll be singing god save the queen every morning before tea in no time.

Tbh fam, I was really annoyed that I didn't just pay to go to those countries. A trip to Istanbul is a hell of alot cheaper than Berlin or London. My trip to Buckingham Palace or the British Musuem had me going through little Baghdad. I expected to see real British people when I was there, not that. I am a bit annoyed the current state of Turkey. No scuba for me this year.

But you still went to bongland and london to boot because you were a stupid tourist. I still went and am in the process of buying tickets for next summer + train to paris, cuz I'm a stupid dumb tourist.
Give it a decade, some arts funding, and a little gentrification, you'll be paying a pound and a half for a bit of burnt espresso in a fancy cup in no time. And I'll be there, slamming it back. You still won't see much white british people there, but you'll see plenty of folks from Minnesota and Dakota, if you're lucky maybe a few of the richer spaniards. You'll see plenty of brown people, but this time imitating cockney accents, wearing too much red white and blue, and with kids desperately trying to hide that their with their parents out of embarrassment. And those kids, those kids'll be brits through and through, they'll have that narcissistic self-loathing that marks us all as properly western children.

As for turkey, anywhere with political problems does its best to prevent tourists from getting caught in the crossfire, cuz that's good money. For some purely political disputes tourism remains untouched, cuz both sides know that both their asses rest on folks eating their weird cuisine. A place like Istanbul? Go, that place is probably the safest place you could be in Turkey right now, especially if you're sporting a fanny pack.

[Olerand]

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

Sounds a bit like Switzerland.

Except much much much less stringent.

What are the laws in Switzerland?

[The balkens]

Uh.

I would think it actually makes sense. Being able to communicate with the larger population is important to be a functioning member of society, right?

Yeah, but that shouldn't be one of the ways to attain citizenship.

Why.

not speaking the same tongue just puts up another barrier people.

[Jolet]

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

That's totally not right at all.

Well, think of it this way, mate:

>Le you, applying to be a citizen
>Citizenship implies being part of the society of the country, which includes working knowledge of the country in question
>The culture of the country includes integration, including knowing the language.
>Language is necessary for basic communication as well, so that you can function as a member of society.
>Therefore, you need to learn the language in order to be a functioning member of society.

Does that reasoning make sense?

EDIT: To clarify, that doesn't mean they need to be fluent in the language. But they do need a working knowledge of it, at least enough to understand when a policeman/woman is talking to them or another such figure.

[Olerand]

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

That's totally not right at all.

Oh well. You have no right to become French, and we are not obligated to accept you into our nation if we don't want to.

[The balkens]

That's totally not right at all.

Oh well. You have no right to become French, and we are not obligated to accept you into our nation if we don't want to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K1q9Ntcr5g

o7

[Jolet]

Sounds a bit like Switzerland.

Except much much much less stringent.

What are the laws in Switzerland?

Pretty sure you have to sign a contract if you're planning on staying in the country and not just passing through, forget citizenship. They take their borders and immigration very, very seriously. Also, immigrants that cause trouble soon cease to be immigrants to Switzerland, as violation of that contract results in immediate ejection.

Because Switzerland.

[Arkinesia]

Not that it's news to anyone, but almost 55% of hate crime offenders are white, and over 75% are white or black. Given that the predominant religion among both of these demographics in America is Protestant Christianity, it's not hard to figure out the average religion of hate crime offenders in the United States.

And...?

Just because there is a correlation there doesn't indicate causation. For example, there's a fairly high number of Islamist militants out there who identify as Muslim. Does that mean that Muslims are all radicals who want to overthrow the government in favor of their own twisted view of how the world should be?

Probably not, no. In fact, there's a pretty good chance that's not the case. I'd be willing to bet money that it isn't the case, and for the record I'm no gambler. Therefore, that statistic means... Well, little to nothing. There's segments of the Qur'an that definitely point to that behavior- I'll see if I can pull them up later and probably post them seperately- but that doesn't mean that they follow it. Likewise, you don't see the large majority of Christians running around doing awful things that are against the law. I fail to see how this is germane.

If you go back through the quote chain, the poster I quoted implied that Christians are not violent and do not commit hate crimes.

This is obviously untrue.

[Kubumba Tribe]

That's totally not right at all.

Well, think of it this way, mate:

>Le you, applying to be a citizen
>Citizenship implies being part of the society of the country, which includes working knowledge of the country in question
>The culture of the country includes integration, including knowing the language.
>Language is necessary for basic communication as well, so that you can function as a member of society.
>Therefore, you need to learn the language in order to be a functioning member of society.

Does that reasoning make sense?

Yes. What I would say however is that they learn English (or whatever the majority language is) AFTER they attain citizenship. For example, maybe English-learning night school could work.

[Xadufell]

As a Swiss-born citizen I agree that in order to become a citizen you should learn the language. Not only does it make it easier for other Swiss people but it also is necessary to function as a Swiss citizen. Just my thought.

[Jolet]

And...?

Just because there is a correlation there doesn't indicate causation. For example, there's a fairly high number of Islamist militants out there who identify as Muslim. Does that mean that Muslims are all radicals who want to overthrow the government in favor of their own twisted view of how the world should be?

Probably not, no. In fact, there's a pretty good chance that's not the case. I'd be willing to bet money that it isn't the case, and for the record I'm no gambler. Therefore, that statistic means... Well, little to nothing. There's segments of the Qur'an that definitely point to that behavior- I'll see if I can pull them up later and probably post them seperately- but that doesn't mean that they follow it. Likewise, you don't see the large majority of Christians running around doing awful things that are against the law. I fail to see how this is germane.

If you go back through the quote chain, the poster I quoted implied that Christians are not violent and do not commit hate crimes.

This is obviously untrue.

Well, of course it is. That's a broadly generalized statement, and paints all Christians in a rather broad brush.

Whether or not those people who are violent are very good Christians, of course, is probably something that would be debated, but to prevent myself from going NTS on this, I will agree with you.

[Kubumba Tribe]

That's totally not right at all.

Oh well. You have no right to become French, and we are not obligated to accept you into our nation if we don't want to.

Rude?

[Olerand]

Oh well. You have no right to become French, and we are not obligated to accept you into our nation if we don't want to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K1q9Ntcr5g

o7

The laws are still much too lax, however. Although they are mercifully more stringent than Britain or America where even the most regressive Wahhabi feels he is entitled to become a citizen.

French judges constantly reject the applications of families who have women who wear the niqab in them. The niqab is illegal in France, and that a daughter/sister/mother etc. wears it in this country is a clear sign of your rejection of our laws and nation.

Also, have you seen the Marseillaise sung by Jessye Norman on the bicentennial of the Revolution in 1989? Very... Unique.

What are the laws in Switzerland?

Pretty sure you have to sign a contract if you're planning on staying in the country and not just passing through, forget citizenship. They take their borders and immigration very, very seriously. Also, immigrants that cause trouble soon cease to be immigrants to Switzerland, as violation of that contract results in immediate ejection.

Because Switzerland.

Ah. I don't know how restrictive Swiss laws are, but we will probably be looking into their methods after 2017, even if liberal Juppé becomes president.

Oh well. You have no right to become French, and we are not obligated to accept you into our nation if we don't want to.

Rude?

To? Immigrants who are rejected? Oh well. As is our right.

[Kubumba Tribe]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K1q9Ntcr5g

o7

The laws are still much too lax, however. Although they are mercifully more stringent than Britain or America where even the most regressive Wahhabi feels he is entitled to become a citizen.

French judges constantly reject the applications of families who have women who wear the niqab in them. The niqab is illegal in France, and that a daughter/sister/mother etc. wears it in this country is a clear sign of your rejection of our laws and nation.

Also, have you seen the Marseillaise sung by Jessye Norman on the bicentennial of the Revolution in 1989? Very... Unique.

Pretty sure you have to sign a contract if you're planning on staying in the country and not just passing through, forget citizenship. They take their borders and immigration very, very seriously. Also, immigrants that cause trouble soon cease to be immigrants to Switzerland, as violation of that contract results in immediate ejection.

Because Switzerland.

Ah. I don't know how restrictive Swiss laws are, but we will probably be looking into their methods after 2017, even if liberal Juppé becomes president.

Rude?

To? Immigrants who are rejected? Oh well. As is our right.

You type as if you don't care about immigrants' lives, sorry if I misinterpret. BTW the niqab must be made legal throughout the world (ugh, I brought up an old debate >m<)

[Kubra]

In France, you have to learn French, take a test, even sign a contract with the State promising to integrate. If a functionary/judge deems you to not have integrated enough, your application for citizenship will be revoked.

And most right-wing (and the right will win in the next elections) politicians and French citizens want to make that even more stringent.

That's totally not right at all.

tbf it's not the worst set of requirements possible.

In french and british colonies in Africa and the islands in the Atlantic, there were two different methods of segregating the indigenous from the new folks. For the brits, it was a simple matter of just saying gtfo, we live here you live there. The french were able to achieve roughly the same outcome, but in a roundabout fashion. They had to mandate language, certain cultural practices couldn't be practices within certain hours near city limits, you couldn't dress in a particular way in certain parts of the city, and so on.
This is because, despite the two having had roughly the same goals for their colonies, their narratives on national identity and citizenship necessitated this divergence. The French have never had a narrative of such that made blanket exclusion, citizenship and inclusion must always be at least theoretically possible. In the end, a few indigenous folks really did gain french citizenship and political franchise. Hell, the ones that best approximate the french still get preference in who they support over who in the developing world. So long as one can walk and talk like a frenchman, they are french. What changes is simply the standards of frenchness.

[Jolet]

Well, think of it this way, mate:

>Le you, applying to be a citizen
>Citizenship implies being part of the society of the country, which includes working knowledge of the country in question
>The culture of the country includes integration, including knowing the language.
>Language is necessary for basic communication as well, so that you can function as a member of society.
>Therefore, you need to learn the language in order to be a functioning member of society.

Does that reasoning make sense?

Yes. What I would say however is that they learn English (or whatever the majority language is) AFTER they attain citizenship.

Well, what if they don't really have any interest in engaging in society? Maybe they just want a state where they get taken care of and go off and do their own thing. What incentivizes them to go chase integration at that point, if they already have the whole citizenship thing settled? The language is necessary to understand everything else; it is the lynchpin to integration.

In the US, applicants for citizenship are asked, along with questions regarding English, basic questions about history of the United States, current officials in the United States, basic (and by basic I do mean BASIC) questions about the US government and how it functions, and as far as I'm aware, all of these questions are in English. Maybe they have versions in other languages, I dunno, but it'd make sense if that were the case.

I personally think that nothing would drive those who merely wish to exist within the country, not be part of it to join without some form of integration (whether that's just learning the language or compulsory service or what have you),which is why I don't approve of just granting green cards to anybody who makes it across the border and happens to have a pulse. You skip the whole aculturation process that way, which causes serious issues later down the road.

[Olerand]

The laws are still much too lax, however. Although they are mercifully more stringent than Britain or America where even the most regressive Wahhabi feels he is entitled to become a citizen.

French judges constantly reject the applications of families who have women who wear the niqab in them. The niqab is illegal in France, and that a daughter/sister/mother etc. wears it in this country is a clear sign of your rejection of our laws and nation.

Also, have you seen the Marseillaise sung by Jessye Norman on the bicentennial of the Revolution in 1989? Very... Unique.


Ah. I don't know how restrictive Swiss laws are, but we will probably be looking into their methods after 2017, even if liberal Juppé becomes president.


To? Immigrants who are rejected? Oh well. As is our right.

You type as if you don't care about immigrants' lives, sorry if I misinterpret. BTW the niqab must be made legal throughout the world (ugh, I brought up an old debate >m<)

I reject them if they reject our values, certainly. We are under no obligation to accept those who do not accept the Republic.

And I am pleased you think that.

[Kubumba Tribe]

Yes. What I would say however is that they learn English (or whatever the majority language is) AFTER they attain citizenship.

Well, what if they don't really have any interest in engaging in society? Maybe they just want a state where they get taken care of and go off and do their own thing. What incentivizes them to go chase integration at that point, if they already have the whole citizenship thing settled? The language is necessary to understand everything else; it is the lynchpin to integration.

In the US, applicants for citizenship are asked, along with questions regarding English, basic questions about history of the United States, current officials in the United States, basic (and by basic I do mean BASIC) questions about the US government and how it functions, and as far as I'm aware, all of these questions are in English. Maybe they have versions in other languages, I dunno, but it'd make sense if that were the case.

I personally think that nothing would drive those who merely wish to exist within the country, not be part of it to join without some form of integration (whether that's just learning the language or compulsory service or what have you),which is why I don't approve of just granting green cards to anybody who makes it across the border and happens to have a pulse. You skip the whole aculturation process that way, which causes serious issues later down the road.

Hm, I understand you now. But history of the US and how the gov works? Actually, an immigrant actually has to know how the gov works. But why US history?