European Politics Thread

[Untecna]

I gotta say fair play to the migrants not learning Portuguese, it’s hard as hell (after 16 whole years I still don’t get it fully) and like 80-90% of people in cities can speak English so if you already know English its a kind of waste of time to learn this hard language that only unlocks 10-20% of the population for you.

Learning the language is dependent, but I think at the very least the culture needs to be learnt and respected. After all, you'd be the migrant in their country. Realistically speaking, if you'd want them to respect you, you should know that you gotta respect them back. I don't think one would need to go all 'gung-ho' about it and become a professional, but at least to the point where you are decently informed. The culture won't adapt for you, right? By culture, I specifically mean things like (for example off the top of my head) how loud you are in public or knowing about upcoming cultural events

I don't think any of that actually matters. Like I said before, this is an arbitrary standard being pushed upon a certain group of people for racist reasons.

People have their own observances of culture. Let them be.

[True Europa State]

Learning the language is dependent, but I think at the very least the culture needs to be learnt and respected. After all, you'd be the migrant in their country. Realistically speaking, if you'd want them to respect you, you should know that you gotta respect them back. I don't think one would need to go all 'gung-ho' about it and become a professional, but at least to the point where you are decently informed. The culture won't adapt for you, right? By culture, I specifically mean things like (for example off the top of my head) how loud you are in public or knowing about upcoming cultural events

I don't think any of that actually matters. Like I said before, this is an arbitrary standard being pushed upon a certain group of people for racist reasons.

Maybe I should be a bit more specific in my intentions. I don't expect what I said to become a genuine standard for migrants when they move to a new country; it's more of my personal opinion and preference in regards to what I'd do (and what I did when I moved for uni). It'd become excessive to actually demand culture to be learned/taught and making it law, but in a more general sense I think it's nicer to do so. Out of respect, right?

[Untecna]

People think they know what racism is, yet have never brought up a neighboring country to a southern European cab driver, I was in an uber with my mom once and this old cab driver was talking bout sum “Devemos matar todos os espanhóis, aqueles idiotas pretensiosos. Eles sempre dizem “no entiendo” mas eu posso te entender, as nossas línguas são muito parecidas, tu só queres ser difícil”

I translated this in Google Translate and oh hell naw what the f*ck is wrong with that man

You've yet to substantiate that migrants are not learning languages. Furthermore, what does it matter? Why should their status rely on your standard for them? Why should their health and safety rely on being a fluent speaker of your language? What compels that to be truth?

1. When did I say most don't? I simply provided a statement of dependency, that IF they learn the language (along with the other requirements I gave), they can be allowed to stay.
2. If your life depends on learning a language, wouldn't you do that, even with joy? Even apart from this question, should they not learn the language so they can find a job? Especially in countries with a lower birthrate, whose future generations will have to sustain the more numerous older ones, making it hard for basically everyone and contributing to major worker shortages (builders, electricians, teachers, etc.), why should the natives have to provide by their own taxes not only for the elderly and those unable to work, which they're obligated to as they are from within the same nation, the latter having worked before that and contributed to the country as a whole, also pay for certain migrants which refuse to get jobs and resort to inhabiting the streets, even if they have a work permit (not all, but some)?

1. And why is that the standard? By the same arbitrary logic, we can restrict entry based on preferred flavor of ice cream.

2. I think it's inhumane to force people into continued suffering because you decided that they were not going to be allowed to have a fair livelihood unless they bent to your whim.

[Untecna]

I don't think any of that actually matters. Like I said before, this is an arbitrary standard being pushed upon a certain group of people for racist reasons.

Maybe I should be a bit more specific in my intentions. I don't expect what I said to become a genuine standard for migrants when they move to a new country; it's more of my personal opinion and preference in regards to what I'd do (and what I did when I moved for uni). It'd become excessive to actually demand culture to be learned/taught and making it law, but in a more general sense I think it's nicer to do so. Out of respect, right?

So now you're backtracking on what you've said. Well, at least you're honest about being flimsy cardboard.

[Tombourville]

The funny thing is:

The Socialist Party is refusing to participate in government without a wealth tax
The Republicans are refusing to participate in a government with a wealth tax

LAUGHS

Outside of this, the funny thing is that Melenchon agreed to have no ministers, no input and even agreed to a technocratic prime minister of a left-centre coalition. He literally agreed to have absolutely no power, and Macron said he was asking too much, of course, Melenchon is no longer open to such an agreement, but there we are.

I suspect Gabriel Attal would be the last option here, mainly because he would happily cave to the left, in order to fix France so the far right doesn’t win. Former allies of Macron are now suspecting he’s planning to fuck everything up so he can win in 2032.

[Lusitanic]

I gotta say fair play to the migrants not learning Portuguese, it’s hard as hell (after 16 whole years I still don’t get it fully) and like 80-90% of people in cities can speak English so if you already know English its a kind of waste of time to learn this hard language that only unlocks 10-20% of the population for you.

Learning the language is dependent, but I think at the very least the culture needs to be learnt and respected. After all, you'd be the migrant in their country. Realistically speaking, if you'd want them to respect you, you should know that you gotta respect them back. I don't think one would need to go all 'gung-ho' about it and become a professional, but at least to the point where you are decently informed. The culture won't adapt for you, right? By culture, I specifically mean things like (for example off the top of my head) how loud you are in public or knowing about upcoming cultural events

I think that’s valid but I’m just really hating my language right now because I have Portuguese class.

[Unogonduria]

I translated this in Google Translate and oh hell naw what the f*ck is wrong with that man
1. When did I say most don't? I simply provided a statement of dependency, that IF they learn the language (along with the other requirements I gave), they can be allowed to stay.
2. If your life depends on learning a language, wouldn't you do that, even with joy? Even apart from this question, should they not learn the language so they can find a job? Especially in countries with a lower birthrate, whose future generations will have to sustain the more numerous older ones, making it hard for basically everyone and contributing to major worker shortages (builders, electricians, teachers, etc.), why should the natives have to provide by their own taxes not only for the elderly and those unable to work, which they're obligated to as they are from within the same nation, the latter having worked before that and contributed to the country as a whole, also pay for certain migrants which refuse to get jobs and resort to inhabiting the streets, even if they have a work permit (not all, but some)?

1. And why is that the standard? By the same arbitrary logic, we can restrict entry based on preferred flavor of ice cream.

2. I think it's inhumane to force people into continued suffering because you decided that they were not going to be allowed to have a fair livelihood unless they bent to your whim.

1. Because, with few exceptions like the USA, the nation is build off by the people living in it; its natives. They are united by a common language, most of the same traditions as regional variations eixst, and most times religion; though this is not necessarily the case, as proved by the Pomaks in Bulgaria who are Muslims, or by the Bavarians in Germany who are Roman Catholics. A flavor of ice cream is not built up of centuries of traditions and is an entirely miscellaneous thing. A native does not suddenly become a non-native because he prefers vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate ice cream.
2. Once again, it's not a whim, it's an entirely justified requirement to learn the local language if you desire to permanently move to another country. "you decided that they were not going to be allowed to have a fair livelihood" In regards to the immigrants to don't learn the language, that is entirely their fault. For that reason, the governments should make language courses more accessible to foreigners.

[Untecna]

1. And why is that the standard? By the same arbitrary logic, we can restrict entry based on preferred flavor of ice cream.

2. I think it's inhumane to force people into continued suffering because you decided that they were not going to be allowed to have a fair livelihood unless they bent to your whim.

1. Because, with few exceptions like the USA, the nation is build off by the people living in it; its natives. They are united by a common language, most of the same traditions as regional variations eixst, and most times religion; though this is not necessarily the case, as proved by the Pomaks in Bulgaria who are Muslims, or by the Bavarians in Germany who are Roman Catholics. A flavor of ice cream is not built up of centuries of traditions and is an entirely miscellaneous thing. A native does not suddenly become a non-native because he prefers vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate ice cream.
2. Once again, it's not a whim, it's an entirely justified requirement to learn the local language if you desire to permanently move to another country. "you decided that they were not going to be allowed to have a fair livelihood" In regards to the immigrants to don't learn the language, that is entirely their fault. For that reason, the governments should make language courses more accessible to foreigners.

1. Most countries are chock full of different ethnic groups with various languages and cultural practices. There is no "unity" except at the level of the government of a country. So again, what makes this arbitrary standard truthful?

2. It is a whim. You've decided that immigrants should conform to what you want before they should be allowed into a country, on no actual basis.

[Unogonduria]

1. Because, with few exceptions like the USA, the nation is build off by the people living in it; its natives. They are united by a common language, most of the same traditions as regional variations eixst, and most times religion; though this is not necessarily the case, as proved by the Pomaks in Bulgaria who are Muslims, or by the Bavarians in Germany who are Roman Catholics. A flavor of ice cream is not built up of centuries of traditions and is an entirely miscellaneous thing. A native does not suddenly become a non-native because he prefers vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate ice cream.
2. Once again, it's not a whim, it's an entirely justified requirement to learn the local language if you desire to permanently move to another country. "you decided that they were not going to be allowed to have a fair livelihood" In regards to the immigrants to don't learn the language, that is entirely their fault. For that reason, the governments should make language courses more accessible to foreigners.

1. Most countries are chock full of different ethnic groups with various languages and cultural practices. There is no "unity" except at the level of the government of a country. So again, what makes this arbitrary standard truthful?

2. It is a whim. You've decided that immigrants should conform to what you want before they should be allowed into a country, on no actual basis.

1. There are a few differences:
a) Most times, there's a predominant ethnic group in each state, despite local variation and naturally-occurring ethnic diversity. Take Germany as an example: Yes, there are some Poles, Sorbs and Czechs, but the predominant ethnic group is German. If you don't want to take Germany as an example due to its atrocities during the Second World War that partially contributed to the above statement, take for example Bulgaria then - the predominant ethnic group is Bulgarian, despite the fact Turks and Gypsies/Romas also reside here. Take another example: France. If we do not count the immigrants, the minorities there are either Germans, Italians or other smaller groups; the predominant ethnic group being French. Not directly related to this, but since many Muslims tend to have more than 5 kids, compared to the 3 at most by most Europeans, the ethnic demographic might change towards a predominantly Arab one within the next 200 years.
b) All these countries have standardized a given dialect or straight up created a new language that takes different things from each dialect from each country. Would you call such a standardization unfair and subjugating? A country cannot fair well for a long time if it is not united by something - at the very least a common language, and in more pronounced cases a national identity as a whole.
2. Oh yes, the great conformation of having to learn the local language so you can at very least find a job. You are yet to address that.

[Untecna]

1. Most countries are chock full of different ethnic groups with various languages and cultural practices. There is no "unity" except at the level of the government of a country. So again, what makes this arbitrary standard truthful?

2. It is a whim. You've decided that immigrants should conform to what you want before they should be allowed into a country, on no actual basis.

1. There are a few differences:
a) Most times, there's a predominant ethnic group in each state, despite local variation and naturally-occurring ethnic diversity. Take Germany as an example: Yes, there are some Poles, Sorbs and Czechs, but the predominant ethnic group is German. If you don't want to take Germany as an example due to its atrocities during the Second World War that partially contributed to the above statement, take for example Bulgaria then - the predominant ethnic group is Bulgarian, despite the fact Turks and Gypsies/Romas also reside here. Take another example: France. If we do not count the immigrants, the minorities there are either Germans, Italians or other smaller groups; the predominant ethnic group being French. Not directly related to this, but since many Muslims tend to have more than 5 kids, compared to the 3 at most by most Europeans, the ethnic demographic might change towards a predominantly Arab one within the next 200 years.
b) All these countries have standardized a given dialect or straight up created a new language that takes different things from each dialect from each country. Would you call such a standardization unfair and subjugating? A country cannot fair well for a long time if it is not united by something - at the very least a common language, and in more pronounced cases a national identity as a whole.
2. Oh yes, the great conformation of having to learn the local language so you can at very least find a job. You are yet to address that.

1. Germans have a variety of cultures within their borders. As do the French, and the Spanish, and the Italians, and so on ad nauseum. Again, there is no unity except in government. The second argument in this is just xenophobic great replacement bullshit.

2. You've routinely ignored that most people immigrating to a country are already doing these sorts of things. My problem is that you think it should be forced on them by law, with no justification, before they enter a country.

[Nova Finis Terrae]

Not directly related to this, but since many Muslims tend to have more than 5 kids, compared to the 3 at most by most Europeans, the ethnic demographic might change towards a predominantly Arab one within the next 200 years.

Nah, second-generation immigrants are becoming accustomed to our poor reproductive habits. I describe them as 'poor' because they inevitably lead to a demographic winter, with all that that entails: an increased retirement age, reduced productivity and the risk of long-term extinction of entire populations.

[Unogonduria]

1. There are a few differences:
a) Most times, there's a predominant ethnic group in each state, despite local variation and naturally-occurring ethnic diversity. Take Germany as an example: Yes, there are some Poles, Sorbs and Czechs, but the predominant ethnic group is German. If you don't want to take Germany as an example due to its atrocities during the Second World War that partially contributed to the above statement, take for example Bulgaria then - the predominant ethnic group is Bulgarian, despite the fact Turks and Gypsies/Romas also reside here. Take another example: France. If we do not count the immigrants, the minorities there are either Germans, Italians or other smaller groups; the predominant ethnic group being French. Not directly related to this, but since many Muslims tend to have more than 5 kids, compared to the 3 at most by most Europeans, the ethnic demographic might change towards a predominantly Arab one within the next 200 years.
b) All these countries have standardized a given dialect or straight up created a new language that takes different things from each dialect from each country. Would you call such a standardization unfair and subjugating? A country cannot fair well for a long time if it is not united by something - at the very least a common language, and in more pronounced cases a national identity as a whole.
2. Oh yes, the great conformation of having to learn the local language so you can at very least find a job. You are yet to address that.

1. Germans have a variety of cultures within their borders. As do the French, and the Spanish, and the Italians, and so on ad nauseum. Again, there is no unity except in government. The second argument in this is just xenophobic great replacement bullshit.

2. You've routinely ignored that most people immigrating to a country are already doing these sorts of things. My problem is that you think it should be forced on them by law, with no justification, before they enter a country.

1. Which I stated is true, however, they are predominantly populated by the name-bearers of the country... or rather, the nations are named after their respective people. In the 19th and 20th centuries there was unity based on the national identity - which is not inherently wrong, but it can spill out into uncontrollable ultranationalism that seeks to establish ethnostates.
No, it's mathematics.
2. I've stated nothing thus far on whether few or most migrants actually do learn the language and work as productive members of society, you are putting work into my mouth. I would have to do more research on that particular point in order to be able to argue more. I said that they should do these things if they want to inhabit any country for that matter - not just European ones. "My problem is that you think it should be forced on them by law" I don't fully get what you mean, could you explain further? Are you saying you think I think that immigrants should first work and then be able to get visas/citizenships?

Not directly related to this, but since many Muslims tend to have more than 5 kids, compared to the 3 at most by most Europeans, the ethnic demographic might change towards a predominantly Arab one within the next 200 years.

Nah, second-generation immigrants are becoming accustomed to our poor reproductive habits. I describe them as 'poor' because they inevitably lead to a demographic winter, with all that that entails: an increased retirement age, reduced productivity and the risk of long-term extinction of entire populations.

My friend, thank you for introducing me to the term "demographic winter". I was aware of its properties, but not its name - finally I can use that term instead of having to explain why low birth rates are bad from scratch every time

Really? Could you give me a source? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just would like to read more on that.

[Untecna]

1. Germans have a variety of cultures within their borders. As do the French, and the Spanish, and the Italians, and so on ad nauseum. Again, there is no unity except in government. The second argument in this is just xenophobic great replacement bullshit.

2. You've routinely ignored that most people immigrating to a country are already doing these sorts of things. My problem is that you think it should be forced on them by law, with no justification, before they enter a country.

1. Which I stated is true, however, they are predominantly populated by the name-bearers of the country... or rather, the nations are named after their respective people. In the 19th and 20th centuries there was unity based on the national identity - which is not inherently wrong, but it can spill out into uncontrollable ultranationalism that seeks to establish ethnostates.
No, it's mathematics.
2. I've stated nothing thus far on whether few or most migrants actually do learn the language and work as productive members of society, you are putting work into my mouth. I would have to do more research on that particular point in order to be able to argue more. I said that they should do these things if they want to inhabit any country for that matter - not just European ones. "My problem is that you think it should be forced on them by law" I don't fully get what you mean, could you explain further? Are you saying you think I think that immigrants should first work and then be able to get visas/citizenships?

Nah, second-generation immigrants are becoming accustomed to our poor reproductive habits. I describe them as 'poor' because they inevitably lead to a demographic winter, with all that that entails: an increased retirement age, reduced productivity and the risk of long-term extinction of entire populations.

My friend, thank you for introducing me to the term "demographic winter". I was aware of its properties, but not its name - finally I can use that term instead of having to explain why low birth rates are bad from scratch every time

Really? Could you give me a source? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just would like to read more on that.

1. I'm not going to keep engaging with your weird views on how everything is a homogeny, somehow. And, no, it's bullshit predicated on bigotry.

2. So... flatly admitting you don't know what you are talking about. Why are you still trying to argue?

[Unogonduria]

1. Which I stated is true, however, they are predominantly populated by the name-bearers of the country... or rather, the nations are named after their respective people. In the 19th and 20th centuries there was unity based on the national identity - which is not inherently wrong, but it can spill out into uncontrollable ultranationalism that seeks to establish ethnostates.
No, it's mathematics.
2. I've stated nothing thus far on whether few or most migrants actually do learn the language and work as productive members of society, you are putting work into my mouth. I would have to do more research on that particular point in order to be able to argue more. I said that they should do these things if they want to inhabit any country for that matter - not just European ones. "My problem is that you think it should be forced on them by law" I don't fully get what you mean, could you explain further? Are you saying you think I think that immigrants should first work and then be able to get visas/citizenships?

1. I'm not going to keep engaging with your weird views on how everything is a homogeny, somehow. And, no, it's bullshit predicated on bigotry.

2. So... flatly admitting you don't know what you are talking about. Why are you still trying to argue?

1. You once again put words into my mouth - this leads to nothing but meaningless discourse.
How so? If a given population reproduces 3 or 4 times faster than another one, will the former not outnumber the latter in a matter of a few centuries at most, given that the latter is not just reproducing less than the former, but is also declining?
2. No, what I claim to not have enough data about is whether the majority of migrants actually learn the language and are law-abiding citizens - this wouldn't have been a problem at all if you did not constantly project what you perceive as my argument into something that is completely different. Go on, read the entire argument and tell me where exactly I said that the majority of migrants don't do these things.

[NewAlbion]

Not learning the language of the country you are in is very disrespectful; not being able to work because of this implies that they will likely live off the taxpayer.

[Unogonduria]

Not learning the language of the country you are in is very disrespectful; not being able to work because of this implies that they will likely live off the taxpayer.

My point exactly.

[Stellar Colonies]

Moldova's pro-Russian party rejects election results, threatens protests (The Kyiv Independent)
By Tim Zadorozhnyy

The Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM) does not recognize the results of the parliamentary elections and is threatening protests if the Constitutional Court approves them, independent Moldovan outlet NewsMaker reported on Oct. 7.

The announcement came as the pro-European Action and Solidarity Party (PAS), led by President Maia Sandu, secured a decisive victory in the Sept. 29 vote with just over 50% of the vote.

The result allows the party to maintain its majority and keep Moldova on a path toward European integration.

Vlad Batrincea, the parliamentary leader of the Moscow-friendly PSRM party, claimed that the elections were marred by "violations and the use of administrative resources," which, he said, "called into question the fairness of the vote."

"We cannot seriously talk about Moldova's future if there is no democracy or free elections in the country," he said. "Under such conditions, there will be no economy, no demographic growth — nothing. Elections must be fair, and the conditions for participation must be equal."

The opposition Patriotic Electoral Bloc, led by pro-Russian former President Igor Dodon and including the Socialist and Communist parties along with the new Future of Moldova, won 24% of the vote.

Dodon's bloc, backed by Moscow, has campaigned on reversing Moldova's EU integration.

When asked what steps his party would take if the Constitutional Court confirmed the results, Batrincea said that the PSRM would "continue to fight on international platforms, in the streets, in parliament — by all possible means and at all available levels."

The elections were held amid growing concerns about Russian interference.

In the days leading up to the vote, Sandu warned that if Moscow succeeded in exerting control over Moldova, "the consequences will be direct and dangerous for our country and for the entire region."

Ahead of election day, the Central Electoral Commission barred the Heart of Moldova and Greater Moldova parties from participating after security agencies uncovered evidence of illegal financing.

Intelligence reports also linked the Greater Moldova party to the Victory Bloc — a coalition of pro-Russian factions allegedly financed by exiled oligarch Ilan Shor.

The Constitutional Court is expected to review and validate the election results in the coming days.

…
The announcement came as the pro-European Action and Solidarity Party (PAS), led by President Maia Sandu, secured a decisive victory in the Sept. 29 vote with just over 50% of the vote.
…

…
The opposition Patriotic Electoral Bloc, led by pro-Russian former President Igor Dodon and including the Socialist and Communist parties along with the new Future of Moldova, won 24% of the vote.
…

[Slembana]

The Bundestag has voted to get rid of fast-track citizenship.

This is fucking disgraceful.

[Ifreann]

The Bundestag has voted to get rid of fast-track citizenship.

This is fucking disgraceful.

The fast-track option allowed applicants to wait three years if they could show advanced German comprehension and other proof of being well-integrated into German society. This was the law that the Bundestag nixed on Wednesday.

This is just blatantly counter to the ostensible positions of the anti-immigrant types. They claim to want immigrants to learn the language and to integrate, but here we see immigrants who do exactly that being kicked to the curb.

[Slembana]

The Bundestag has voted to get rid of fast-track citizenship.

This is fucking disgraceful.

The fast-track option allowed applicants to wait three years if they could show advanced German comprehension and other proof of being well-integrated into German society. This was the law that the Bundestag nixed on Wednesday.

This is just blatantly counter to the ostensible positions of the anti-immigrant types. They claim to want immigrants to learn the language and to integrate, but here we see immigrants who do exactly that being kicked to the curb.

Exactly. It’s fucking stupid to get rid of this law.

[Ifreann]

This is just blatantly counter to the ostensible positions of the anti-immigrant types. They claim to want immigrants to learn the language and to integrate, but here we see immigrants who do exactly that being kicked to the curb.

Exactly. It’s fucking stupid to get rid of this law.

There is really no possible read of this move except that they want to deny citizenship to fluent German speakers who are well integrated into German society. Fucking liberals, man, I swear.

[The BlAAtschApen]

Exactly. It’s fucking stupid to get rid of this law.

There is really no possible read of this move except that they want to deny citizenship to fluent German speakers who are well integrated into German society. Fucking liberals, man, I swear.

Heh, I could have applied under that law.

Now that that law is gone, I've been living here so long, that I can also apply under the regular process.

And given how fast bureaucracy is, it might take a few years more before I get it, if I were to apply.

[Unogonduria]

The Bundestag has voted to get rid of fast-track citizenship.

This is fucking disgraceful.

The fast-track option allowed applicants to wait three years if they could show advanced German comprehension and other proof of being well-integrated into German society. This was the law that the Bundestag nixed on Wednesday.

This is just blatantly counter to the ostensible positions of the anti-immigrant types. They claim to want immigrants to learn the language and to integrate, but here we see immigrants who do exactly that being kicked to the curb.

I do not commend that. It'd be wrong to discriminate against immigrants who put so much effort to integrating.

[Owonyaania]

There is really no possible read of this move except that they want to deny citizenship to fluent German speakers who are well integrated into German society. Fucking liberals, man, I swear.

Or maybe living 3 years somewhere even when knowing language and being "well-integrated" doesn't meant you are truly a part of that nation in a way that should make you a citizen. It's a fundamentally liberal thinking to consider belonging to a nation be about administrative criteria like what language you can speak.

[Untecna]

Macron reappoints Lecornu