Korean Job Discussion Forums

[bigverne]

'I think what we would have most to lose is the image of the EU as being all-encompassing'

But the EU was never designed to be all encompassing. It was certainly never designed to encompass nations that are patently not European.

[mithridates]

That's possible. I won't rehash all the arguments from a few months ago (such as how 90% of Turkey's population is west of Cyprus) but The Economist favours their entrance along with a number of other magazines that I respect, and I'm in favour of at least giving them time. It won't be for at least a decade anyway.

[bigverne]

'The Economist favours their entrance along with a number of other magazines that I respect'

The Economist favours almost anything that fits into their free market, laissez-faire ideology. Turkey has plenty of opportunities for companies to make money, and for cheap immigrant labour to work for a pittance in the West. Of course they are in favour of it.

Economics is of minor importance compared to the cultural and political ramifications of allowing 80 millions muslims entry to Europe overnight.

[The Bobster]

[bucheon bum]

[bigverne]

'I've declined commenting for several days because the level of it amazes me more than I can say.'

Get over yourself. If there is anything stated that you don't agree with, then please let's hear your pearls of wisdom refuting them. Or, maybe you could make the case in support mass immigration from muslim nations into Europe. In the meantime, the people of Europe are beginning to realise that the prospect of Sharia Law is not all that appealing.

[bigverne]

'Regardless, before the US invasion, women held high positions in govt and industry, but today they are unsafe if they walk on the sidewalk in the daytime with their heads uncovered.'

You say this as it it refutes anything that has already been said; that Islam is an intolerant, totalitarian ideology, and that Europeans would be well advised to reconsider their current immigration policies that could see a massive increase in their muslim populations over the next 50 years. Now that the Iraqi people are free to choose their leaders, it is likely that they will choose ones that advocate Sharia and Islamic principles. If that's what they want then fine. Just don't expect the Dutch, Swedes, and French to sit by and abide by PC strictures which would lead to their eventual extinction as European nations.

[bigverne]

'At last count, something less than two dozen human being were involved in the destruction of of the WTC on September 11, 2001 - people here, across America, and possibly in Europe are happy to use those tiny number of people as justifactaion to hate and wish to kill a billion more ...'

Easy on the dramatics there sonny! Who's talking about killing a billion muslims. Most on this thread have merely been stating that Western countries should reconsider there policies on muslim immigration. I am not particularly worried about terrorism. What I am worried about is the importation of Islamic cultural practices, which are diametrically opposed to those of the West.

[Leslie Cheswyck]

[Ya-ta Boy]

[Ya-ta Boy]

France had a somewhat parallel problem back in the 16th & 17th Centuries.

The Huguenots were perceived as a problem because they were different. The Catholic French tried the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre which included killing as many protestants as possible, but also the kidnapping of children and forceably assimilating them by raising them in Catholic families.

Henry IV decided that wasn't a great solution to the problem so he issued the Edict of Nantes, granting considerable toleration to the Huguenots in 1598. That experiment in toleration lasted for almost a century.

Louis XIV changed the policy with the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685. The result was a talent drain as the Huguenots streamed out of France and into Holland, England, South Africa. Many scholars see a connection with the 18th Century decline of France.

Review lesson over.

Someone mentioned that the population of France is now about 10% Moslem. The numbers are roughly similar all over Western Europe.

The question is how to deal with it?

So far on this thread, no one has mentioned they'd like to see a re-play of the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. Maybe it's just an oversight, but I'll go out on a limb and assume no one really does want that.

That leaves mass expulsion as one way to deal with the problem. Does anyone vote for that?

One alternative is forced assimilation--like the French Catholics kidnapping protestant kids and raising them Catholics. I think the Americans, Australians and Canadians have all had recent policies like that vis a vis their aboriginal populations. Is anyone suggesting we bring that policy back? Please speak up.

Another alternative is shutting the borders and blocking further immigration. That presents a labor problem. The immigrants are being let in because white birth rates are falling and populations are aging. Who will do the work? Several of the EU countries have put up restrictions on Eastern Europeans moving west. Can you suggest any policies to deal with the labor shortage without immigration?

The last alternative that I can think of is to accept that the immigrants have arrived but some of them are dangerous because they are fanatics. The solution is to figure out how to separate the militants out and deal with them without turning the majority into fanatics.

Any other ideas?

[Leslie Cheswyck]

[bigverne]

'You seem to indicate you are from the UK. Please clarify something for me. Isn't the Church of England the state church of the UK? Didn't Charlie and What'shername get married outside the church because the Church didn't approve?'

The Queen is the head of the church of England, and the head of state, that it true, but it is only a ceremonial role. Apart from that, the UK is the same as other Western countries, in that our laws are not based on medieval rules laid down in the Bible, unlike in many Islamic countries, where Sharia law is enforced.

'Iraq was and Syria is a Ba'athist state. That is a secular political party. Pre-civil war Lebanon was too. Someone already mentioned Turkey. Egypt is also secular. Libya is not controlled by the mosque.'

And in all of these countries secularism was imposed, and Islam suppressed. In fact, Libya, though a pariah state is one of the least repressive in the Arab world, precisely because Gadafi has suppressed Islam and advocated his own brand of socialism. Lebanon also has a large population of Christians, Druze and Maronites, making it difficult for Shariah to be imposed.

Democratic reforms are already leading to a resurgence of Islam in Turkey, and after Gadafi is gone, who knows what might happen.

'It would appear that a good number of Arab states have been trying for some time to establish secular states.'

Correction. A good number of Western educated elites have been trying to IMPOSE secularism on Arab states. This secularism does not have strong foundations, as it has little popular appeal outside the Western educated intelligensia.

'Another alternative is shutting the borders and blocking further immigration. That presents a labor problem.'

No it doesn't. You simply bar immigration from muslim states and encourage immigration from places like Asia, or Latin America.

'One alternative is forced assimilation'

Yes, but not to the extent that you mean. Assimilation would mean that your daughters would have to wear the same school uniform as all the other girls, and not headscarves and black cloaks. It would mean no state funding for native language teaching, or religious education (as they are doing in Sweden!), no state funding for mosques or Islamic community centres. It would mean that anti-Western clerics would face immediate deportation, and that muslims would have to take it on the chin when somebody criticises Islam.

[R. S. Refugee]

BV, please learn the use the quote function, or at the very least alternating colors to diferentiate between your comments and the other fella's.

[R. S. Refugee]