I'm not talking about traditional or contemporary societies. I am talking about expectations from immigrants in eastern and western societies. If you read the OP I am comparing between Syrian Christians and Parsis in eastern societies and western attitudes to immigrants not reflected in their own migrant communities.
Oh ok, then I'll wait to hear the opinion from a Syrian Christian or Parsis from an eastern society. Sorry
Feel free to provide us with examples of your own efforts at assimilation as a migrant. The kind that you would like to see from Cambodians moving to the UK for example
I don't need to Sam. I ask nor demand nothing from their society, I am a temporary expat and as I said we are there in very small numbers. If you look at the vietnamese who live there they make an extra effort to fit into Khmer society. They are disliked by the Khmers who say there are too many of them estimated at about 1 million. They are said to take jobs from Khmers, exercise voting privileges, commit crimes and what have you. When there are any riots its always a vietnamese business that goes up in flames where they completely ignore the western expats. Western expats cannot vote nor buy land. We live there on an extended visa, they can ask us to leave anytime they want if they decided our presence was not welcome.
Parsis and the Syriac Christians you are talking about exist only in a single country (India), and so don't make for good generalizations about the ill-defined entity "eastern societies." For that, you'd need to include a holistic comparison of all eastern societies (not to mention, actually posit a definition of "eastern"). Add to the the fact that Syriac Christians are not immigrants at all, but rather converts (and that dating back almost 2000 years), and likewise the historical distance of actual Paris immigration, and you are left without any relevance whatsoever to actual attitudes towards immigration, as they exist in the societies in question today. For that, you'd need some actual immigrants. And since many more people are emigrating out of India than are immigrating to India, you are going to have trouble on that count as well.
Thats because we have more young people than we can provide jobs for, which is essentially the condition that creates immigration outwards. But even today, any Dutchman who works for ING is free to live in a Dutch expat community even for decades and need not learn a single word of the local language. He will still be treated [on the whole] as a human being rather than as someone come to steal food and jobs from other Indians. No one will object to his visiting [or not visiting] a church, hanging out only with Dutch people, preferring Dutch food, celebrating Dutch festivals or wearing western clothing.
Yes because he isn't there to take jobs and steal food from locals. he's probably there on a western contract, sends his kids to an international school and makes very few demands on the local culture. And I bet this Dutch community is relatively small.
We were colonised for a thousand years, by the Mughals and the British. Don't forget that. And yeah, a lot of Indians could do with jobs in foreign companies established in India.
I haven't. What I am saying is that the colonization you speak of is a different subject altogether than the handful of French, Russian, English or Dutch expats you have living in the environment.
Thats now. Because the global GDP of the country went from over 20% before the British to less than 4% after. In other words, there wasn't anything left to exploit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_India#GDP_estimates_2
Ok for example I remember when Danes absolutely adored foreigners, anyone who was african or asian or middle eastern was welcome. They thought it was great to have an exotic element in their very homogenized environment. When these small group of immigrants began to grow and had problems assimilating, arguing for a mosque to be built in historic Nyhaven, didn't learn the language so that schools had to set up special classes, or when what is referred to as the 'second generation' began forming gangs and fighting in their streets because they were in between two worlds and part of neither, when whole neighborhoods began to change into ghettos, or when immigrants brought family back from Yemen or Somalia to live off of the social welfare system. Then there were the cases of women having to be sent Sweden with new identities because they were threatened with honor retribution, etc etc etc the liberal welcoming attitude of the Danes changed. These small numbers would have had to have been thoroughly integrated and assimilated for this not to have happened, but in order for this to occur people would have had to readily give up some of their traditional practices and attitudes and immerse themselves into Danish society. I don't blame the immigrants for this I blame the Danish government for not looking ahead and preparing for these problems. They should have capped immigration and made certain demands like the Swiss before offering citizenship to make sure that those who did stay could do so with a certain harmony
Apparently "harmony" requires a monocultural society. Which probably explains why hundreds of thousands are killed to force people to become "tolerant". A case of very weird priorities.
Well it depends on the culture. Danes are very homogenized, small population of 5 million, they are a clanish people so they would feel a growing population who represented a different culture and having that culture spread in their environment. I remember when there was one Hindu family living in a Danish suburb (this was on the news) and they were celebrating a Hindu holiday in their yard with music, food etc. Well their neighbors all complained. Why? Well besides the fact that its not a Danish holiday, Danes wouldn't have held a party like that outside near the street with music blaring with loud speakers, its just not what they do. So of course they wanted it stopped. The fact that this made the news shows how homogenized they really were, I mean this would hardly have made headlines in a NY suburb. Anyhow what I am trying to say is that some groups blend together more easily than others. For example they have Vietnamese boat people that have integrated into their society and you never hear a peep about them, they do their thing, they haven't changed any communities, they learned the language quickly enough and they were able to assimilate and integrate in such a manner that they are never even mentioned in discussions on immigration, same thing for many West africans living there but mention a Somalian and they begin the anti-immigration rant because Somalians have caused some problems in their society. They are not fond of Albanians either.
Are these the same Danes who sent troops into Iraq and Afghanistan and were busy "liberating" them? I really do not understand western people.
Well actually the Danes didn't send troops, they sent secondary auxiliaries like medics etc. Their presence in Afghanistan and Iraq is almost nil. But even still this is a political issue not an immigration issue. They didn't send troops into Vietnam, nor Somalia, nor west africa nor Yemen but they have invited these people to live in their country and reap the benefits of life in their country.
They did send troops and national support for both invasions was very high. Regardless, its just part of the same pattern. Everyone has to be "like us" or they are worth nothing.
"Denmark will withdraw its troops from Iraq by August, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen has said. The troops, numbering about 460, will be replaced by a unit of about 50 soldiers manning four observational helicopters, he said." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6382675.stm Is this the massive amount of troops you're referring to? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 450? Hell we can put more people than that in a football stadium.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Anyway its not about 'everyone has to be like us' people have a right to protect their society from problems that are not home grown, from things that upset the social or cultural balance. Its their country, its their right. Now you haven't addressed the fact that they have invited many people from countries where there was no danish military presence, fine. But to bring up Iraq and Afghanistan is a red herring argument since it doesn't pertain to how immigrants are absorbed or not absorbed in a given society. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan has nothing to do with this. COALITION FORCES US -132,000 UK - 7,100 South Korea - 3,200 Poland - 900 Georgia - 800-850 Australia - 900 Romania - 600-865 Denmark - 460 El Salvador - 380 Bulgaria - 150
The notion of tolerance is usually about what is different from what we are used to. It doesn't require endorsement or even acceptance, but to expect that you will only tolerate a society that is exactly like you in every way is not tolerance. Probably, such xenophobic societies are better left to themselves. I grew up in a mostly Hindu neighborhood, with Diwali crackers, Holi balloons with coloured water and all night poojas with loud music. Its called diversity.
But they are not xenophobic as I told you the Danes are very liberal and open and they don't resent all and every immigrant group. So basically you are saying they should allow people to come into their society fuck it up and cost them money? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! That to you is tolerance?
