> The Kingdom of Prussia in 1842 introduced a law forcing municipalities to provide social welfare to permanent residents without citizenship. As a consequence, there were attempts to prevent Yenish people from taking permanent residence.[6] Recently established settlements of Yenish, Sinti, and Roma, dubbed "gypsy colonies" (Zigeunerkolonien), were discouraged and attempts were made to incite the settlers to move away, in the form of various forms of harassment, and in some cases physical attacks.
A law meant to help a group lead to more difficulties for said group. Why does that sound all too familiar?
Many comments here are along the lines of: "we have ... gypsies ... here too and they are called ...". I recently visited a museum in (Kingston upon) Hull - 'ull. The Streetlife one. A wall board managed to describe most of the wandering tribes hereabouts (UK and Éire), where they hail from, their modus operandi, a brief history and how to refer to them with a fair chance of not causing offence. I had no idea that Ro…
> I had no idea that Roma and Romany were not the same thing ... They aren't? Would you mind saying more about what this?
There are several different groups which speak the Romani language(s). As the Romani spread throughout Europe, they began to diverge into different groups, with separate identities, dialects, traditions, etc. These groups have various names, including Rom, Sinti, Kale, Vlax, among others. The term Rom/Roma is ambiguous, because some authors use it to refer to the Romani-speaking groups collectively, others use the term to refer to particular subgroup(s) known by that name, as opposed to other subgroups such as the Sinti. So the above commenter had learned the “synonym for Romani collectively” definition, but is now exposed to the “specific Romani subgroup” definition, and is being introduced to that by people who view the first definition as incorrect. (I’m not much of a linguistic prescriptivist, so not sure if I agree it is “incorrect” per se, but certainly if one dislikes unintended controversy it is better avoided.)
A. Learned a new word: endogamy , or intermarriage within the group. It's a known root cause of genetic disorders. B. We should stop creating a war between settled peoples and wanderers.
We have some people of the road in Geneva. I'm not sure if they're Yenish or not but the usually arrive at the beginning of Spring and leave at the end of the Summer.
where do seasonal populations like you describe stay in Geneva? (I'm imagining they're not camping for the summer.)
They stay in their caravans. The set up their camp anywhere they like, on a large parking lot or a field somewhere. There are some places provided by the government, but typically that space is not enough so they set up anywhere, but are often removed by the police after a while as the permanent habitants and local government gets fed up with them as they litter or in general are in the way as they use land supposed to be used for other things.
> The Kingdom of Prussia in 1842 introduced a law forcing municipalities to provide social welfare to permanent residents without citizenship. As a consequence, there were attempts to prevent Yenish people from taking permanent residence.[6] Recently established settlements of Yenish, Sinti, and Roma, dubbed "gypsy colonies" (Zigeunerkolonien), were discouraged and attempts were made to incite the settlers to move aw…
Well, it's less that the law led to difficulties and more that the law ignited pre-existing bigotry, similar to some poor white Americans being opposed to welfare out of biases against poor black Americans thanks to a successful (implicitly racial) hysteria about "welfare queens".
The Prussians were "fine"[0] with travelers as long as they were second-class citizens who didn't have access to welfare. As soon as citizenship stopped being a requirement, they were no longer fine with them and "they just want to live her to get our money" became a compelling narrative to fuel the bigotry against them.
As a German it hurts to admit this, but Europeans are still extremely bigoted against travelers (and yes, if you prompt them, they will have very good rational reasons and cite crime statistics, which may sound familiar to Americans and suffers from the same limitations of surface-level analysis of social problems). It's just that we successfully deported and murdered enough of them in Germany that the discourse usually only involves Sinti and Roma people nowadays.
[0]: "Fine" in the sense most conservatives say they are "fine with homosexuals", i.e. "as long as they keep to their own".
Oof: > From the 1920s until the 1970s, the Swiss government had a semi-official policy of institutionalizing Yenish parents and having their children adopted by members of the sedentary Swiss population.
I don't defend that policy, but on the other hand, the children who stay and live the Yenish life will often not get a good education and will have to continue to live a life outside the regular society.
Many times throughout history it seems tied more to a refusal to conform to the consensus reality of the ruling class, e.g., not worshipping some emperor as a god, not having the same theology, questioning “settled” narratives, etc.
At least in recent history in "melting pot" Western societies it seems to be related to cultural practices that prevent integration into the broader community.
Care to share examples? Because wearong different clothing, speaking different languages and having a different religion are actually none. Discriminating because of those is actually illegal in most western democracies.
Oof: > From the 1920s until the 1970s, the Swiss government had a semi-official policy of institutionalizing Yenish parents and having their children adopted by members of the sedentary Swiss population.
I don't defend that policy, but on the other hand, the children who stay and live the Yenish life will often not get a good education and will have to continue to live a life outside the regular society.
So, while not defending taking children away from their parents, you think it has benefits? Interesting take.