Live data from Hacker News

The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

economist.com

181–190 of 202 posts

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#181
post #138

> What is driving this change? AFAICT there are no major issues that should have caused this. I honestly can't imagine how you could avoid exposure to any of the incredible amount of discontent in Europe right now. European leaders have been importing millions(!) of people from incredibly violent, theocratic, illiterate, and regressive regions, to the detriment of peaceful, secular, educated, and liberal Europeans wh…

I object to this. > European leaders have been importing millions They have not imported millions. > incredibly violent, theocratic, illiterate, and regressive regions This is aggressive against millions of people. > European politicians don't seem to give much of a shit about Europeans This is hate speech.

This type of reaction is why the discussion has been polarised so much, in Europe and elsewhere. Instead of sticking on simple labels and well-worn claims of 'hate speech' you'd do better to try to refute those statements with data. Let's try, shall we?

The first statement was that 'European leaders have been importing millions'. Your simply deny this without any evidence to the contrary. The facts seem to point to the validity of the original claim, with Germany taking in more than a million migrants and refugees (these are two different categories) all by itself. Maybe it would have been closer to the truth to state 'around 1.5 million in a single year' instead of 'millions', but the original poster did not state that the claim was for a single year. All in all, the original claim has more validity than your flat-out denial.

The second claim was that these migrants and refugees come from 'incredibly violent, theocratic, illiterate, and regressive regions'. You claim this to be 'aggressive against millions of people'. Let's dissect the original claim, starting with 'violent'. This needs no discussion, those regions are violent, this being one of the stated reasons for people to leave them in the first place. The middle-east is riddled with conflict, it is a volatile region. Syria and Iraq in particular stand out but it would be foolhardy to the extreme to try to claim the rest of the region is stable and peaceful. The next part of the statement is 'theocratic'. Taken literally this is only true for part of the region from which the migrants and refugees come. Iran is a theocracy, and Iran is where a large part of those claiming to be Afghans come from. Syria and Iraq are in themselves not theocracies but the regions claimed by IS/Daesh are. The African countries from which a large part of the migrants come are not theocracies, although most of them have an islamic majority.

The claim of illiteracy applies to part of the countries from which migrants arrived to Europe. Literacy in Afghanistan is 28% - that is literacy, so the illiteracy rate is 72% [1]. Other regions fare better but compared to the near 100% literacy rate in western and northern Europe they fall short. Literacy in Africa varies wildly but none of the African countries from which migrants arrive nears 100% [2].

The third part of the original claim was that these countries are 'regressive'. This is a very subjective term and as such can not be dealt with like the other claims. It could be applied to some of the countries from which refugees (Syria, Iraq) and migrants (Somalia, Afghanistan) arrived as those countries did regress from stability into chaos due to the collapse of governmental and societal institutions.

Now to the last part of the original statement, the one which states that 'European politicians don't seem to give much of a shit about Europeans'. You call this 'hate speech', but that is simply wrong and one of the more damaging parts of your claims. Hate speech is one of those labels often used by those who wish to quell discussion (others are 'racism', 'islamophobia', 'xenophobia', 'fascism', etc.). The term 'hate speech' is relatively well-defined as being "speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation" [3]. You apply this term to a claim of politicians not looking out for their constituency. This is a total misapplication of the term, using it in such a way actually devalues it by implying that politicians who follow their own agenda (which many of them do) are no worse than, say, Westboro baptist church supporters toting claims of whatever horror being some gods punishment for homosexuality.

Do you stand by your reaction?

[1] http://www.indexmundi.com/map/?v=39&r=me&l=en [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you're right; European politics has fallen victim to ridiculous notions of ancestral guilt. Is it any wonder that people who had no involvement in something that happened hundreds of years ago are unhappy that they're being punished for it? > European unity is about more than free trade. You're right again, which is why it's insane to drive a wedge between Europeans with politically and socially untenable forced…

Just because you say it's "socially untenable forced immigration" does not make it so. You have no evidence that it is, indeed, untenable. Rants from your "expat friends" are not evidence, they are anecdotes. Germany has been accepting much more immigrant refugees than other European countries, out of moral duty but also out of economic interest. Germany has had pro-immigration programs for years before that, especia…

   Just because you say it's "socially untenable forced immigration"
   does not make it so. You have no evidence that it is, indeed, untenable.
Have a look around the suburbs of [Sweden] Stockholm, the city of Malmö, some of the suburbs of Göteborg or [France] the banlieux of Paris to get a view on what the original poster meant. There is no need for 'rants from "expat friends"' to form an opinion on the situation which has developed due to untenable migration.

Also, what do you mean by 'immigrant refugees'? There is no such thing as an 'immigrant refugee', people either come as refugee or as immigrant. You can claim that refugees are by definition immigrants. Objectively speaking this is true as they migrated from another country, but in the context of the discussion on migration it only serves to muddle the view as refugees have a special status, guaranteed by international conventions, whereas immigrants do not have this claim. This is an important distinction due to the fact that many immigrants (without valid claims of refuge) came along with the refugees from the war in Syria and Iraq. In some countries - Sweden being a good example - the majority of those claiming asylum fall under this category and as such did not have valid reasons for asylum. The insistence on grouping these different categories together only serves to erode the public support for true asylum seekers as the number of people 'hitching a ride' on the crisis quickly strains the capacity of a country to take up (true) refugees to the breaking point (viz. Sweden, again). Sweden has now 'closed its borders' (in theory, at least, in practice it still takes up around 50.000 per year).

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you're right; European politics has fallen victim to ridiculous notions of ancestral guilt. Is it any wonder that people who had no involvement in something that happened hundreds of years ago are unhappy that they're being punished for it? > European unity is about more than free trade. You're right again, which is why it's insane to drive a wedge between Europeans with politically and socially untenable forced…

Just because you say it's "socially untenable forced immigration" does not make it so. You have no evidence that it is, indeed, untenable. Rants from your "expat friends" are not evidence, they are anecdotes. Germany has been accepting much more immigrant refugees than other European countries, out of moral duty but also out of economic interest. Germany has had pro-immigration programs for years before that, especia…

   I have yet to see any evidence that they do it in higher 
   proportion that european-born population.
Evidence is available in abundance for those willing to look for it. Here is an often-discussed publication from the Swedish "Crime-prevention council" on the subject:

https://www.bra.se/bra/publikationer/arkiv/publikationer/200...

https://www.bra.se/download/18.cba82f7130f475a2f1800012697/1...

Similar publications are available from other countries, eg. The Netherlands:

https://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/FA26E32C-250B-4D1D-B3B9-3508...

I'm a migrant myself (from the Netherlands to Sweden) so this thing is interesting to me. If you read these reports you'll soon find out that it is not simply the fact that someone migrates from country A to country B which makes him or her more likely to commit crimes. A simple look at the statistics shows that immigrants from certain regions to both Sweden and the Netherlands are actually underrepresented in crime statistics, this goes for people from eg. China and Japan. People who come from eg. north-African and middle-eastern countries are over-represented. Over- or under-representation in crime statistics is more a factor of culture and cultural differences than it is a simple factor of origin.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#184
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you're saying is that a direct claim from a high-ranking Israeli politician about a conversation he had, with no apparent benefit to lying about its contents, is not enough? > right-wing groups Haaretz, a liberal Israeli newspaper, is a "right wing group"? > What does it have to do with Martin Schulz? I feel like I'm chatting with a bot; do you remember the course of our conversation? Yes, Schulz has been wor…

> So what you're saying is that a direct claim from a high-ranking Israeli politician about a conversation he had, with no apparent benefit to lying about its contents, is not enough? Exactly. Random people can claim anything. There is no credible source and Schulz never said anything like that on record. You might want to listen to what Schulz actually says. > Haaretz, a liberal Israeli newspaper, is a "right wing g…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haaretz

"... It is known for its left-wing and liberal stances on domestic and foreign issues. ..."

Yes, Wikipedia is not an original source.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-political-leanings-of-the...

"... Among the newspapers Haaretz is definitely left leaning, with some columnists in the radical left. ..."

Claiming that Haaretz is 'Repeated only by right-wing groups' is rather unbelievable, they'd be undermining their own arguments by doing so. That is, unless the 'left and radical left' in Israel is actually 'right' when compared to other countries. I don't think this is the case.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#185
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not nationalistic. One of the standard things that happens with Visa costs is reciprocity. If you charge my citizens a fee for a visa, then I'll charge your citizens. What is different here is that the EU is involved, and the EU is many countries which generally act like a bloc. So the US grants Free Visa Access to 23 of the 28 members of the EU countries and likewise those 23 countries grant Free Visa Access…

Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, and Romania are not in the Schengen Area. It is not clear to me whether by "one of the five other countries" you mean that any of them or whether you mean Poland .

You can travel to non schengen countries with a schengen visa. At least to countries which have active applications to become schengen members e.g. Cyprus. It's just that Cyprus can't issue a schengen visa. Partly one of the reasons Cyprus doesn't get as many refugees as Greece even though being geographically much closer to Syria and Turkey.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#186
post #112
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As others have stated here, this is largely a reaction to globalization and immigration issues that have been present in the world's view. Globalization has left a large portion of each country behind. Large multinational firms have moved a lot of their low-skill labor to cheaper markets and developing countries, leaving a large swath of former employees in their wake with very little perceived hope of finding anothe…

Citizens from all the countries you mention can just emigrate to Western Europe, with much less hassle. On top of that, check the terrorism statistics for these countries, it's basically non-existant (maybe Cyprus has some due to Greek-Turkish tensions). And as a further point, they're all middle-income economies 10k km away, with a combined population of 60 million people. Barely half of Mexico :)

Terrorism in Cyprus? Been living in Cyprus most of my life I don't remember hearing of any terrorist incidents other than an attempted bombing of Israeli embassy in the 80s. There's definitely more terrorist activity in Western Europe than eastern.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantic or Latin American, in my experience; it's not much fun to be forgotten, and I feel their frustration but can't think of a very good solution. "US-American" doesn't really roll off the tongue... Maybe the US could adopt the same ethnonymn as Usa, Japan? :P

Why though? Like what's wrong with being Brazilian or Chilean??

Brazilians and Chileans are Americans too. Even though they are from another continent.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or people for who English is not their first language. In Spanish at least, an "americano" is anyone from the Americas. People from the US are "estadounidenses".

Nobody says estadounidenses . The standard, common word in western hemisphere Spanish for people from the United States is an ethnic slur against us. Which should help indicate how good an idea it is to invite more people from that region to our country.

Maybe it has something to do with the US/CIA fucking up those countries.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody says estadounidenses . The standard, common word in western hemisphere Spanish for people from the United States is an ethnic slur against us. Which should help indicate how good an idea it is to invite more people from that region to our country.

Maybe it has something to do with the US/CIA fucking up those countries.

It started with the Mexican-American war of 1846, so that is a viable theory (though the CIA was not yet involved). That's the war Mexicans still teach in every Mexican school with a big famous map showing that California and Texas are Mexican territory unjustly stolen by the USA.

Re: The European Parliament votes non-bindingly to reintroduce visas for Americans

#190
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I object to this. > European leaders have been importing millions They have not imported millions. > incredibly violent, theocratic, illiterate, and regressive regions This is aggressive against millions of people. > European politicians don't seem to give much of a shit about Europeans This is hate speech.

This type of reaction is why the discussion has been polarised so much, in Europe and elsewhere. Instead of sticking on simple labels and well-worn claims of 'hate speech' you'd do better to try to refute those statements with data. Let's try, shall we? The first statement was that 'European leaders have been importing millions'. Your simply deny this without any evidence to the contrary. The facts seem to point to t…

Germany did not 'import' them. Germany gave refugess a shelter, protected by the German constitution.

Germany did not import millions of illiterate people from Afghanistan.

Attributes 'such as'. 'politician' is an attribute such as. Tactics like Goebbels who called them Volksverräter and Volksfeinde.

These are the usual tactics by the right wing propaganda: useless 'semantics' when the intend is clear: a smear campaign against politicians.

Post reply on HN