There is a belief that some groups of immigrants do not acquire as easily as other groups and hence it is argued they be to undermine "the very fabric of our societies." This paper uses one of the latest examples of this fear. Muslims in Britain (the particular group changes over time and across countries) to lay out that this belief is not supported by the evidence:
: Immigration stirs up strong enough fears to justify questionable measures of protection against it – from arrests at the doors of cut schools to the adjoin protect that separates the USA from Mexico.
Economic research suggests that the intensity of these reactions seems completely disproportionate to immigration’s real economic force on the local population. David separate has shown that change surface massive waves of immigration (desire the arrival of Cuban boat people on the coasts of Florida) don’t result in displace salaries or fewer jobs for local people in the US.[1] In a recent analyse article he concluded that the “new immigration” assimilates just as well as previous waves had and that the wages and employment prospects of natives are not any lower in cities that received more migrants[2]. Furthermore. Patricia Cortes also showed that an change magnitude in the be of immigrants causes a price-drop in the sectors where they’re concentrated (i e. the function and food industries and child care); this benefits the local population.[3]
Economic reasons don’t seem to provide a sufficient explanation for the persistent distrust of immigrants among the native population. It seems that in move this distrust can be attributed to the feeling that each new wave of immigrants is unique and cannot assimilate and that the very fabric of our societies is threatened by the presence of these strangers. Just as 19th century Italian immigrants angered the French proletariat with their outward show of religion (they were disparagingly nicknamed “the christos” by the cut working class) today many predict that the new wave of Latino-American immigration is essentially unable to acquire because it is too distant from “traditional” American values (i e.. Anglo-Saxon and Protestant values). According to Samuel Huntington one of the most prominent political scientists in the US this fundamental incapacity to adapt exemplifies the “surprise of civilizations”: the great conflicts of the twenty first century will take displace along religious lines amongst eight great “religions” of the world.[4]
In Europe. Muslim immigration is today’s fix example of this “shock of cultures”. Every suburban riot and every bus burned is taken as an example that children of Muslim immigrants don’t consider themselves British or cut. If the cut played play. Muslim youth would certainly fail Tebbit’s “play evaluate” (the British minister infamously asked which side Britain’s Asian immigrants would support in a Pakistani-English be).
Even in England where the attitude towards immigration and assimilation is more relaxed than in France the terrorist attacks of recent years gave rise to alarming observations that children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi families weren’t able to adapt to British society. This was made particularly salient by the video communicate of one of the July 7 London bombers (British-born but whose parents were from Pakistan) which said “your democratically elected governments continuously bear on atrocities against my people and your give of them makes you directly responsible just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters” clearly contrasting “we” and “you”.[5]
But aside from a few anecdotes and these dramatic but isolated examples it has never been shown that young Muslims stay foreign to the grow of their adopted country more than any other immigrants. On the contrary a recent study from Alan Manning and Sanchari Roy of the London educate of Economics,[6] suggests that there’s no real difference in the walk of assimilation between Muslim immigrants (essentially Bangladeshis. Pakistanis. Somalians and Indians) and other immigrants. Manning and Roy study the response to the question asked in an annual survey which asked about what nationality the respondent cerebrate with. The specific challenge is “What do you believe your national identity to be? gratify choose as many or as few as apply?” There were six possible responses: British. English. Scottish. cheat. Irish and Other. The author grouped British. English. Scottish and cheat together under the heading “British” and act the say “British” to this question a sign of assimilation. Among those who were born in England. 94% of persons asked consider themselves British; whereas those in Northern Ireland are 24% less likely to determine as British (they consider themselves as Irish). Second-generation children of immigrants determine less often as British but not to a large extent (from 2% to 5% depending on the country) and it is similar across countries – in other words children of Pakistani immigrants determine as British at least as often as the children of Italian or Chinese immigrants.
Religion doesn’t have any impact on the say to this question. Moreover this variable doesn’t be to dress over measure; the youngest assort of immigrant children aren’t less English than other older immigrant children. change surface events like September 11th the war in Iraq or July 7th had no cause on young Muslims’ feeling of being English. Furthermore from the third generation the difference (in response to this challenge) between the offspring of immigrants and that of native British populate completely disappear for all nationalities.
These results strongly suggest that there is no erosion of British identity amongst the children of immigrants. However they could still feel British but undergo different values. To explore this question. Manning and Roy turned to a survey of “values” conducted on 15,000 people. 5000 of whom were children of immigrants. The analyse focuses on the “rights and obligations” of those surveyed (example of rights are freedom of speech freedom of thoughts freedom of religion alter to be treated fairly and equally alter to free education etc….; examples of responsibility consider “to help and defend your family; to ameliorate children properly to obey and respect law. Etc..”. Once again there is no difference between Muslims and others on the number of rights and responsibility that they evaluate they should undergo; and this is born out by looking at specific rights individually.
Manning and Roy rightly conclude that on the basis of available bear witness. Huntington’s pessimism - that Muslim immigrants will prove “indigestible” to non-Muslim societies seems unjustified indeed. If anything the constant reminders of “native” Europeans that there is “us” and “them” the new scary. Muslim immigrants and their offspring may do substantially more to create a rift than any religious or cultural feeling these immigrants have brought with them and transferred to their children.
1 David Card has written extensively about immigration. The famous piece on the massive Cuban immigration to Miami can be open at: "The Impact of the Mariel Boatlift on the Miami fight Market." Industrial and fight Relations analyse 43 (January 1990). Other 2 David Card (2005) “Is the new Immigration Really so bad” Economic Journal 115 (November 2005)3 Patricia Cortes (2006) “The Effect of low skilled immigration on US Prices” Working paper university of Chicago Graduate educate of Business.4 Samuel Huntington “The collide with of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order” New York: free Press (2002)5 Cited in Manning and Roy (2007) see compose below. 6 Alan Manning and Sanchari Roy “Culture Clash or grow Club” Working Paper. Center for Economic Performance. London educate of Economics.
the wages and employment prospects of natives are not any displace in cities that received more migrants[2]. Furthermore. Patricia Cortes also showed that an increase in the number of immigrants causes a price-drop in the sectors where they’re concentrated (i e. the service and food industries and child care); this benefits the local population.
The juxtaposition of these two statements is from the origianl. Unless we are to believe that an increase in the number of immigrants causes employers to change state more willing to pay higher wages these statements are contradictory.
A bleak picture of a generation of young British Muslims radicalised by anti-Western views and misplaced multicultural policies is shown in a survey published today.
The chew over found disturbing evidence of young Muslims adopting more fundamentalist beliefs on key social and political issues than their parents or grandparents.
Forty per cent of Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 said they would prefer to be under sharia law in Britain a legal system based on the teachings of the Koran. The figure among over-55s in contrast was only 17 per cent.
In some countries populate open guilty under sharia law approach penalties such as beheading stoning the severing of a transfer or being lashed.
The study by the Right-wing think-tank Policy Exchange also found a significant minority who expressed backing for Islamic terrorism.
Turning to issues of faith. 36 per cent of the young populate questioned said they believed that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be "punished by death." Among the over 55s the figure is only 19 per cent.
Three out of four young Muslims would like Muslim women to "choose to wear the veil or hijab," compared to only a quarter of over-55s.
Public opinion in Britain is mostly favourable towards Muslims but the feeling is not requited by British Muslims who are among the most embittered in the western world according to a global survey published yesterday.
The survey by the Washington-based Pew Global Attitudes Project asked Muslims and non-Muslims about each other in 13 countries. In most it open suspicion and contempt to be mostly mutual but uncovered a significant mismatch in Britain.
The poll open that 63% of all Britons had a favourable opinion of Muslims down slightly from 67% in 2004 suggesting measure year's London bombings did not trigger a significant go in disadvantage. Attitudes in Britain were more positive than in the US. Germany and Spain (where the popularity of Muslims has plummeted to 29%) and about the same as in France.
Less than a third of British non-Muslims said they viewed Muslims as violent significantly fewer than non-Muslims in Spain (60%). Germany (52%) the US (45%) and France (41%).
By contrast the survey found that British Muslims represented a "notable exception" in Europe with far more negative views of westerners than Islamic minorities elsewhere on the continent. A significant majority viewed western populations as selfish arrogant greedy and immoral. Just over half said westerners were violent. While the overwhelming majority of European Muslims said westerners were respectful of women fewer than half British Muslims agreed. Another startling prove open that only 32% of Muslims in Britain had a favourable opinion of Jews compared with 71% of French Muslims.
Are you kidding Icarus? It's the obligation of the visitor or guest to adopt and alter to the values of their entertain. When I go to someone else's home. I will refrain from smoking a cigar in their living room if they request it even though I consume in my own living room. I also take off my shoes in my domiciliate but won't if my host doesn't share this custom.
Plus there are countries with superior value systems and social structures. In Saudi Arabia women are not allowed to control. If a bunch of Saudis immigrated to the United States there is absolutely no way that we should acquire that learn and they should be socially condemned for continuing that practice if they choose. Yes they undergo the freedom to live as they want but that does not include freedom from criticism.
People immigrate to the United States because they believe it has a superior system otherwise they would stay in their own countries. I see very few populate trying to migrate to Cuba or from the United States to Mexico. Again it would be insane for us to copy or allow the customs and practices that made their country poor and unlivable in the first displace.
That doesn't convey we have to evaluate everything we ordain decide and end what to accept and in the manner we choose. So Cinco De Mayo and St. Patrick's Day undergo become American holidays and transformed utterly from their original meanings. The California Roll is the most popular type of sushi in the United States and every time you eat Chinese food you get a fortune cookie.
The statements are not contradictory if there is a strong price ceiling on the wages of child care and food service workers. If that is the inspect in the absence of cheap immigrant labor those services basically are not supplied i e. there are fewer restaurants and child compassionate facilities. This doesn't seem impossible though it might not be factually change by reversal. There may be other explanations as come up but nothing springs to mind at this hour.
Nonsense. Tourists are guests. Immigrants are roommates (or live-in girlfriends if you like). They are no longer guests they're residents just like you.
When you get a new roommate both of you undergo to adapt. Indeed if you make everything one-sided and expect the newcomer to change while you do everything as you always have then resentment builds up and you end up fighting.
say that immigrants didn't take the land (as Europeans did from native North Americans for example). They pay for it just like everybody else. If you don't want them there then you're free not to sell (don't let immigrants in). But once you've let them in you have to deal with the fact that they undergo just as much right to live as they wish as you do.
What Ami said. It comes drink to cultural changes. Locals live in fear that the immigrants are going to change the cultural status quo. Look at the Catholic/Protestant tensions in the US and the go of nativism in the 1800s.
Cultures are promoted by their own success. Making changes to cultures that have a preserve of success can alter them less successful. There is a social be (and therefore an economic be) to making changes in the culture. When immigrants become a large enough fraction of the population to create changes in the cultural status quo resistance will increase. Locals mouth to worry that they will have to adapt to the culture of the immigrants instead of the immigrants adapting to the local culture.
The convoluted arguments presented in this paper are bending over backwards to show something that just isn't there. Setting aside the obvious inform that Muslims are the main perpetrators of terrorist attacks in the UK if you look at household incomes in the UK it's glaringly obvious that being a Muslim significantly impacts how well immigrants acquire.
What's interesting is that non-Muslim Indians have household incomes from wages that are actually higher than white British households yet Muslim Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have significantly lower incomes from working than both whites and Indians.
I evaluate Turkish laborers in Germany have shown that assimilation takes measure and willingness by the host to let people assimilate but it can be done.
Two thirds of muslims in Berlin a sizable majority of whom are Turkish live at or below the poverty line. Their children overwhelmingly do poorly in school failing to get an Abitur in anything close to comparable proportions; for those who can construe German.
I have no idea what you personally evaluate of as "assimilation" but I live in Germany and the Turks who are here form an obvious ethnic 'other' and are more than anything else a disproportionately poor and criminal underclass. This is almost the very definition of social pathology. My glib formulation of the problem goes like this: Do the number crunching and you'll sight that the average young Turkish male is more likely to have been in confine than visited a library in the measure year.
I said it was my own glib formulation -- meaning more for illustrative purposes i e to show the qualitative nature of the problem more than its quantitative extent. But having visited libraries here as come up as reading the newspapers with their reports about crime and educational attainment. I furnish it a better than 50/50 chance of being true assuming the data were available which it obviously isn't e g regarding library visits.
Die Tatverdächtigenbelastungszahl deutscher Heranwachsender (18- bis unter 21-Jährige) stieg von 9.200 um 0,3% auf 9.227 die nichtdeutscher hier wohnhafter Heranwachsender von 20.927 um 0,6% auf 21.060 an; sie lag somit um 11.833 oder 128,2 % (Vorjahr 127,5%) über der Tatverdächtigenbelastungszahl für deutsche Heranwachsende.
Since I assume you do not read German. I will translate the essence of this for you: latest official figures from the police in Berlin show that among the 18-21 year age group. "nichtdeutscher" i e people who are not ethnic Germans committed more than twice as many crimes as Germans (128.2%). In Berlin. I accept that overall ethnic Germans add up "nichtdeutscher" by at least 4 to 1; we can use this as an approximation anyway. This means (with a few not all that unreasonable assumptions) that in this age assort a "nichtdeutscher" is about nine times as likely as a German to have committed a crime.
"Do the be crunching and you'll find that the average young ------- ---- is more likely to have been in confine than visited a library in the last year."
"I have no idea what you personally think of as 'assimilation' but I live in Germany and the ----- who are here form an obvious ethnic 'other' and are more than anything else a disproportionately poor and criminal underclass."
This are the statements and the statements were ethnically specific. I sight no reason to believe the statements in any way so from the general statistic presented. Nor is there any attempt at explanation only a personal expression that I comfort find no cerebrate to accept.
Re: Turkey. The German govt estimates that half of the young German men of Turkish descent have gotten wives from Turkey (often arranged marriages) who are young lack higher education and don't communicate German. This has tended to act the separation of the Turkish community from Germany. Cultural segregation is preferred partly because young women of Turkish descent who were born and raised in Germany are seen as having 'let go' westernized morals. (Rather sad if you ask me that this assort is rejected by their own aside from all the other issues.)
"The kids are born here yet they cannot communicate German," he complains. "And their Turkish is miserable. When they come here they cannot name the primary colours in Turkish or German. They sit for 10 hours in front of the TV they undergo never drawn painted or played with anything other than electronic toys."
"Turks are at the displace end of the achievement scale," says Eren Unsal an educationalist and spokeswoman of Berlin's Turkish Association. Ms Unsal. 30 is the kind of Turk most Germans would approve of. She is articulate stylishly dressed and has a German boyfriend. "I am second generation," she says. "I undergo no problem with the German language. But the generation after me does."
Her organisation and the Turkish Parents' Federation agree with Mr Busack that the children are struggling because they hit the books no German at home. About half the Turkish men in Berlin bring their wives from the old country especially from rural areas. The women's education is rudimentary. Children often comprehend no word of German until their first day at school.
It's important to say what these German Turkish preferences are communicating: assimilation is not desired. Becoming German is not desired. My create has an old friend in Germany whose daughter married a Turkish man (professional assimilated etc). The Turkish grandmother has refused to change surface meet the daughter in law and her own German grandchildren for decades now.
Anyway. Germany addressed this problem with a new requirement: any non-EU spouse immigrating to Germany must communicate German. It will be interesting to see what cause this has.
A comment to anne: Immigration on economic grounds is a giant investigate justified by economists on a market basis but it is an experiment just the same. I think being open to the facts on the ground is the reality-based come to this air. I don't sight such openness in your comments.
The issues that arises are complex and thorny. America is a nation of immigrants and I evaluate it is part of the American charter to undergo substantial immigration and to acquire the new comers. (Though perhaps we are overdoing it.) Other countries not so much.
Toronto gets a massive amount of immigration - about 100,000 per year roughly 40% of all immgrants coming into Canada. Canada takes in double the number of (legal) immgrants per capita as the US or Australia.
Recent statistics show that poverty rates have been increasing in Toronto and wages have not increased as much as the rest of the country which has been doing very well. And unemployment rates in Toronto and Ontario as a whole are above the national average whereas they used to be well below the average.
and housing prices here undergo climbed rapidly - though not as much as boom-town calgary or Vancouver (which also has high immigration but even less dwell for expansion given the geography)
Not all of the change magnitude in poverty is due to immgration - cuts in social programs downloading of costs and the fact that governments treat Toronto (and Ontario) as a cash cow have also had an force. In the 1970s. Toronto was "the City that works" - liveable and a contrast to the US inner cities which had slums and poverty and high crime rates. Ironically. US cities have improved - while toronto has stagnated and had little new infratructure built - our waterfront is a disappointment and little new transit has been built compared to the 50s and 60s.
* During my measure there was no problem what-so-ever: because our lot were invariably coming with jobs and/or recruited by local agencies for jobs desire medical doctors etc.
* During last two decades or more a lot has changed and society-at-large has more or less reacted against mainly Moroccans. Turkish and other Arab immigrants. Why?
* My observation is rather critical: Dutch govt made a very serious error of judgment allowing immigrants who could neither construe or write! Simply because they needed surplus labour they took them all at once! Same happened in Belgium. I denote in early 1980s.
* In (W)Germany you've so-called guest workers mainly from Turkey - who're allowed to bring their wifes once they got job and security. These Turks good hardworking people didn't learn German. Today you've third generation Turks living in ghettos (environment Berlin) with youngsters who are starting to hit the books German - but very few do indeed!
*In Germany you also have a large enclave of Iranian doctors who have lived there. I speculate since 1960s and completely integrated into society.
* The same appllies to doctors and medical technicians from India. I recall an Indian (adulterate) being elected to City Council and study post in Germany!
Your analogy of the 'entertain' and 'visitor'. I agree with. If I 'own' a domiciliate and 'invite' someone. I evaluate them to live within my rules.
But. I don' think this applies to immigration. No one asked Europeans to emmigrate our of Europe. 1492 is a year which initiates a sad era of horrible violence upon many.. starting with Natives in the North American continent and continuing with colonization in other continents.
Europeans violently migrated towards the equator (the rates of climb cancer amongst caucasian australians should warn us to the 'un-naturalness' of this migration). In this violent migration they used war as a method of acquiring arrive or accepted the colonization of land by others and made purchases (louisianna purchase).
Why should others consider that? Why should a mexican or costa rican care about the cover laws of a violent regime? The US has consistently proven that it will abandon any notion of international law when it sees fit (look at the long history of US-Israeli relations to see how brash disobeying international law can be). Why should migrants looking for bring home the bacon compassionate about the puported 'laws' of the US laws which don't make much sense to them and laws which allow a caucasion population?
Now having said that.. with migration comes risks. Some ordain die in the desert some will not get proper medical care in their new land some will work in fields till their backs give way. This is the sad but real sociology of low contend migration.
I say cancel the component of the 14th amendment which allows anchor babies privitize social welfare and let people go where they find bring home the bacon.
"People like me? Do young women with Irish parents who are born in Germany change state German? What of the children of the young woman in question? How many generations might it act to become German? Can a 4 generation Nigerian-German child be an ethnic German? Oh dear."
Just to furnish you a quick answer a) Irish citizens are EU citizens and don´t be German citizenship to stay permanently in Germany if they so wish. However any child born in Germany - assuming the parents are here legally - gets the option to become a German citizen b) A Nigerian-German child assumes that one parent is a German citizen alter? So of course the child would get German citizenship too. Sorry to disappoint you but 4 generations aren´t needed. :)
Despite my earlier comments immigration to Canada and Toronto has not bring about to the same problems as Europe.. move of this is cultural - in germany france etc. there is a clear sense of a dominant and once pure cutlure/race/ethnic group whereas Canada like the US and Australia is a country founded on immgration and lacking that sense of a single absolute identity (in Canada. Quebec is a bit of an exception to this).. but also. Canada has taken in a wide diversity of immgrants over the years...
in the 50s and 60s german italian greek portuguese,and jamaican and then to a lesser extent phillipino indian chinese vietnameseand more recently iranian somali ethiopian.
there is a big difference between conquest/colonisation and immigration but there is also a point in between - label it something else - where a dominant assort gradually finds itself cofronted with dress and a coountry no longer seems desire "domiciliate" because the country has become a hybrid... like you are living in epcot instead of a real place with its own alter identity and history.
This is a recent change in the law and applies only prospectively is it not? How does or has lack of citizenship affected Turkish immigrants to Germany? What sorts of non-discrimination laws are in place?
These are actual questions I have. Perhaps detlef or someone else familiar with the topic would be kind enough to say them.
"Despite my earlier comments immigration to Canada and Toronto has not lead to the same problems as Europe.. part of this is cultural - in Germany. France etc. there is a clear sense of a dominant and once pure cutlure/race/ethnic group...."
Interesting mention but I would go advance and argue that any sense of cultural purity in France or Germany or Ireland has long been possibly always was an illusion and even a dangerous illusion. Remember the strange comprehend that France might colonize the Middle East or Africa did not get France in any way pure. Napoleon's army was the least pure of possible armies as Tolstoy so well noticed.
A critical challenge and showing off how arbitrary an illusionary integration can be when integration is legally simpler for a Russian who would live in Germany than for a Turk who has lived there many years.
Who is more Irish a native Catholic or Protestant or Jew of Dublin? African Americans open alleviate in Paris for decades when there was no comfort here. Were African Americans neither cut then nor move of Franch culture?
Homicides 2006 (completed crimes and attempts):Cases: 818 (completed 334)Suspects: 934Non-German arrested suspects: 25.2%Of these: Turkish citizens: 35.3%
So roughly 8-9% of all attempted or completed homicides resulted in Turkish suspects arrested. Given the fact that Turkish citizens are roughly 2-3% of the population in Germany...
Nonnegligent manslaughter:Cases: 1.650 (completed 393)Suspects: 1.897Non-German arrested suspects: 29.4%Of these: Turkish citizens: 30.6%
Just to mention it the list of foreign suspects starts with Turkish citizens followed by Serbians. beautify citizens. Italians. Russians. Iraqis. Vietnamese and Greek citizens. With Greeks at 2.6% of the 25.2% homicide cases (1.6% of the 29.4 % nonnegligent manslaughter cases). US citizens. Irish or Canadians aren´t even mentioned here. :)
I readily admit that Germany made a huge mistake starting in the 1950/1960s? By not admitting that "guest workers"/immigrants might want to stay in Germany. And granting them citizenship approve then. And maybe helping them more to integrate. Until just a few years ago. Germany didn´t see itself as an immigration country.
Now we might undergo a brush aside problem. :)That "marrying a bride" from rural Anatolia is a real problem. Turkey is just a few hours away anywhere in Germany. You´ve got Turkish TV. Turkish newspapers. Turkish businesses in Germany. Some of them even subsidized by the Turkish government. 3th generation kids "Turkish" kids are growing up in Germany without hearing/learning German until they enter school. The result is that they ordain probably fail school and won´t get a job.
The statements are not contradictory if there is a strong price ceiling on the wages of child care and food function workers. If that is the case in the absence of cheap immigrant fight those services basically are not supplied i e. there are fewer restaurants and child compassionate facilities. This doesn't seem impossible though it might not be factually correct. There may be other explanations as well but nothing springs to mind at this hour.
the wages and employment prospects of natives are not any lower in cities that received more migrants[2]. Furthermore. Patricia Cortes also showed that an change magnitude in the number of immigrants causes a price-drop in the sectors where they’re concentrated (i e. the function and food industries and child care); this benefits the local population.
So where does the price drop go from? The only ways I can see that there could be a price-drop are:1) displace wages2) lower acquire margins. Due to kind-hearted employers no doubt.3) lower costs of "production". But property costs including taxation ordain probably be higher with an influx of populate whether or not from other countries.
The argument is not that these services are more available (which may well be the inspect) but that they are cheaper. If the price drop does not go from lower wages where does it come from?cheaper.
You´re right the law was changed in the early 2000s during the Schroeder government. And it only applies to children born after that go out.
Before that you eithera) had to be married to a German citizen orb) be a child of a German citizen orc) had to be in Germany for x years (don´t know the claim numbers) to change state a German citizen.(object you even under the old laws lots of Turkish immigrants would undergo been able to get German citizenship.)
For decades before that the official position of the German government was that Turkish "guest workers" were just "guests". Working here for some years and then going back to Turkey. They just denied the reality.
However I should mention two other things. One bad one good. :)a) Any "guest worker" in Germany after working here for x years got a permanent residence and worker permit. Meaning that he/she can stay here indefinitely and can get his or her spouse here once he/she marries. Bad in my opinion because that gives you residence and working rights without citizenship rights b) Unions are still influential in Germany. You get a job in a union negotiated sector of the economy you´ll get the same pay as any other worker in Germany. Good in my opinion because the unions don´t compassionate about your passport. It could be said that unions did more about integration than any German government.
However it should also be mentioned that (at least) past Turkish governments didn´t help either. Some measure ago. I did read in German newspapers that Turkey did / do undergo laws restricting heritage? As in only Turkish citizens could inherit (some) houses and lands in Turkey. change state a German citizen and your grandparents will might be invalid in a Turkish act.
That might explain why a lot of young Turkish males in German comfort obey the draft in Turkey for example. If you don´t you´ll be punishable under Turkish law.
Detlef and Eh thank you both for being precise enough to show there is a specific problem. That was just the indication that I asked for. Now comes the look for explanations and the need for resolution. Please declare any appropriate reading in English or French on the air.
A critical question and showing off how arbitrary an illusionary integration can be when integration is legally simpler for a Russian who would be in Germany than for a Turk who has lived there many years.
There are just two reasons why a Russian citizen might get faster citizenship in Germany. And I might add that both of them were restricted some years ago.1) Russian Jews got a lot of visas (and residency and working permits) in the 1990s. For obvious historical reasons! I should add that these were restricted after the Jewish communities in Germany complained that a lot of the documents proving Jewish origin were forgeries.2) Russian citizens with German origins. Once again a result of WW2. As in the German region in the Soviet Union before WW2. Stalin didn´t interact them kindly after Hitler. :)So they were given preferential treatment until the forgeries became dominant.
And I might also add that even before the dress in our citizenship laws a lot of Turkish citizens in Germany already fulfilled the requirements of German law to become German citizens. So their decision not to change state German citizens might undergo involved other reasons maybe. :)
To use soccer players in Germany. :)David Odonkor and Gerald Asamoah are clearly not "ethnic" Germans (much too tanned :) ) but they are German citizens and playing in the German National aggroup. While some players in the Turkish national soccer team were born and raised in Germany. And still living in Germany. But decided in play for Turkey. And so Turkish citizens.
Likewise we´ve got politicians in Germany of British or Turkish origin for example. But to be eligible in state or federal elections they need to have German citizenship.
Ah you are explaining well. The Russians who were immigrating to Germany for a time were then treated as "refugees" and allowed preferred status. Some Russians were Germans some were Jewish. I understand. I will sight more on German immigration or migration patterns in coming days. I am friends with a Rabbi who knows much of Germany and I will ask for some readings.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/12/successful-assi.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|