[Ret10Echo]

At the risk of being politically incorrect....

This is just me thinking out loud and putting some observations down.

My understanding was that the large influx of immigrants to Europe was initially back in the 70's (?)....primarily from Turkey. It suppose it seemed like the right answer. Booming economy, a need for workers in the low-end jobs and service industry. These folks came in and were willing to do the work.

Assimilation into the general society seemed to be avoided in spite of government programs that emphasized learning the local language, etc. Initially the immigrants populated the larger industrial areas because that was where the work was. As time went on the immigrant population was more commmon in less-urban areas.

The connection to the home country was maintained, either through family ties or the fact that the groups tended to live in communities together. Whether this was intentional or not is probably open for debate. My impression was that the immigrants tend to form their own enclaves for mutual support. This creates a situation where they do not really ever blend into the rest of the population. The host nation population was quite fine with this idea since they figured that if they left the immigrants alone that their would be reciprocity.

As the economy slowed there was some pushback on the part of the native population. Competition for jobs, housing etc became an issue. This is aggravated by the fact that those coming into the country were willing to work for less than what a native-born citizen would. This applied to immigrants coming from outside of Europe or from eastern Europe in more recent history.

Then look at the birth rate amongst the native population and the immigrant population. (other threads discuss this in particular) The immigrant population outpaces the native. The immigrants continue to maintain a close tie to their native culture so the idea that the children will bring the family into the new culture gets dilluted since their exposure outside of their community can be limited.

Multiply these issues with those of the Islamic faith and you get closer. Much more dedicated parents (to their religion and culture). Children are raised within the faith (madras) through their school years so the attitudes and mindset remains much closer to the home country of their parents than it does to the host nation.


A parallell to the situation here in the U.S. is debatable.

Not having specific statistics, but I believe here in the US the Hispanic immigrant population is the major contributor. Social values tend to be closer to the U.S. and the children attend the local schools (even if their is a strong ESL population within the school). I don't believe there is a parallel with the Muslim faith since their faith is the basis for not only their religion, but their social values, education, form of government and rule of law.

IMHO the slippery slope is when the things that should be sending off alarms are suppressed due to the "political correctness" issue. If I say you should integrate into society, learn the language and be a participant through citizenship I am insensitive or a bigot. If I say that our laws supercede your customs, then I am out of line....

I start to mix the words "illegal" and "rights" into the same sentence then there is issue. You have to work on the first part before you are a beneficiary of the latter.