Yea, inter-generational corruption, debt and incompetence; it's all the fault of those pesky immigrants.The italian election results is another slap in the face to the unlistening bureacracy in Brussels. This result follows on from the austrian elections and german election results where right wing parties are in power or have gained large support. This cannot simply be dismissed as populism. There was a laughable quote by the defeated government party in italy, "The democratic parties have been defeated by populists", the democratic parties were defeated by democracy because they refuse to listen to the people. The main reason of course for the election results is unchecked immigration into italy which the mainstream parties throughout europe refuse to talk about or deal with honestly.
We in Europe have a history of blaming minorities and/or marginalised groups for social ills , even when they have no real connection to them. It generally hasn't turned out well.I personally believe that I would share a lot of the concerns of these groupings, but I would attempt to resolve the problems in different ways than to what they are proposing.
We in Europe have a history of blaming minorities and/or marginalised groups for social ills , even when they have no real connection to them. It generally hasn't turned out well.
We in Europe have a history of blaming minorities and/or marginalised groups for social ills , even when they have no real connection to them. It generally hasn't turned out well.
That's the danger of populism; it offers simple, and usually incorrect, solutions for complex problems. It tells us that we are not to blame, rather is is some "other" and if only we deal with that other then everything will be fine.
It is a lie and it is dangerous and to ignore it is to sacrifice reason and logic on the alter of bigotry, nationalism, racism and xenophobia.
We in Europe have a history of blaming minorities and/or marginalised groups for social ills , even when they have no real connection to them. It generally hasn't turned out well.
That's the danger of populism; it offers simple, and usually incorrect, solutions for complex problems. It tells us that we are not to blame, rather is is some "other" and if only we deal with that other then everything will be fine.
It is a lie and it is dangerous and to ignore it is to sacrifice reason and logic on the alter of bigotry, nationalism, racism and xenophobia.
That has been the prevailing wisdom in europe, we cannot talk about migration into europe or illegal migration because of what happened in the second world war. Therefore anything got to do with these topics must be met with silence, that is what the mainstream parties in europe have been doing for years now and the populations have had enough of it. Silence is not a solution, the only parties prepared to talk about and address these issues are the so called "populist" parties. When we look at other western countries like Canada, Australia, Japan and USA you cannot wander into these countries as an illegal migrant, only europe sends out ships to "rescue" migrants in the sea and drops them in italy. For example Canada is lauded for its liberalist policies yet it has tight controls on migration including on refugees, there are strict criteria and they talk about numbers. Only in Europe has a blind eye been turned to this topic, we cannot talk about numbers, we cannot talk about deportation of illegal migrants. Italy has borne the brunt of this dishonesty and it has had enough
If a European politician conflates economic issues, like they are in Italy, with immigration then they are being dishonest and populist as well as racist.Why, if a European politician advocates for a similar immigration policy are they demonised as populist - or worse?
If you don't want Muslims or blacks or Jews or Johnny foreigner in your country then just be honest about it.
Oh, and each country sets its own policy on emigration, not the EU.
The “immigration crisis” as it is laughably called concerns about a million people, 2 million tops. The vast majority of whom are educated moderate middle class people from what was the only first world Arab country, before we in the West destroyed it in a proxy war with Russia to remove our dependence on Russian gas.
Agreed; the vast majority are European.The bulk of the migrants that entered germany since 2015 are not Syrians
Have you anything to back that up?and are not skilled as they are still unemployed today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation
It was a hot topic because, just like us, the Italians find it easier to blame someone else for their problems than accept their own culpability.And this was a hot topic in the Italian election..http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43209525
Have you read your link?!
The Dublin Regulation enshrines in EU law that member states are responsible for determining the status of asylum seekers. It makes it clear that the country which the asylum seeker first entered is where they must make their application.
Oh, and it deals with asylum seekers, not immigrants. It was a hot topic because, just like us, the Italians find it easier to blame someone else for their problems than accept their own culpability.
Again, have you read the link? Have you read my post?!So all your earlier comments in this thread about immigration and the Italian election are thereby invalidated because in fact the topic in the Italian election was EU asylum law, of which you agree Italian law is subject to an EU law so they are not in total control of it?
Again, have you read the link? Have you read my post?!
The EU convention states that the laws of the country where the immigrant entered the EU apply. Therefore immigrants who enter Italy are subject to Italian law and Italian law only. It is 100% up to the Italians whether they stay in Italy or not. It is a fabrication, a nonsense, a lie to suggest that EU immigration policy or law determines who or how many immigrants are allowed to stay in Italy or Ireland of Little-England.
Of course it does, at a minimum, it means asylum seekers reaching the EU whose first port of call is Italy, make their application to Italy.
That is EU law.
It is nonsensical to suggest this has no determining factor in how many immigrants\asylum seekers stay in a particular EU country.
All member state law in this area is subject to EU courts. To suggest that it is 100% up to Italians is untrue, when EU courts have several times overruled member state law.
"The CEAS is composed of a number of directives and regulations that require action by the EU Member States or are directly applicable within their national legal systems. The European Commission follows closely the full and correct implementation of CEAS and has adopted many decisions related to the application of asylum rules... The ECHR has held against several Member States for violating the EU’s legal regime on refugees on issues of detention, status of reception facilities, and lack of legal remedies."
[broken link removed]
So you are saying that the EU law stating that the Italian government and Italian law is the sole determiner of who and how many asylum seekers stay in Italy somehow limits Italy's ability to determine who and how many asylum seekers stay in Italy. Grand so.Of course it does, at a minimum, it means asylum seekers reaching the EU whose first port of call is Italy, make their application to Italy.
That is EU law.
It is nonsensical to suggest this has no determining factor in how many immigrants\asylum seekers stay in a particular EU country.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?