On Thursday, December 10, the center-right Danish government proposed legislation that would enable immigration authorities to seize jewelry and other personal valuables from refugees.
Vox says this can’t be compared to what the Nazis did.
I say if you don’t want to be compared to Nazis, don’t act like Nazis.
Geesh.
Correction (Dec 18): I have been informed and agree that I misunderstood. Apparently the law applies only to those applying for welfare, and Danes are also required to realize assets. Thanks for the correction.
If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.
tony
I recently read a paper titled “The Political Economy of Liberal Democracy”. I think its applicable to this case. In short, I think the Danes have for a while now been moving from a liberal democracy towards an electoral democracy. The difference is that in the latter the majority rules and simple disregards or exploits the minorities.
I think Sweden is moving to that direction too.
nationalist
If you dont want people to act like Nazis then dont try to destroy their countries by allowing massive non white immigration
Ivory Bill Woodpecker
Troll cleanup in aisle 2! 😛
S Brennan
Except that #2 has a point about limiting the numbers [of any group] onto any lifeboat. Anybody who knew Chicago in 1889 would shocked beyond belief that their would be race riots in 1919.
Any massive group of immigrants are going to a) Lower the prevailing low end wage b) Increase rents of low end apts c) Increase the cost of low end food.
That is why, instead of having wealthy liberals sanctimoniously preaching tolerance to those, other than themselves, who have to face the consequence of their public piety, they should start paying their taxes and demanding tax reform so that their class starts paying some of the bills instead of always sloughing them off on the working class.
Guest
I thought the nazis fleeced their emigrants not their immigrants, or are we talking about transients between Germany and Sweden?
Anyway, this is what Europe gets for not standing up to buscheney and al that coalition of the willingly complicit.
markfromireland
No doubt to his horror and astonishment I agree with Brennan.
mfi
markfromireland
Ian,
I have difficulties with the legislation as proposed but the thrust is reasonable enough and I have to say that this posting comes under the heading of kneejerkery.
The legislation enacts for those seeking to be registered as refugees a welfare provision that applies to Danes which is that if you’re claiming welfare relief — in other words welfare aimed at those facing destitution, then the authority providing that support (which will be the local municipality) not central government is entitled to say to you “but you have assets that can be realised and these must be realised before we can subsidise you for example by providing free housing”.
I know quite a few Danes who’ve been obliged to do just that.
The “take their wedding rings” provision doesn’t exist in the legislation as proposed and was a political kite flown by a well-known blowhard who subsequently backed down very hastily indeed. What the legislation addresses is a phenomenon well known in the Middle East which is that women buy or are given gold – typically ornaments, as insurance against the effects such calamities as being widowed. By way of example every single one the female members of the “Guides” has a fairly substantial amount gold ornaments for just such an eventuality. Do you remember Nur Hussein Ghazali? She’s recently arrived in Sweden from Irak. Selling some of her gold was precisely how she’s financed getting to Sweden, renting a flat, learning Swedish, and taking a professional conversion course so that she can get a job that uses her qualifications.
mfi
markfromireland
@ Guest December 17, 2015
“Anyway, this is what Europe gets for not standing up to buscheney and al that coalition of the willingly complicit. ”
Except that the overwhelming majority of European governments in line with the vehemently expressed opinions of their electorate flat out refused to have anything to do with the Bush administration’s illegal war of agression against Irak and its people. They also refused to have anything to do with the subsequent illegal American occupation and rape of the country.
That can’t said for Americans in general and and it certainly can’t be sadi for American so-called “liberals” whose protests against what their government planned and then did were very carefully calibrated to have precisely zero impact on what their government planned and then did in Irak. One of the many reasons why I fucking despise you and people like you is because of the blatant cowardice and hypocrisy of American so-called “liberals” such as you and bastards like you. You did fuck nothing other than masturbate your consciences in public so that you could feel good about yourselves. But you pointedly leave it to people from civilised countries to attempt to ameliorate the catastrophes that your country cynically viciously with malice and with forethought caused and continues to cause throughout the Middel East. Fuck off and die.
mfi
V. Arnold
@ markfromireland
December 18, 2015
Hear, hear! Well and thoroughly said…
V.
someofparts
I appreciate S Brennan’s observations too.
I live in Atlanta, so I’ve been living with/thinking about the stuff you are discussing here all of my life.
During my childhood, Jim Crow laws were in force around here. I can tell you what it is like to grow up in an apartheid community because I did.
When Dr. King showed up, around the time I made it to my late teens, it seemed too good to be true. I was exactly the sort of starry-eyed champion of civil rights one would expect after a Jim Crow childhood.
Now, forty years later, it’s gratifying to come here and find hard-headed sorts making solid sense. Experience has obliged me to become fairly hard-headed too, and it’s good to see I’m not the only one.
As a wizened veteran of these skirmishes, what I see these days is just the ordinary jostling of competing demographics. Not pretty, not necessarily fair, but the reality of how things play out.
As to my role in it, time has shown that all my learning, and all my travel, were never going to exempt me from my social position. It’s a hell of an interesting spot to be in.
Also, fwiw, the last time I read a writer shrewd enough to see the distinctions that S Brennan articulates and MFI affirms, it was Hannah Arendt. Looks like I’m keeping pretty good company for an aging redneck.
Ian Welsh
As soon as I am a wealthy liberal I shall continue to advocate the policies I have always advocated, which include high progressive taxation, a policy I have been for when I had money, and when I was poor.
I stand corrected by Mark on the welfare provisions, of course people who can support themselves should, though the details often matter a great deal.
It is not inevitable that immigrants decrease standards of living. It is a policy choice. In a climate of austerity, they certainly will, but that is a choice. If you want immigrants to improve the standard of living, that can be arranged.
Of course, it helps to have your own currency if you want to be able to do things like that. And Welfare provisions, though usually handled by municipalities, never should be: that should always be handled by the level of government which controls the printing press.
You also need to believe that government can and should manage the economy. You can’t do what you don’t believe you can or should do.
People are very stupid about supply and demand and most people (including way too many economists and virtually every person who took only Economics 101) don’t understand how it works, how it integrates with trade, with money creation and so on.
(I should note that Denmark’s economy may well be structured such that it can’t integrate immigrants in a way to increase prosperity. Its size is also a problem. Given it still has its own currency, however, I suspect it could be made to work.)
Ian Welsh
Article corrected. As Danish welfare includes schooling and so on. I would not support such a measure in Canada or the US for lower values of jewelry because welfare, since it does not allow for real education, and is too low to live on adequately, does not allow escape from poverty. People on welfare must have some additional assets if they hope to get out of poverty
Inverness
MarkfromIreland: T American/European divide is less relevant at this point. European governments are now complicit in bombing Syria and destabilizing Libya. I understand why you would be enraged by the charge that Europeans didn’t resist the Bush doctrine, however there is plenty of neo-colonialism to go around, and it isn’t limited to the United States.
Sarkozy was quite interested in Libyan oil. Check out those Hillary emails — it’s all there. Too bad the regime change didn’t work out as planned. Ill-treatment of refugies is another scourge that doesn’t reflect well on Europe, as reports from overseas have made clear.
I agree that American progressives should have engaged in real activism to prevent Iraq. I would say the same about Europeans, who should do more to prevent these airstrikes which hurt civilians much more than ISIS.
S Brennan
Ian, this;
“…That is why, instead of having wealthy liberals sanctimoniously preaching tolerance to those, other than themselves, who have to face the consequence of their public piety…”
Was not directed at you by any means, while I may disagree with you from time to time, as I certainly do with Mark, neither of you strike me as pious hypocrites.
That said, my arguments are social, not economic, it should be very clear that the benefits of massive immigration that has occurred in the US has accrued to those that hire labor, to those that own apartment complexes and for those whose needed food expense is a very limited portion of their income since the 70’s. At the same time, those who were born too late, or to the lower 70-80%, for whom income decreased while expenses increased, were prevented from accruing capital by artificially lowered wage and higher personal expenses that the older, or wealthier citizens enjoyed.
This artificial dichotomy, where one group gains at the direct expense of the other is the reality, whatever utopian mechanism you rightfully envision does not exist, nor is it likely to be enacted…when the powerful have so much to gain by preventing it. Indeed, genuinely liberal ideals wane during times of artificially created scarcity, which would further prevent your vision greater equanimity.
You can verify my conjecture by looking at data which will corroborate the 1965 Immigration act, which expanded immigration exponentially, to a time when there were few immigrants and people felt secure in their social position…and as such, they were much more inclined to be generous. The same thing could be observed by the generosity shown by Chicagoans to the first southern migrants escaping the Jim Crowe. It was only later, when the stream of migrants seeking a better life turned into a flood that social resentments occurred. In 1919, Chicago was a powder keg waiting for a match, while in the 1880’s it welcomed all.
That is not to say the hatred between races wasn’t carefully nurtured by Chicago’s ruling class, it was, it was the perfect “no cost” social control of the working classes and did much to strengthen their grip on the city.
What I am arguing, the hypocrisy of wealthy “liberals” aside is, long term, massive migration, whatever the source, is incompatible with liberal ideals. Long term, massive migration by it’s own nature distorts society and has historically been used against the working classes to prevent them from “rationalizing” the labor market in such a manner that each worker can get some small share of productivity gains. “Liberal ideals” are essentially incompatible with long term, massive migration.
Had the USA not quadrupled the number of, and tripled the % of immigrants, for the last 50 years, the Syrian refugees who are only trying to escape the “religious” head-choppers sicked on them by Bush/Obama/Hillary, the House of Saud, Qatar..et al, they would have arrived without significant opposition. This conjecture can also be verified by looking back to when the US brought in a massive wave of Vietnamese. There was very little opposition by mainstream America in the 70’s & early 80’s to a group who fled under similar circumstances.
I included a chart that will verify the dates and volumes of peoples. While I anticipate the cause & effect argument, the history is far more compelling than anything offered in an economics classroom, a “profession” I likened to astrology before the comparison became common usage.
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/images/pubs-images/44xxx/44134-land-ForeignBornPop.png
Guest
I never said or implied that Americans won’t reap what we have sown, or anything like what you are saying. But bush stole an election in broad daylight and was clearly dangerous and gunning for war with Iraq from before 2001, with nary a peep from Europe. Did you think it wouldn’t bite you in your self righteous asses before it bites the us in the ass?
Inverness
Guest, the Iraqi invasion was denounced as barbaric by France. So your “nary a peep” argument doesn’t work.
markfromireland
@ Guest:
“was clearly dangerous and gunning for war with Iraq from before 2001, with nary a peep from Europe.”
That is a blatant and flagrant lie and you know it. There was massive European resistance right from the start including at all levels of government. That resistantance which included not only resistance within governments but also included massive protests by the electorate is why Bush & Co were forced to go war WITHOUT any support from NATO and WITHOUT any legal figleaf from the UN.
Typical fucking American liberal – full of lies and determined to drag everyone down to your level.
mfi
Ian Welsh
Massive and prolonged, yeah, almost always. There are ways to handle it FAR better, though. In Canada we spread them out thru the country, very deliberately. Give em a farm, etc…
There must be work for them, and the volume of work is more adjustable than people make out. Housing can be dealt with, etc…
As with most things, the people already there must see immigrants as creating more opportunities than they take away.
A short spike for a couple years, even large, however, can be handled. But it also requires a certain ability to assimilate people — to make them us. Some countries are pretty good at that. Despite some failures, Canada usually has been.
See the way Justin Trudeau (who I don’t like on many other issues) is welcoming refugees. These people start off like that, they are far less likely to feel they aren’t “real” Canadians.
I certainly have no mandate for Economics as a discipline. That’s the point, in many ways, Economics is so often about a certain learned helplessness.
In a healthy economy which isn’t overly dependent on trade for domestic needs, just goddamn build the houses and make money available for the jobs. It will pay back, and yeah, actually, money comes from mid-air.
But if you’ve deliberately crippled your economy with stupid trade deals and monetary unions (not the case in Denmark), well, you are boned.
These are forseeable consequences, and it has taken great intellectual labor to make it respectable to not be able to feed your own goddamn population, for example. No Statesman in 1950 would ever have uttered such nonsense.
Peter*
It’s entertaining to read a spittle flecked rant from a European directed at a, less than informed, Amerikan Liberal about the Iraq war and the moral/ethical resistance to war of European people and governments especially after Libya and especially the French.
What happened, in Europe, to those noble people and governments and their ideals when the opportunity to skewer Kaddafi and destroy that Muslim country came along?
It seems in retrospect that the rejection of Bush’s Iraq war by the French and German governments may have had more to do with mercantile considerations than the anti-war resistance publicly displayed by demonstrators and public figures.
You won’t see me defending Amerikan Liberals but it appears that many Europeans are cut from the same thin cloth.
fgd
If someone here were to suggest that the USA almost certainly railroaded Europe into Libya and Syria, I’m sure that Peter* here would be the first to denounce that as unsubstantiated conspiracy theory.
And if some latter-day Manning were to produce concrete proof of such a thing, I’m sure that Peter* here would be the first to demand he go in front of a firing squad.
And the latter assertion is not mere conjecture, it is based on simple observation of how the previous batch of Peter*s consistently behaved in reaction to CableGate breaking.
Plausible Deniability isn’t just for high officials, it’s a way of life for everyone in the steaming s***heap of warmongering jingos all the way down to lowly dung beetles like Peter* here.
Inverness
FGD –France certainly didn’t need to be railroaded into innumerable wars, including Syria and Libya. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/francois-hollande-obama-isis-russia-putin-syria
Sarkozy wasn’t forced into NATO, or Libya. France has also acted on her own initiative throughout Africa. Her involvement didn’t end with the Algerian War. I fail to comprehend what was so controversial about Peter’s claims. Frankly, Europe has been complicit in so much colonial, and neo-colonial adventures, I’m surprised this isn’t general knowledge. For more on this, see http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2013/08/201387113131914906.html
Mark from Ireland’s claims that European countries civilized begs the question: what does it mean for a nation to be civilized? I fail to see how Europe is so civilized, although the continent has been deeply invested in portraying herself that way — white man’s burden, and all that. Maybe I’ve been reading too much about the treatment of refugees, the austerity imposed on formerly first-world nations like Greece, and the cruel, pointless show bombings on Syria (not just an American project, last time I checked).
Frankly, I cannot see Europeans having much of a moral upper hand, and pretending otherwise is dangerous. Cut of the same cloth, indeed.
Peter*
I’m not sure what in my comment sent FGD on his deranged little rant but my analysis or criticism often loosen some peoples grip on reality and decorum ending in personal projections and misrepresentations of my positions. I have and will continue to support whistleblowers such as Manning, Snowden and Wikileaks although I do not trust or support John Kiriakou.
It may be that my not defending Amerikan or any other of todays Liberals, especially leaders, set off his reactionary Liberal response, arrogantly presuming that any criticism must come from the Right because the Centrist Liberals presume they are Leftists or at least control that spectrum.