Politics 09: Fire Reid and Steele.

[Cotigo]

Just because they're more secular doesn't negate the fact that they're a more concentrated ethnic group in Switzerland than they are here.  I'd reckon that the strength of their faith is less the issue, so much as it is that they have a different faith/ethnicity to begin with.  I think we're on the same page with this one.

Now, take a look at the minority underclasses in the US.  Yes, we are (for damn good reason) not allowed to legislate specifically against other races.  That hasn't stopped race-based legislation, or at least race-based enforcement; whether targeting activities mostly done by minorities or simply targeting minorities for crimes, I'm hard pressed to say that either is not a factor in our prison population being mostly Black and Latino.  I recall a fairly recent court case between the DEA and one of its former officers that found that the DEA was targeting minorities with a far greater frequency than they were targeting whites.  (After some Googling I can't find the exact case, and after some searching the apartment I can't find the PODLR pamphlet from the talk I went to a couple weeks ago, so I can't even look up the guy's name either.  So take this detail as salty as you'd like.)
 
Hell, look at the immigration reform movement in the US, and tell me that most of that isn't a bunch of poor (economically) whites with a chip on their shoulder about Latinos. 

We have our own issues with race--the races that US racists come into contact with frequently.  If the Muslim (secular, non-secular, what have you) population was equivalent to the US's Latino or Black population, do you really think we wouldn't be seeing a similar racist backlash?

Probably not legislatively, no, but that's about the only point I'd be willing to give the US on this note.  And, really, THAT'S only been taboo for some 50 years.  You know, after a huge social movement that had to squelch the acceptance of litigated racism, which hopefully Switzerland will get to in due course.

As for how outsiders should view it?  Certainly, we can and should condemn it.  I agree.  I agree completely.

Comments like this, though:

And I thought America had problems with Muslims. Wooooooow. Makes me wanna puke, really.

America doesn't have a fraction of the problems Europe does with Muslims. This is still really pathetic.

are fucking short-sighted and need to be called out for the utter lack of perspective they show.  I suppose I blew the number of people espousing this sentiment out of proportion in my mind, but I stand by my words.  America's just as de-facto racist as Switzerland, we're just less open and more condescending about it.

EDITS:  Just ignore 'em.  Mostly cleaning up poor word choices, grammar, etc. 

[Xeroma]

I didn't mean it like that :/

That is, I get your point, and even agree with it, but I also didn't intend to come off as saying america is problem free with muslims. On the contrary, we have ridiculous racism towards them if not in legislation but in well EVERYWHERE ELSE. Airport security comes to my mind, and I even see it in my own parents[*barf*]. It just struck me that a european contrary was scared enough to actually put something like that into legislation, but seeing the facts made me less struck and more just horribly disappointed, after I thought about it enough. And as Snow said, the precedent it gives is very much not a good one.

[superaielman]

are fucking short-sighted and need to be called out for the utter lack of perspective they show.  I suppose I blew the number of people espousing this sentiment out of proportion in my mind, but I stand by my words.  America's just as de-facto racist as Switzerland, we're just less open and more condescending about it.

The US is better equipped for a number of reasons to deal with immigration in general. Europe hits both ends of the spectrum for problems, from the UK who doesn't force any cultural migration to France who is France.  We've been shamed enough by our own past that openly racist politics are mostly a thing of the past.


De facto racism exists and is extremely hard to deal with other than making people interact. More relevant here is the US usually moving forward on the subject of race. This is a big step backwards for a normally tolerant country, which is why it is getting this kind of reaction.

I'm hard pressed to say that either is not a factor in our prison population being mostly Black and Latino. 

Lower socioeconomic status and a thousand other factors play in there, specifically the drug war. Fuck the drug war.

[NotMiki]

Just because they're more secular doesn't negate the fact that they're a more concentrated ethnic group in Switzerland than they are here.  I'd reckon that the strength of their faith is less the issue, so much as it is that they have a different faith/ethnicity to begin with.  I think we're on the same page with this one.

Not really important, but the stickler in me has to point out: Muslims in Switzerland aren't an ethnic group but a religious one (and only in a broad sense).  The reason they're so secular is because most of them are Albanians from Kosovo or Turks, two largely secular groups, and only 10% of them are Arab, and largely religious.

American Muslims are about 25% Arab, 25% African American, 35% South Asian, and 15% other groups.

Most of the time these days, Muslim is shorthand for Arab Muslim, wearing a burqa, like the woman in the poster, is a tradition from Arab countries, so this whole mess in Switzerland can be seen as a direct assault on Arab Muslims cynically designed to play up fears of them and draw the larger Muslim population into the fray by extension (because, though there are almost none of them in the country, minarets are an Islamic symbol that goes beyond that minority).

EDIT:

I'm hard pressed to say that either is not a factor in our prison population being mostly Black and Latino. 

Lower socioeconomic status and a thousand other factors play in there, specifically the drug war. Fuck the drug war.

Don't know if I've posted this before, but it gives me some hope for the future:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/us/24crime.html

[metroid composite]

Actually, anti-islam stuff in America really is surprisingly low even in the wake of 9/11:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2008/data/table_01.html

http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions

By these numbers...there are 3 times as many American Jews, and 10 times as many hate crimes against American Jews...which means per-capita there's 200% more hate crimes against Jews than Muslims.

No, this is not a complete picture by any means, but it's more a point that old prejudices die hard, and new prejudices don't get entrenched that fast.  You'll notice that the highest total hate crimes is anti-black, for instance, even though the news reports comment on anti-hispanic sentiment being a big new thing (undoubtedly it's on the rise, but still...there are more hispanic people than Black people these days, and yet 80% fewer hate crimes against hispanics).

[Grefter]

I am not even going to make this argument because Zenny did it for me.  You might not have any political movements against the Muslim population, but you beat the shit out that argument by yourself.  It isn't anything to do with that they are Muslim it is the massive reactionary response to a large scale migration of an insular ethnic group (no matter how secular it is).  So yeah you don't have an issue with Muslims in the same way in the states.

You sure as fuck do with Mexicans though.  So yeah. Edit 2 - This is in regards to having people actively trying to legislate against a specific ethnic group (and succeeding depending on how you read into things). You are clearly NOTHING like the hoi polloi in Europe, you go full on and build a fucking wall between your two countries, which is nothing at all like what would happen in Europe.  Edit 3 - And since obvious stuff has to be pointed out today it seems, this was a joke about Germany.

And Jim nothing wrong with bringing it to attention, it is the WE DON'T HAVE NONE OF DAT SHIT HERE sentiment that made me fucking want to vomit.  That is like saying Australia doesn't have the same fucking issue because we treat people all good as long as they aren't from South East Asia.

Edit - And that any of you even read that as me condoning that shit makes me sick.

Edit 1 million - And what fucking precedent Snow?  The one that was set years ago when Australia locked up Asylum seekers for half a decade before letting them out of imprisonment?  The one set in Zimbabwe when they forcibly evicted people from their land in a perverted inversion of the Apartheid?  The one set in France when they totally fucked around with Muslim residents after a chain of riots in their ghettos?  The one set in Georgia during the revolution where full blown ethnic cleansing was taking place and the RUSSIANS were blamed when they weren't even in the fucking country at the time?  How about the one in Somalia where the general people are so poor that they turn to piracy to live after the local fishing is ruined by shipping lanes and dumping of chemicals/fuel off the coast because the Somalian government is far to poor to do anything about it and now those pirates are being hunted by international armies?  (these are all from THIS DECADE and most are from the last five years) Every country in the damned world is chock full of humans and they are a horribly reactionary defensive beast that are continually making bad choices because they perceive something hostile happening and this is -nothing new- the precedent was set years ago and the precedent was to be a dick.  What we are doing is getting better about and every lapse is just one more sign that we have further to go.

[NotMiki]

I really think you're underselling the religious aspect of what's going on in Switzerland, Gref.  Sharia law, rights of women, and the threat of a "parallel society" were all explicitly referenced in the anti-minaret campaign.  That plus the poster says that religion is the focal point of the current action, even if general anti-immigrant animosity is the true purpose.  Same with the issues in France (but not the UK, where the anti-immigrants are, uh, less discriminatory).

Not sure what it means in the long run, but the tone on immigration (and when we say immigration, we pretty much mean illegal Mexicans) has actually cooled somewhat in America over the last couple years.  Why?  Two things stand out: first, W. was a proponent of sensible immigration reform, and to a lot of his supporters who were simmering on the issue that was a slap in the face that dovetailed very well with the other reasons he lost popularity, this being 2005.  Those people are too busy being mad at Obama for issues he's actually doing stuff about to get huffy over something on the back burner.  Second, illegal immigration has slowed down since we ran out of jobs.  Broad consensus from most political angles seems to be it's just not worth worrying about until we get other shit taken care of.

Pretty much the only big immigration news this year in the US was the controversy over new tactics being used to clamp down on illegal workers (and an interesting related Supreme Court case interpreting the word "purposefully" in an anti-identity theft statute.)

[Grefter]

The religious aspect is about fear of migrants not integrating with the culture of the country, it is a very common worry and complaint from this sector (see any complaint you have heard from that quarter regarding Mexicans and the prevalence of Spanish in the South/South West), it is the same thing extrapolating itself further out because there is less cultural overlap between mainstream Swiss culture and the extremist Muslim culture (which is obviously not the majority of the people ACTUALLY migrating, but this is about fear).

It has died down in Australia as well, but it doesn't change that it is something we feel the world over (especially in First World countries when we feel our dominant culture is being threatened by people seen as migrating from the second/third world, again not reality in plenty of cases, but this is about fear).  It is not something new.  It is not something ANYONE has any fucking right to go HUR HUR WE IS MUCH BETTER about.  It is something we should be examining and going "well fuck I hope they can come to and understanding over that like we did OH WAIT WE STILL FUCKING SUCK AT IT".  There is quite clear, obvious reasons for it that you can logic out when you look at it.  Perspective makes the world go round and helps us to reflect upon ourselves.

So yeah.  My argument is exactly what I said.  No perspective.  There is some perspective.  Apply this perspective to your obvious parallels, see how it is different?  You don't have nearly as many incoming immigrants, people are feeling less threatened so they are becoming SHOCK HORROR, less reactionary and generally far more reasonable about it.  Does Switzerland still have a high intake of immigrants?  You sure as shit bet your life they do.  So what are they doing?  Feeling threatened, being reactionary and doing stupid shit because of it, fear creates a mob and a mob is crippled when it comes to thinking clearly, it takes the worst and loudest groupthink you can find and amplifies it.

So what is happening?  Same shit, different country.  Same kinds of people the world all over.

[metroid composite]

To make a small addition--while with Mexican people there hasn't been a complaint about religion, but there definitely has been a complaint about language.

Switzerland has 4 national languages, so they really haven't complained on that front.  But they are used to being predominantly christian (77%...and, hell, 27% of the population says they don't believe in god, so...there are even people who don't believe in god and call themselves Christian, to give you an idea of the pervasiveness).

Thing is, people are only bothered by immigrants when they're different.  If America got an influx of immigrants from [English] Canada, I don't think anyone would bat an eyelash.  It's the really visible differences.  Different = unknown.  The human brain fears the unknown.  And reports of Islamic terrorism only feed into that misinformation loop by confirming this unknown entity is scary.  Similarly, with Mexican immigrants, people who are accustomed to understanding the language of all their neighbors get uneasy when people speak in a language they don't understand.  This speech becomes the unknown, and from the perspective of the paranoid brain, suddenly all the employees are talking crap about their boss.

[Pyro]

Surprised this hasn't gotten more notice.

So a hacker or group of hackers gets a hold of 13 years worth of emails from the Climate Research Unit of The University of East Anglia (England). Right before an international summit on climate change attended by a US president who for the first time in at least 8 years takes it somewhat seriously. These emails are sorted through vigorously and various snippets are supposed to provide evidence of elitist scientists shutting down scientific debate and widespread fraud on the issue.

"Climategate" or a switfboat styled attack by people with various insidious motivations to soften/sabotage whatever may come out of Copenhagen?

Personally I think it is a load of bullshit perpetrated by people with political connections.

[Shale]

From what I read it boiled down to people calling those who disagree with them stupid and "conspiring" to promote theories they believed to be true over ones they believed to be false. My mind is blown, let me tell you.

[NotMiki]

Personally I think it is a load of bullshit

Seems more like conspiracy theorists than conspirators to me.

Anyway, the numbers on civil rights enforcement in the Bush years are out, and they're just what you'd expect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/us/politics/03rights.html?hp

[Cotigo]

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/aanj4/euroredditors_lets_discuss_immigrant_integration/

Related to earlier.  Interesting first post from one European (Swedish) about the problems s/he sees with the integration of Muslim immigrants, and the replies (usually) provide other interesting points of view on the matter.  Fascinating read regardless of whether or not you agree with anything said within.

[NotMiki]

Regarding the first post, it's difficult, probably impossible, for a country to perfectly balance the proper level of accommodation of immigrants.  It should come as a surprise to no one that a program the government sets up to help people, like language lessons, is abused by the unscrupulous.  There will always be people out there willing to take advantage of the kindness of others.  A government (anyone, really) shows their true mettle when they're able to craft a program that genuinely helps people and prevent it from being abused.

Classic example of this problem is charity to the homeless.  Give a homeless person a dollar, and there's a good chance that they'll use it to buy food.  There's also a good chance they'll use it to buy drugs.  There's even a decent chance they're not homeless at all and are just scam artists.  If you want to help the homeless by giving them money directly, some of the money you give out will be used badly.  But there are ways to mitigate this.  Personally, I never give money to people with better shoes than me, and always give money to people missing limbs.  The fact that someone is using a wheelchair or other prop, or is blatantly lying about their situation is not a factor to me; just because they're disingenuous doesn't mean they don't need to eat.  Homelessness ain't a popularity contest.

The US asylum program for immigrants has been abused by the cynical as well: one law firm charged immigrants money to fabricate medical documents and other records showing they were political prisoners or had been tortured by their homeland's government, and coached them on how most convincingly to claim they'd been raped and tortured (matching the methods they claimed to things the US State Dept. reports said those countries were doing).  The US has found a way to mitigate this problem, however.  It involves long prison sentences for the lawyers, and reviews of the asylum materials for their clients that will likely lead to the deportation of some of them.

One more note: Sweden in particular has accepted a HUGE number of refugees from the middle east since the Iraq war began.  Something like 10x more per capita than the US has, and more than any other country.  There are bound to be growing pains.  (going back to the earlier issue, I don't think Switzerland is experiencing anything like that at the moment, though it probably did in the late '90s with Kosovo.)

EDIT: next on the agenda for Switzerland?  A law banning separate Muslim and Jewish cemeteries.  Also a ban on burqas.  That first one I can't take as anything but good news because it's so far beyond the pale.  A vote on cemeteries would give the Swiss the option to walk back the crazy, or provoke even higher levels of (well-deserved) international condemnation.  Win-win.  Voting on a ban of burqas would be very bad, however, because if people can't stand minarets, which (there being 4 in the country) they probably don't see outside of world history classes, they probably really can't stand scary ladies in black.  A ban could only serve to heighten extremism and animosity.

EDIT 2:

CAIR's report on anti-Islamic discrimination in the US.  Upshot: hate crimes down, discrimination up.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/discrimination-up-hate-crimes-down-picture-mixed-for-american-muslims-cair-report-shows.php#more

And on a perversely comforting note: death threats against Obama are merely at the same historical level as against Clinton and Bush.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/secret-service-director-threats-against-obama-not-up.php?ref=fpa

[Grefter]

I can't see the Cemetaries one passing (why do you need religion specific cemetaries again?), but the Burqa ban is quite probable sadly since in that case they are more chiming in on the crazy shit coming out of France.

[Cotigo]

Well, the movement would ban the segregation of cemeteries, for that exact reason.  Given all the (illogical) justifications for Switzerland's recent legislation, I can't see that one not passing; if it doesn't, I can't imagine the international community not condemning them. 

Really, if they want to force cultural integration through legislation, things like this are the way; not retardedly banning architecture or dress.   

Re: Obama death threats: Huh.  I... kind of expected it, though the theatrics at some healthcare rallies implied otherwise.   It at least explains why Secret Service security hasn't been drastically ramped up.

[NotMiki]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/05/opinion/05stamm.html?ref=opinion

A soul-searching look at Switzerland's minaret decision from the inside.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/swiss-pol-apologizes-for-calling-for-ban-on-muslim-and-jewish-cemeteries.php?ref=fpb

And the Swiss politician who called for a ban of separate Muslim and Jewish cemeteries has apologized for suggesting the measure, saying he "didn't mean it like that."  Which leaves one to wonder how many ways you can mean you don't want Muslims or Jews to have separate private cemeteries.  (In originally calling for them he said, "Principle requires that one does not distinguish on the basis of origin or religion."  So presumably he also wanted Jews and Muslims to start just going to church with the Christians, I guess?)

[Grefter]

http://exiledonline.com/bailed-out-aig-forcing-poor-to-choose-between-running-water-and-food/

Privatising utlilities outlined as basic human rights requirements is a good plan.  I am glad the world is shaping up to be a marvelous place of Freedom tm.

[NotMiki]

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/12/thats_interesting.php?ref=fpblg

those videos of the pimp talking to ACORN employees?  Turns out that the audio for what he said was heavily edited and retaped.  Shocking, I know.

Gref: it may make you feel a bit better to review David Kucinich's term as mayor of Cleveland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayoral_administration_of_Dennis_Kucinich

[Cotigo]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/22/copenhagen-climate-change-mark-lynas

China essentially sabotaged the Copenhagen climate talks, according to one man attached to one of the main delegations.

[Taishyr]

Somehow I'm not terribly surprised, though I am rather disappointed. Feh.

[Cotigo]

Well, it's not like America didn't do essentially the same thing less than 10 years ago.

[AAA]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34498942/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

Senate passed the healthcare bill a few days ago.

Now this and the different bill the House passed have to be reconciled (basically by chopping off everything on the House Bill that the Senate removed), and then voted on by the House, and then Obama will sign it and it's a law.

People seem optimistic that this bill will cater to more moderate Democrats...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/house-braces-for-final-painful-compromises-but-leadership-confident-theyll-win-over-more-blue-dogs.php

...At least enough to overcome any hard leftists who are offput by the lack of a public option.

The way this is going we could have healthcare reform enacted within a few months.

[Pyro]

Well, near as I can tell most view it as effectively a mandate for people to get health insurance off the private market, and a massive subsidy for the health insurance industry. That follows the stock prices of health insurance companies lately. This is likely to end up being a death-sentence for the democratic party for the near future, if that perception really takes hold.

[AAA]

And the left spin machine is going to be hard at work trying to convince people that it's a good piece of legislation. Whether or not they'll succeed depends on just how well the bill works out, which we won't know for awhile.