7 ms·

What you describe is pure fascism. And for the elders, maybe we should build camps to hold them? I hear a lot about how this or that part of the population "do

What you describe is pure fascism. And for the elders, maybe we should build camps to hold them? I hear a lot about how this or that part of the population "doesn't integrate". What I never hear about is why it's so important they integrate.

viraptor 9y ago
To start, I think (hope!) the parent didn't suggest that taking children is a good idea. Either human decency should stop that, or at least reading about Australian history... And I assume the grandparent posts were both about Roma people, not Romanians. Why it's important that the part of population integrates is because countries extend both rights and expectations to people. Groups of a specific culture that settle in an area and refuse to live under local laws are a problem. Because child/teen marriages are a problem. Because forcing children to beg for the families is a problem. Because living in conditions where large groups rely on begging is a problem. Etc. How can we say some parents are guilty of child abuse while other parents are just not integrating?
- oelmekki 9y ago
  That's a good point, there's indeed a problem with mafia-like behavior in Rroma groups. Don't just assume they all rely on begging, though, we see a lot of them in seasonal agriculture, and they make good money there. Regarding difference between rights and expectations, there are two layers, there. There is the laws that apply to anyone with the rights that apply to anyone, and the laws that apply to citizen and the rights that apply to citizen (which rromas are not, most of the time). I'm not a lawyer, but I would tend to think the laws most often apply to everyone and the rights most often apply to citizen, except for basic decency. There's an exception regarding the laws : when a law makes mandatory for a child to go to school, it is usually only about citizens' children. Now, we could certainly ask more of those people to disband mafias and enforce human rights. But I'm not under the impression it's what we try to do, in europe. What I see most of the time is attempts to push them away and to hell with them.
  - mantas 9y ago
    We deal with Romas here in Lithuania for decades. Most of them are citizens. Although I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were never reported to be born and have no papers.. We tried all kinds of things. Yes, we tried to get their kids to go to school. We trie to build a police outpost in their village, burned in a week :) There're NPOs working specifically with them. The only problem is lack of will on their end. As for your upper level comment, we can either leave them as outcasts' clan or make then integrate. In their current shape, they clash with modern society too much. Stealing, begging, dealing drugs, living in unregistered shacks, squatting public parks while keeping children away from education is what put them into their position in the first place. Either we look them up for all felonies they do or they have to learn to live with the rest of us. Their "special" way of life is not something that can continue and be respected in any way.
    - oelmekki 9y ago
      Well, I don't know much about Lithuania, maybe it's paradise on earth, but I assure you that here in France and in most of the world, stealing, begging and dealing drugs also happens in "integrated" populations :) But I hear you, Rromas are often linked to that, and it doesn't help. Regarding the "way of life", I find it funny it's considered a problem while I know so many friends, who nobody would say they are not integrated, who live just the same. They do seasonal winter work in tourism in mountains, seasonal summer work at beaches, and travel in between with their home/truck to visit friends and family, or just visit new places. I know three of them who have been living that way for 15 years, and nobody finds anything to say about it (except parents, of course, who would like to see them have "a real job"). Are you sure, deep inside, there is absolutely no problem of racism implied in your problems with rromas? (no need to answer this question, that's more something to ask to yourself)
      - redblacktree 9y ago
        I'm not sure your examples are comparable. It's different for an individual to live a nomadic lifestyle vs. a group.
      - 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
numismatex 9y ago
Well, for one it's important they integrate because otherwise you have liberal, wealthy people whose commentary on their plight being for nothing if they don't "solve" the problem. The reality is that so many problems to be "solved" are multi-generational affairs that too many jackasses, idiots (read members of the general public) get involved with and feel the need to "solve" in their lifetime -- mostly so they can grandstand about it. Vegans and PETA come to mind as the two most obvious and candid examples, whining about ethics while really being into their respective communities for the attention, money and pussy. Sociopaths take over every group after a time and run their own agendas on top of those of the groups', whether informally or formally. And of course they, as well as others love to share their perceptions and experiences within it because that's become part of their strategy in life. The posts in this thread alone have been disappointing and smack of both affluenza and romanticization of the homeless. "Let's solve the homeless problem, yeah!" completely forgets that where these things are taking place are living ecosystems where when one variable changes, many others domino-effect along with it. Ultimately, if you're homeless in an affluent area you can snag more crumbs and get more donations, which is why the borders between haves and have-nots are so often intense in regards to property crime. The homeless should just move somewhere affordable, where there are jobs. Money may be the greatest indicator of success but there are many common-sense reactions that people want to avoid by touting some relation to a city or that they "deserve" better than their lot in life. The knee-jerk mentality of course loves to romanticize the plights yet again and say "yeah, you really do deserve better" regardless of the personal actions on the individuals' or groups' behalf. That's so out of touch with how the world has worked for millenia that I can't do much more than point out the absurdity. So much emphasis on social pressures why they don't have jobs that cover the bills and too little emphasis on personal responsibility, including the choice to stay in the area rather than move across the country to somewhere cheaper, with more jobs in their fields, or at least an easier place to start over -- but of course, every single time it's become a Plight that Society created thus Society must take credit for rather than a personal plight created many times over that the individual is responsible for. SMH

viraptor 9y ago

To start, I think (hope!) the parent didn't suggest that taking children is a good idea. Either human decency should stop that, or at least reading about Australian history... And I assume the grandparent posts were both about Roma people, not Romanians. Why it's important that the part of population integrates is because countries extend both rights and expectations to people. Groups of a specific culture that settle in an area and refuse to live under local laws are a problem. Because child/teen marriages are a problem. Because forcing children to beg for the families is a problem. Because living in conditions where large groups rely on begging is a problem. Etc. How can we say some parents are guilty of child abuse while other parents are just not integrating?

oelmekki 9y ago
That's a good point, there's indeed a problem with mafia-like behavior in Rroma groups. Don't just assume they all rely on begging, though, we see a lot of them in seasonal agriculture, and they make good money there. Regarding difference between rights and expectations, there are two layers, there. There is the laws that apply to anyone with the rights that apply to anyone, and the laws that apply to citizen and the rights that apply to citizen (which rromas are not, most of the time). I'm not a lawyer, but I would tend to think the laws most often apply to everyone and the rights most often apply to citizen, except for basic decency. There's an exception regarding the laws : when a law makes mandatory for a child to go to school, it is usually only about citizens' children. Now, we could certainly ask more of those people to disband mafias and enforce human rights. But I'm not under the impression it's what we try to do, in europe. What I see most of the time is attempts to push them away and to hell with them.
- mantas 9y ago
  We deal with Romas here in Lithuania for decades. Most of them are citizens. Although I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were never reported to be born and have no papers.. We tried all kinds of things. Yes, we tried to get their kids to go to school. We trie to build a police outpost in their village, burned in a week :) There're NPOs working specifically with them. The only problem is lack of will on their end. As for your upper level comment, we can either leave them as outcasts' clan or make then integrate. In their current shape, they clash with modern society too much. Stealing, begging, dealing drugs, living in unregistered shacks, squatting public parks while keeping children away from education is what put them into their position in the first place. Either we look them up for all felonies they do or they have to learn to live with the rest of us. Their "special" way of life is not something that can continue and be respected in any way.
  - oelmekki 9y ago
    Well, I don't know much about Lithuania, maybe it's paradise on earth, but I assure you that here in France and in most of the world, stealing, begging and dealing drugs also happens in "integrated" populations :) But I hear you, Rromas are often linked to that, and it doesn't help. Regarding the "way of life", I find it funny it's considered a problem while I know so many friends, who nobody would say they are not integrated, who live just the same. They do seasonal winter work in tourism in mountains, seasonal summer work at beaches, and travel in between with their home/truck to visit friends and family, or just visit new places. I know three of them who have been living that way for 15 years, and nobody finds anything to say about it (except parents, of course, who would like to see them have "a real job"). Are you sure, deep inside, there is absolutely no problem of racism implied in your problems with rromas? (no need to answer this question, that's more something to ask to yourself)
    - redblacktree 9y ago
      I'm not sure your examples are comparable. It's different for an individual to live a nomadic lifestyle vs. a group.
    - 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

numismatex 9y ago

Well, for one it's important they integrate because otherwise you have liberal, wealthy people whose commentary on their plight being for nothing if they don't "solve" the problem. The reality is that so many problems to be "solved" are multi-generational affairs that too many jackasses, idiots (read members of the general public) get involved with and feel the need to "solve" in their lifetime -- mostly so they can grandstand about it. Vegans and PETA come to mind as the two most obvious and candid examples, whining about ethics while really being into their respective communities for the attention, money and pussy. Sociopaths take over every group after a time and run their own agendas on top of those of the groups', whether informally or formally. And of course they, as well as others love to share their perceptions and experiences within it because that's become part of their strategy in life. The posts in this thread alone have been disappointing and smack of both affluenza and romanticization of the homeless. "Let's solve the homeless problem, yeah!" completely forgets that where these things are taking place are living ecosystems where when one variable changes, many others domino-effect along with it. Ultimately, if you're homeless in an affluent area you can snag more crumbs and get more donations, which is why the borders between haves and have-nots are so often intense in regards to property crime. The homeless should just move somewhere affordable, where there are jobs. Money may be the greatest indicator of success but there are many common-sense reactions that people want to avoid by touting some relation to a city or that they "deserve" better than their lot in life. The knee-jerk mentality of course loves to romanticize the plights yet again and say "yeah, you really do deserve better" regardless of the personal actions on the individuals' or groups' behalf. That's so out of touch with how the world has worked for millenia that I can't do much more than point out the absurdity. So much emphasis on social pressures why they don't have jobs that cover the bills and too little emphasis on personal responsibility, including the choice to stay in the area rather than move across the country to somewhere cheaper, with more jobs in their fields, or at least an easier place to start over -- but of course, every single time it's become a Plight that Society created thus Society must take credit for rather than a personal plight created many times over that the individual is responsible for. SMH