3 ms·

This is an interesting point: the Minister fears that if he will be granted asylum, Iceland might have to show humanitarianism in action by transforming its po

This is an interesting point: the Minister fears that if he will be granted asylum, Iceland might have to show humanitarianism in action by transforming its poor treatment towards asylum seekers who seek shelter in Iceland While Iceland is generally liberal on social issues, they've traditionally been quite closed on immigration. That's partly been helped by their geographic isolation, but in recent years there has been an increase in refugees attempting to claim asylum in Iceland (e.g. fleeing the Syrian civil war), and Iceland has generally not granted those requests. So perhaps they are worried that if they start granting some kinds of political asylum they will have to grant others to be consistent.

coldtea 13y ago
>While Iceland is generally liberal on social issues, they've traditionally been quite closed on immigration. Should they be more open, though? They have a nice society going on, their way of life, customs and traditions, they want to keep having them. Would an influx of immigrants help? It's not like every place is like the US (a vast country with room to spare, composed by tons of different ethnicities, living on the land of the previous inhabitants, and with a powerful enough economy to assimilate a lot of immigrants). Not to mention: the US immigrants came to the place in ages of SLOW transportation and over a period of 400 years (with some ramping up in the 20th century). Nowadays, especially in Europe, immigration ramps up in a couple of decades or less. And, given the huge numbers, they don't even need to be assimilated that much -- if you can work in a place with millions of fellow X-speaking immigrants, and easy access to websites, tv etc in your language, why bother to learn english or change your habits at all? Consider a thought experiment: would the US be OK with an influx of 100, 200 or 300 million immigrants from islamic countries? Not terrorists, mind you. Just normal folks, that, nonetheless, would soon wish their practices and mindset be respected and reflected in laws (and, since they would be able to vote, it would be): from the right to beat their wives or persecute gays, to refusing education to their daughters? And even darker stuff like "honour killings" that would be sure to want to bring to their new country? Now, 30% is a lot to be realistic. But if immigration was "open to all", it wouldn't be that far off. Especially since, in the US, almost 100% are immigrants anyway (just over the course of centuries, not over the course of a decade or so). There are places in Europe where the immigrant population rose to 10% or 20% in a course of a couple decades.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  >the right to beat their wives or persecute gays, to refusing education to their daughters? Conservative religious beliefs aren't exclusive to Muslim immigrants. A good percentage of the locals are fighting for these same things, and the immigrants we receive will probably skew at least more liberal than the population of their home countries (just based on the image we project around the world.) The bulk of US immigration took place from the late 19th century to the 1910s, 1920s, came from Europe, and they and their descendants are probably a plurality of the population.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >Conservative religious beliefs aren't exclusive to Muslim immigrants. Of course not. But, outside the US (or just the US's Bible-belt), they are pretty much relegated to an insignificant minority in modern secular Europe. Even catholic Italy, with it's Vatican et al, could not care much about having a PM that openly hangs around with prostitutes and models (sometimes two at a time) in coke fuelled parties (how's that for a indifferent look towards "conservative religious beliefs"?). They are, however, everything BUT a minority affair with regards to muslim immigrants. It's like only having a 2-coast US and then adding an influx of Bible-belt population (only worse). The bible-belters might end up a bit more liberal than when they were alone, but the previous 2-coasts-only country will skew to the conservative.
- anu_gupta 13y ago
  > nonetheless, would soon wish their practices and mindset be respected and reflected in laws (and, since they would be able to vote, it would be): from the right to beat their wives or persecute gays, to refusing education to their daughters? And even darker stuff like "honour killings" that would be sure to want to bring to their new country? What is this bigoted nonsense doing on HN? Those of you upvoting this should be ashamed of yourselves. PS. Most Muslims don't want to beat their wives or deny their daughters an education, nor do they want to engage in 'honor killings. If you think they do, you probably also think that the Westboro Baptist Church is an adequate proxy for average Christian beliefs.

coldtea 13y ago

>While Iceland is generally liberal on social issues, they've traditionally been quite closed on immigration. Should they be more open, though? They have a nice society going on, their way of life, customs and traditions, they want to keep having them. Would an influx of immigrants help? It's not like every place is like the US (a vast country with room to spare, composed by tons of different ethnicities, living on the land of the previous inhabitants, and with a powerful enough economy to assimilate a lot of immigrants). Not to mention: the US immigrants came to the place in ages of SLOW transportation and over a period of 400 years (with some ramping up in the 20th century). Nowadays, especially in Europe, immigration ramps up in a couple of decades or less. And, given the huge numbers, they don't even need to be assimilated that much -- if you can work in a place with millions of fellow X-speaking immigrants, and easy access to websites, tv etc in your language, why bother to learn english or change your habits at all? Consider a thought experiment: would the US be OK with an influx of 100, 200 or 300 million immigrants from islamic countries? Not terrorists, mind you. Just normal folks, that, nonetheless, would soon wish their practices and mindset be respected and reflected in laws (and, since they would be able to vote, it would be): from the right to beat their wives or persecute gays, to refusing education to their daughters? And even darker stuff like "honour killings" that would be sure to want to bring to their new country? Now, 30% is a lot to be realistic. But if immigration was "open to all", it wouldn't be that far off. Especially since, in the US, almost 100% are immigrants anyway (just over the course of centuries, not over the course of a decade or so). There are places in Europe where the immigrant population rose to 10% or 20% in a course of a couple decades.

pessimizer 13y ago
>the right to beat their wives or persecute gays, to refusing education to their daughters? Conservative religious beliefs aren't exclusive to Muslim immigrants. A good percentage of the locals are fighting for these same things, and the immigrants we receive will probably skew at least more liberal than the population of their home countries (just based on the image we project around the world.) The bulk of US immigration took place from the late 19th century to the 1910s, 1920s, came from Europe, and they and their descendants are probably a plurality of the population.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >Conservative religious beliefs aren't exclusive to Muslim immigrants. Of course not. But, outside the US (or just the US's Bible-belt), they are pretty much relegated to an insignificant minority in modern secular Europe. Even catholic Italy, with it's Vatican et al, could not care much about having a PM that openly hangs around with prostitutes and models (sometimes two at a time) in coke fuelled parties (how's that for a indifferent look towards "conservative religious beliefs"?). They are, however, everything BUT a minority affair with regards to muslim immigrants. It's like only having a 2-coast US and then adding an influx of Bible-belt population (only worse). The bible-belters might end up a bit more liberal than when they were alone, but the previous 2-coasts-only country will skew to the conservative.
anu_gupta 13y ago
> nonetheless, would soon wish their practices and mindset be respected and reflected in laws (and, since they would be able to vote, it would be): from the right to beat their wives or persecute gays, to refusing education to their daughters? And even darker stuff like "honour killings" that would be sure to want to bring to their new country? What is this bigoted nonsense doing on HN? Those of you upvoting this should be ashamed of yourselves. PS. Most Muslims don't want to beat their wives or deny their daughters an education, nor do they want to engage in 'honor killings. If you think they do, you probably also think that the Westboro Baptist Church is an adequate proxy for average Christian beliefs.