Хорошие аргументы от Нику Попеску I see a lot of non-sensical comments about the tragedy in France coming from Moscow, Kiev, Chisinau and Bucharest (though similar arguments are made throughout Western Europe, but on a much smaller scale). A common theme is saying that multi-culturalism, liberalism and tolerance failed. And then give poor, stupid, short-sighted, naively tolerant Europeans a couple of lessons on how to live. A lot of people do it. And what they say is mostly non-sense. Here is why. 1) Blaming France for multiculturalism is like blaming the USSR for being capitalist. France is not multicultural. Sweden, Netherlands and Canada have or had adopted multiculturalism. French policy on migrants has been anti-multicultural. The French approach has been assimilationist, the opposite of multiculturalist. Using this term shows commentators have no clue what they are talking about. So please do not use terms you do not understand. At least read wikipedia before using such terms. 2) The tragedy in France - and tragedies in many other European countries - have nothing to do with alleged excessive tolerance and liberalism either. If it was about tolerance - intolerant countries would have smaller problems with terrorism or with their Muslim communities. And they dont. China and Russia have serious problems with their own Muslim communities. And Russia has the highest number of persons killed in terrorist attacks in the last two decades outside the Muslim world (ie includes Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen). Check this Terrorism Index - though it is obvious without it as well visionofhumanity.org/… 3) Yes Europe has a problem with migration. It also has a religious dimension. Yes, there is alienation, discrimination, insufficient integration and radicalization. All these problems exist. Yes, there seem to be more problems related to the Muslim communities than the Chinese or Hindu ones. But discussing this through the prism of tolerance and multiculturalism is non-sense. Because non-multicultural and intolerant societies have similar, if not bigger problems with both terrorism and parts of their Muslim communities. Again look at Russia, China, India and their recent history of terrorist acts. 4) Calling Europes approach to migration liberal is also ignorant. It might have been, but this is not the case for over 20 years at least. Yes, many European states imported labour in the 70. But calling EUs Schengen visa policy liberal is non-sense. Yes, there are a lot of Muslims who migrated to Europe. But geography explains it. There are also a lot of Indians in the Emirates and Mexicans in the US (even if US visa policy is not liberal either). And Tajiks or Ukrainians in Russia. So most Muslims are just like any other migrants - going to places which are nearby and rich. And Europe is just like any other rich and prosperous part of the world - needs migrants, is uneasy about them, but whatever migration management tools they try - they cannot stop migration flows. US and Mexico have the same situation. 5) The French tragedy is the biggest terrorist attack in France in decades. But we are talking about 12 victims. So whenever one talks of failures - Europe has coped rather well with combating and preventing such tragedies, it seems. Things might still get worse. But such events are so shocking precisely because they are so rare. And that is not a failure.
Posted on: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 08:40:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015