Europe - The Official Thread

baldgye
Native.
Click to expand...

That isnt accurate in my own opinion. But even you are using the word immigrant in solely in association with muslims. That is just not doing the word justice. I presume a second generation english immigrant born in China doesnt neccesarily consider themselves a native.

I believe in the Netherlands it is similair to what @Johnnypenso posted of Canada. I dont see anything wrong with it?

edit: correction double negative
 
PocketZeven
That isnt accurate in my own opinion. But even you are using the word immigrant in association with muslims. That is just not doing the word injustice. I presume a second generation english immigrant born in China doesnt neccesarily consider themselves a native.

I believe in the Netherlands it is similair to what @Johnnypenso posted of Canada. I dont see anything wrong with it?
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with it. From a technical standpoint applying the word "immigrant" to someone who is native born of immigrant parents is incorrect but in every day usage it's very common over here. No disrespect is intended in my experience it's merely words used to identify and discuss someone's heritage, not something disparaging or malicious. I have several friends and relatives that fall into that category and can't recall any negative connotations associated with the words. Over here a "second generation" would call themselves a Canadian or second generation Canadian depending on the context.
 
Last edited:
PocketZeven
That isnt accurate in my own opinion. But even you are using the word immigrant in association with muslims. That is just not doing the word injustice. I presume a second generation english immigrant born in China doesnt neccesarily consider themselves a native.

I believe in the Netherlands it is similair to what @Johnnypenso posted of Canada. I dont see anything wrong with it?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't they?
You can be whoever you want to be an identify in anyway you want, but, if you are born and bread in Holland or England, you are Dutch or English. You didn't go anywhere, you are just as Dutch as someone born of two Dutch parents.
 
baldgye
Why wouldn't they?
You can be whoever you want to be an identify in anyway you want, but, if you are born and bread in Holland or England, you are Dutch or English. You didn't go anywhere, you are just as Dutch as someone born of two Dutch parents.
Click to expand...
Some people are proud of their heritage and prefer to identify with their parent's homeland as well. If they are comfortable with the term why would it concern you?
 
Johnnypenso
There's nothing wrong with it. From a technical standpoint applying the word "immigrant" to someone who is native born of immigrant parents is incorrect but in every day usage it's very common over here. No disrecpect is intended in my experience it's merely words used to identify and discuss someone's heritage, not something disparaging or malicious. I have several friends and relatives that fall into that category and can't recall any negative connotations associated with the words.
Click to expand...

That is negated by the "second generation" part. It implies that the parents were immigrants, which is correct.

In the Netherlands we used to have an alternative words for immigrants and natives: Allochtoon (immigrant) and Autochtoon (native). Nothing discriminating or racist about these words. However in recent years in the media and under the general public Allochtoon has been associated negatively (again mostly meaning muslims) that they are compaigning to replace the word with "Dutch with a migration background". I understand the change, but I think the word immigrant is going the same direction.

baldgye
Why wouldn't they?
You can be whoever you want to be an identify in anyway you want, but, if you are born and bread in Holland or England, you are Dutch or English. You didn't go anywhere, you are just as Dutch as someone born of two Dutch parents.
Click to expand...

If you mean in the sense of nationality and rights I agree. With Identity there should still be a word to specify ones origin (parents or older relatives). If you dislike "second generation immigrant" perhaps a child born in China from 2 english people, would be a called a "native with an english background"?

Is you problem that it isnt 100% accurate or does it have a negative association?
 
Last edited:
PocketZeven
If you mean in the sense of nationality and rights I agree. With Identity there should still be a word to specify ones origin (parents or older relatives). If you dislike "second generation immigrant" perhaps an English born in China from 2 english people, would be a called a "native with an english background"?

Is you problem that it isnt 100% accurate or does it have a negative association?
Click to expand...

My problem is that immigrant as a word, has been weaponized and sensationalised by the far right. Again, looking at that article linked in this thread by using the term 2nd generation immigrant they attempt to strip away the rights of natives based on racism (by grouping two different groups together).
In my opinion, the best way to stop this is to remove the word, take away the weapons in which are used against natives.

Identity, I can't really help with. As a white, straight man it's not something I really have ever had to think about.
 
baldgye
My problem is that immigrant as a word, has been weaponized and sensationalised by the far right. Again, looking at that article linked in this thread by using the term 2nd generation immigrant they attempt to strip away the rights of natives based on racism (by grouping two different groups together).
In my opinion, the best way to stop this is to remove the word, take away the weapons in which are used against natives.

Identity, I can't really help with. As a white, straight man it's not something I really have ever had to think about.
Click to expand...

Which article? I presume they misused the word, not specifying the origin.
 
PocketZeven
Thanks for providing the link. The article should have specify the the region has a high number of muslims. I dont see the relevance of either being first or second. I am a bit confused though, you said the use of the word is stripping away rights?
Click to expand...

This could be my cynicism going into overdrive, but this how I see using that term like the author of that article. They used descendants of immigrants (some of which only had one foreign parent), in order to bolster the figure of total immigrants in a given area. Immigrants have less rights than natives and so by grouping the two sets of people together the author is trying to suggest that they are one in the same. Immigrants and decedents of immigrants, are still immigrants. This, is wrong and from what I can see, deeply concerning.

You are right, there was no need to mention immigrants at all, but they did because it instils fear and hatred and they included descendants of immigrants to make the % higher, and therefore more scary.
 
PocketZeven
I presume a second generation english immigrant born in China doesnt neccesarily consider themselves a native.
Click to expand...

Of where? If they're born in China then they're a first-generation immigrant once they move to the UK. Perhaps with the exception of a child born to English parents who were working in China at the time.

I'm a second-generation immigrant, incidentally.
 
baldgye
This could be my cynicism going into overdrive, but this how I see using that term like the author of that article. They used descendants of immigrants (some of which only had one foreign parent), in order to bolster the figure of total immigrants in a given area. Immigrants have less rights than natives and so by grouping the two sets of people together the author is trying to suggest that they are one in the same. Immigrants and decedents of immigrants, are still immigrants. This, is wrong and from what I can see, deeply concerning.

You are right, there was no need to mention immigrants at all, but they did because it instils fear and hatred and they included descendants of immigrants to make the % higher, and therefore more scary.
Click to expand...

I think you are focusing on the wrong words here. The key words are the high population of muslims. If you left out that sentence about immigrants the article would still be the same.

TenEightyOne
Of where? If they're born in China then they're a first-generation immigrant once they move to the UK. Perhaps with the exception of a child born to English parents who were working in China at the time.

I'm a second-generation immigrant, incidentally.
Click to expand...

I see the mistake I made there. I meant a child born in China from 2 english people who take on the chinese nationality.
 
Last edited:
PocketZeven
I think you are focusing on the wrong words here. The key words are the high population of muslims. If you left out that sentence about immigrants the article would still be the same.
Click to expand...
I agree, but it was added in for a reason.

BobK
Tell me again about this whole free speech thing?
Click to expand...
What does free speech have to do with anything we are talking about?
 
BobK
Let me try again:

That's not censorship?

Or is your next question going to be, "what does censorship have to do with free speech?"
Click to expand...

That's no censorship no, that's correctly defining that someone born and bread in a country is a national of that country and not an immigrant.
It's also trying to prevent people associating the word immigrant to them, to attempt to strip them of rights they are fully legally entitled too.

Edit: I don't know if your familiar with the English language, but words and their meanings change over time. If a word becomes a weapon rather than a simple and harmless descriptor it's usage usually drops or changes. I meet very few young people who would use the word 'gay' to mean happy or pleasant, for example; oh what a gay day it is. Does that also go against free speech?
 
baldgye
I agree, but it was added in for a reason.


What does free speech have to do with anything we are talking about?
Click to expand...

I think you maybe reading too much into that specific sentence. If the reporter only used "immigrants" instead of 1st and 2nd or not include it at all, the intended reader would still only think of muslims anyways. I dont think anybody will associate it with american, chinese or even european immigrants.
I defended the concept of 2nd generation immigrant for other reasons, but I understand the context now from where you were reasoning from. But you personally should not allow the word immigrant become a bad word or weapon. I and a lot of other people are proud of their immigrant background.
 
So er, remember that Article 13 thing? As well as Article 11 that would make link taxes and such a thing?


Yeah that got passed apparently.
 
baldgye
Immigrants have less rights than natives and so by grouping the two sets of people together the author is trying to suggest that they are one in the same. Immigrants and decedents of immigrants, are still immigrants. This, is wrong and from what I can see, deeply concerning.
Click to expand...

yep, it is wrong, but imo they used it as a short way to describe who are perpetrators of these crimes without any side intention. What would be the substitute, "immigrants and Swedes of immigrant descent in 1st and 2nd generation"?

Suggesting that incorrect use of term can somehow strip people of their rights which are given by the law is a bit weird (no offence).
 
baldgye
This could be my cynicism going into overdrive, but this how I see using that term like the author of that article. They used descendants of immigrants (some of which only had one foreign parent), in order to bolster the figure of total immigrants in a given area. Immigrants have less rights than natives and so by grouping the two sets of people together the author is trying to suggest that they are one in the same. Immigrants and decedents of immigrants, are still immigrants. This, is wrong and from what I can see, deeply concerning.

You are right, there was no need to mention immigrants at all, but they did because it instils fear and hatred and they included descendants of immigrants to make the % higher, and therefore more scary.
Click to expand...

novcze
yep, it is wrong, but imo they used it as a short way to describe who are perpetrators of these crimes without any side intention. What would be the substitute, "immigrants and Swedes of immigrant descent in 1st and 2nd generation"?

Suggesting that incorrect use of term can somehow strip people of their rights which are given by the law is a bit weird (no offence).
Click to expand...

Also not entirely correct. Why would an immigrant (1st generation) have less rights?

edit: added quote
 
novcze
yep, it is wrong, but imo they used it as a short way to describe who are perpetrators of these crimes without any side intention. What would be the substitute, "immigrants and Swedes of immigrant descent in 1st and 2nd generation"?

Suggesting that incorrect use of term can somehow strip people of their rights which are given by the law is a bit weird (no offence).
Click to expand...

What about "people in Sweden" :lol: it's a meaningless figure I imagine the % would be much much smaller if it was only actual immigrants, rather than Swedes and immigrants
 
baldgye
What about "people in Sweden" :lol: it's a meaningless figure I imagine the % would be much much smaller if it was only actual immigrants, rather than Swedes and immigrants
Click to expand...
"People in Sweden" is a meaningless generic term that adds nothing to the analysis or discussion. No one has a problem saying the crime is higher in one neighbourhood or block or district or town or maybe they should just say Sweden has crime so no feelings are hurt in case that area has certain demographics or a given socio-economic status.
baldgye
My problem is that immigrant as a word, has been weaponized and sensationalised by the far right. Again, looking at that article linked in this thread by using the term 2nd generation immigrant they attempt to strip away the rights of natives based on racism (by grouping two different groups together).
In my opinion, the best way to stop this is to remove the word, take away the weapons in which are used against natives.

Identity, I can't really help with. As a white, straight man it's not something I really have ever had to think about.
Click to expand...
Curious to know why your sexual orientation or skin colour has anything to do with the discussion. Can't we just refer to you as another human being? Or is it sometimes important to identify certain immutable characteristics in order to better understand something?
 
baldgye
Syria is an appalling cluster**** that future generations will look upon us with contempt for allowing to happen.
Click to expand...
Like they will judge us for Iraq and Afghanistan?

Western governments have been paralysed to act in the middle east because those 2 conflicts went so poorly in the public consciousness.

Syria would have been the same, but with the added complexity of Russian involvement. The fight would have been justified, the loss of human life too much, the cost humongous and the conclusion ambiguous.
 
ExigeEvan
Like they will judge us for Iraq and Afghanistan?

Western governments have been paralysed to act in the middle east because those 2 conflicts went so poorly in the public consciousness.

Syria would have been the same, but with the added complexity of Russian involvement. The fight would have been justified, the loss of human life too much, the cost humongous and the conclusion ambiguous.
Click to expand...
I feel like there was a way to prevent a proxy war between two super powers, that ultimately cost the lives of millions of people and dislocated millions others while literally destroying some of the most ancient city’s ever built.
 
baldgye
I feel like there was a way to prevent a proxy war between two super powers, that ultimately cost the lives of millions of people and dislocated millions others while literally destroying some of the most ancient city’s ever built.
Click to expand...
I'm sure there was, but at a human and financial cost that Western nations could no longer justify.
 
TenEightyOne
I'm guessing it's the same reason as in Britain. Unless you attain nationality your rights to stay, work and study are different.
Click to expand...

Which specific rights? We are talking about documented immigrants who permanently have taken residence or not? I am not including refugees, people on workvisas or studentvisas etc.
 
PocketZeven
Which specific rights? We are talking about documented immigrants who permanently have taken residence or not? I am not including refugees, people on workvisas or studentvisas etc.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you're defining "immigrants" as a subset of people legally considered as "immigrants", but here are the rules pertaining to immigrants of all flavours. There is no such thing as guaranteed permanent residence for an immigrant due to the caveats covering criminal offences. The rights to stay after Brexit will also be changed for some (it seems), just as it will for British emigrants in the EU.
 
baldgye
That's no censorship no, that's correctly defining that someone born and bread in a country is a national of that country and not an immigrant.
It's also trying to prevent people associating the word immigrant to them, to attempt to strip them of rights they are fully legally entitled too.

Edit: I don't know if your familiar with the English language, but words and their meanings change over time. If a word becomes a weapon rather than a simple and harmless descriptor it's usage usually drops or changes. I meet very few young people who would use the word 'gay' to mean happy or pleasant, for example; oh what a gay day it is. Does that also go against free speech?
Click to expand...

Quite simply, you'd said the word should be removed. Perhaps we disagree on the meaning of the word "remove"? Because it seems to me that you're backpedaling here and objecting to the meaning and/or misuse of the word.

By the way, how does one "weaponize" words? Hit people over the head with dictionaries, perhaps?

I assure you, sonny boy, that I am quite familiar with the English language.
 

Similar threads

Dennisch
The GTP official energy saving thread!
Replies
6
Views
730
Adamgp
Adamgp
KSaiyu
The EU
2
Replies
49
Views
2K
Hun200kmh
Hun200kmh
Brockd43
Server Location question
Replies
3
Views
545
TenderLoins
T
Touring Mars
The Balatro Thread
Replies
9
Views
694
Touring Mars
Touring Mars
Juiposa
Greek people elect fascists to parliament?!
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
sumbrownkid
sumbrownkid

Latest Posts

Back