The NYTimes has a news-item In Denmark, Harsh New Laws for Immigrant ‘Ghettos’.
It is not to hard, it turns out. An easy way is to open in Google Chrome, two versions of a page, one translated and the other not. This allows you to figure out from the translated page the Danish terms on which to search in Danish.
One immediate result is that within my search, this NY Times statement
What is a ghetto? A link on the page linked here provides precise criteria
The residential area must meet at least 3 of the following 5 conditions:
Here are some links:
What has been more difficult has been to find Danish editorials about these proposals.
My view - That the definition of "ghetto" above singles out immigrant residential areas is a symptom of a severe social problem. If immigrants are not left to swim or sink on their own, but can take advantage of the "active labour market policy" then perhaps those who don't do so or at least don't prepare their children to do so should be threatened with benefit cuts. What are the practical barriers to getting an education in a country where education is free? Do these proposals address those? "Head Start" for kids is a good thing, making it compulsory with a threat of welfare benefit cuts is at best characterized as "tough love". But on the other hand if the child does not learn Danish by the time they are of school age, how will they get educated? It will make for a permanent underclass. Positive incentives and the practical means to disperse from "the projects" is good; double the punishment for crimes committed in the ghettos is to me a scary and distasteful proposition.
One thing I'm pessimistic about is that these measures be adopted in the US without any of the funding (e.g., the usual "want English-only but refuse to pay for English classes for those lacking English".)
PS: the economic immigrant comes primed to work; I don't know what attitudes prevail among the asylum immigrant.
Starting at the age of 1, “ghetto children” must be separated from their families for at least 25 hours a week, not including nap time, for mandatory instruction in “Danish values,” including the traditions of Christmas and Easter, and Danish language. Noncompliance could result in a stoppage of welfare payments. Other Danish citizens are free to choose whether to enroll children in preschool up to the age of six....
Of 22 proposals presented by the government in early March, most have been agreed upon by a parliamentary majority, and more will be subject to a vote in the fall.The New York Times struggles to make sense of its native country; and is not a reliable guide to understanding the US of A, let alone any foreign country. For any thing that matters to me, I should try to get as close to primary sources as possible. In this case, it means the Danish press.
It is not to hard, it turns out. An easy way is to open in Google Chrome, two versions of a page, one translated and the other not. This allows you to figure out from the translated page the Danish terms on which to search in Danish.
One immediate result is that within my search, this NY Times statement
mandatory instruction in “Danish values,” including the traditions of Christmas and Easter, and Danish language.is not fully verified. The instruction will be on the Danish language and values like "gender equality, community, participation and co-responsibility". Which is a relief, because mandatory training on language to me of a very different nature than mandatory religio-cultural training. Also, the proposal here had 30 hours a week rather than 25 hours.
What is a ghetto? A link on the page linked here provides precise criteria
The residential area must meet at least 3 of the following 5 conditions:
One thing to keep in mind is that Denmark is just 5.7 million people with about a half million immigrants. By way of comparison, New York City is 8.5 million people, with 3 million residents born abroad. Denmark is a "Scandinavian welfare state" with free health care and education.
- The proportion of immigrants and descendants from non-western countries exceeds 50 per cent.
- The proportion of residents aged 18-64 years who are unrelated to the labor market or education exceeds 40 per cent. calculated as average over the past 2 years.
- The number of convicted persons for violation of the Penal Code, the Firearms Act or the law on euphoric substances exceeds 2.7%. of the number of residents aged 18 and over calculated as average over the last 2 years.
- The proportion of residents aged 30-59, who only have a primary education, exceeds 50 per cent.
- The average gross income for taxpayers aged 15-64 years in the area excluding education applicants accounts for less than 55 per cent. of the average gross income for the same group in the region.
A Golden Triangle Flexicurity is a compound of flexibility and security. The Danish model has a third element - active labour market policy - and together these elements comprise the golden triangle of flexicurity.
One side of the triangle is flexible rules for hiring and firing, which make it easy for the employers to dismiss employees during downturns and hire new staff when things improve. About 25% of Danish private sector workers change jobs each year.
The second side of the triangle is unemployment security in the form of a guarantee for a legally specified unemployment benefit at a relatively high level - up to 90% for the lowest paid workers.
The third side of the triangle is the active labour market policy. An effective system is in place to offer guidance, a job or education to all unemployed. Denmark spends approx. 1.5% of its GDP on active labour market policy.The system into which immigrants are to assimilated in Denmark is very different from that in the US of A. E.g., statistica.com tells us "In April 2018, the total monthly benefits paid to unemployed people in the United States amounted to 2.53 billion U.S. dollars." That amounts to 0.15% of GDP.
Here are some links:
- How the Danish government intends to end "parallel society", i.e., ghettos by 2030.
- More on the above.
- The Danish government proposed in 2004, and 2010 to demolish and rebuild the ghettos, but did nothing. (The American equivalent would be pulling down and rebuilding public housing projects.)
- Double the punishment for crimes committed in the ghettos.
- Denmark has had mandatory language assessment in kindergarten since at least an year ago.
- A Q&A in the Danish Parliament (the answer cites "Heck-Man, James J. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 315 (5782).
pp. 1900-1902)).
What has been more difficult has been to find Danish editorials about these proposals.
My view - That the definition of "ghetto" above singles out immigrant residential areas is a symptom of a severe social problem. If immigrants are not left to swim or sink on their own, but can take advantage of the "active labour market policy" then perhaps those who don't do so or at least don't prepare their children to do so should be threatened with benefit cuts. What are the practical barriers to getting an education in a country where education is free? Do these proposals address those? "Head Start" for kids is a good thing, making it compulsory with a threat of welfare benefit cuts is at best characterized as "tough love". But on the other hand if the child does not learn Danish by the time they are of school age, how will they get educated? It will make for a permanent underclass. Positive incentives and the practical means to disperse from "the projects" is good; double the punishment for crimes committed in the ghettos is to me a scary and distasteful proposition.
One thing I'm pessimistic about is that these measures be adopted in the US without any of the funding (e.g., the usual "want English-only but refuse to pay for English classes for those lacking English".)
PS: the economic immigrant comes primed to work; I don't know what attitudes prevail among the asylum immigrant.
Logging you in...
dwc · 351 weeks ago
"A Brahmin and a sudra could share the same territory in the same way a dog and a cow can; a basic tolerance (or, if you prefer, indifference) coupled with overt aggressive behaviour every now and then. A very familiar example to all of us in India is the existence of shops and restaurants, all in the same street, catering to different ‘caste groups’ living in the same territory. The extraordinary significance of this will become apparent to those of you who know Europe a bit: Turkish cafes and shops in areas hardly populated by the indigenous people, Indian restaurants and shops in areas where only Indians live, etc. I am aware of the presence of all kinds of eating houses in the big shopping streets of Europe. This post-war phenomenon, which is due to the rise of the opulent middle classes in Europe, does not provide a counterexample to what I am saying. The ghetto formation along ethnic lines is a typical phenomenon of European culture and not, I submit, of Asian culture. It is difficult even in our modern day cities to come across a phenomenon so typical of, say, America: Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, or Hispanics generally, Blacks, Vietnamese, Chinese, etc., all have their own ghettos, territories and turf. I submit that the only thing that resembles such territories in our cultures are the cantonments – a British creation. The separate living quarters of the different ‘caste groups’ are only superficially similar to the kind of territoriality of ethnies that we are talking about."
About language:
"Let me focus on this extraordinary notion of hospitality that Derrida refers to and neglect all his other reasons why he has to speak in English. What is extraordinary about this notion is this: hospitality imposes an juridico-ethico-poltical obligation, as Derrida puts it, on the guest. By inviting you to come to my house, I impose an obligation on you as a guest, i.e. one is obliged for being a guest!
Let me begin by talking about those to whom this notion is self-evident including their half-legitimate Indian children. Today, it is taken for granted by most European populace that the non-European im- migrants ought to speak the language of the land they live in. Until recently, it was a demand only of the so-called non-democratic parties; today, they are almost the laws of the lands. In this sense, it is a juridico-ethico-political obligation to learn the language of the land you migrate to, if you are a non- European. If proposed as a pragmatic demand, one understands it: if you want to relate to the people you live with, you better learn their language. The difficulty lies in seeing how or why it is a moral obligation. The anger of the Europeans towards the ‘guest-workers’ from Maghreb countries who do not learn local languages is thus a moral and ethical anger. Clearly, they feel that their hospitality has been violated.
Their semi-legitimate children (whether from the DMK in Tamil Nadu or the Shiv Sena in Mahrashtra or whoever) reproduce this idea in a deformed fashion, when they go for their ‘language of the soil’ policy: one should learn the language of the region. Of course, myriads of post-modern leftist intellec- tuals reproduce this notion, which has also percolated into the mainstream politics. Both the politicians and the intellectuals act as though they understand the idea. My question is: do they? By way of an- swering this huge question, let me outline just four dimensions of Indian common sense that cuts across regions, languages and traditions. "
macgupta123 12p · 351 weeks ago
I do think it is a moral obligation, to as much as is possible, not to be a financial burden on your neighbors. which usually means being gainfully employed. What kinds of customer-facing jobs can a person be employed in if they don't know the language that most of the customers speak? Of course, those are not the only kinds of jobs there are; but they are the most commonly available ones, especially for people without a lot of education. If you are jobless because you can't speak the local language, and subsist on a subsidy from the state; and to "preserve your culture" you place impediments on your children (maybe just your daughters? ) learning the local language, then at some level you are doing something wrong.
Also, there is the consideration - are you there as a refugee who intends to return home? In which case you may be considered to be a guest, "atithi devo bhava" applies, etc., Or are you there as a migrant who wants to stay permanently with the rights of a citizen or permanent resident? In that case, you are no longer a guest, and "atithi devo bhava" does not apply. (Context: quoting Balu - Consider the famous Sanskrit verse: ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’. It tells us of the ethical obligation that the arrival of a ‘Guest’ (one who comes unannounced) imposes on the host. The latter should treat the guest as a Deva. The host does not and cannot impose any obligation of any sort on the Devas; instead, he is obliged to the Devas that they have come to his abode.)