WOKE and proud of it....

[attofishpi]

What he writes is either pure rubbish or based ONLY on LEGAL MIGRATION - not the tidal wave of illegals.
The LINK IS HERE as to where the stats came from:-
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-violent-c ... m=referral

Headline:
Germany recorded more than 214,000 criminal acts of violence last year, according to official police statistics.

Germany recorded a large rise in violent crime in 2023, the first year without pandemic restrictions, police statistics published Saturday showed.
Welt am Sonntag, which gained exclusive access to the data, said violent crime climbed 8.6%, to 214,099 cases — a 15-year high.

It is correct that there has been a significant increase of the number of violent crimes in Germany during the last three years, which is not mentioned in de Haas' book.

The number of criminal non-Germans in Germany has significantly increased too, but so has the number of non-Germans in Germany. And as you can gather from the following figure, given the nearly parallel increase of the number of non-Germans, the percentage of criminal non-Germans among the non-Germans in Germany has not increased. There even seems to be a small decrease!

WOW. Talk about a way to make the stats look a lot prettier for those that want open borders! So immigrants have eased off slightly on their violence -woopy dooo!


Why did you not address this?:-

The number of suspects arrested rose by 7.3% to 2.246 million and 41.3% of them did not have a German passport.

Among the people without German nationality who were charged, 402,514 were described as refugees, asylum seekers and those who entered the country illegally.

...surely if nearly half of ALL violent crime is from immigrants you'd be opposed to more immigration? (if you had any sense of decency for the native population, that is.)

[Will Bouwman]

...so Danes are higher represented in lots of the more 'petty' crimes in those stats clearly.

The graph is purely VIOLENT crimes..(RELATIVE to POPULATION)

Conviction rate of VIOLENT crime relative to native DANES.

The graph says blacks and Arabs are more likely to get convicted of violent crime. If your point is that blacks and Arabs commit more violent crime, you need a different graph.

[Age]

What he writes is either pure rubbish or based ONLY on LEGAL MIGRATION - not the tidal wave of illegals.
The LINK IS HERE as to where the stats came from:-
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-violent-c ... m=referral

Headline:
Germany recorded more than 214,000 criminal acts of violence last year, according to official police statistics.

Germany recorded a large rise in violent crime in 2023, the first year without pandemic restrictions, police statistics published Saturday showed.
Welt am Sonntag, which gained exclusive access to the data, said violent crime climbed 8.6%, to 214,099 cases — a 15-year high.

It is correct that there has been a significant increase of the number of violent crimes in Germany during the last three years, which is not mentioned in de Haas' book.

The number of criminal non-Germans in Germany has significantly increased too, but so has the number of non-Germans in Germany. And as you can gather from the following figure, given the nearly parallel increase of the number of non-Germans, the percentage of criminal non-Germans among the non-Germans in Germany has not increased. There even seems to be a small decrease!

WOW. Talk about a way to make the stats look a lot prettier for those that want open borders! So immigrants have eased off slightly on their violence -woopy dooo!


Why did you not address this?:-

The number of suspects arrested rose by 7.3% to 2.246 million and 41.3% of them did not have a German passport.

Among the people without German nationality who were charged, 402,514 were described as refugees, asylum seekers and those who entered the country illegally.

...surely if nearly half of ALL violent crime is from immigrants you'd be opposed to more immigration? (if you had any sense of decency for the native population, that is.)

LOL 'native population'.

When does 'decency', and any sense of 'it', for the 'native population', come in to play a part here?

After one has already entered and immigrated into 'a country'? Or, before?

[Will Bouwman]

...all the major news outlets I saw repeated all the so-called "conspiracy theories" that turned out to be completely true: such as the Jussie Smollett nonsense, the "mostly peaceful protests" coverups, the multitudinous COVID lies, the Biden laptop discovery, the Russia hoax, the alleged precipitation of the Ukraine war, and so on. If your papers did not report those things in the same way as other major news outlets, then I guess you can excuse them from the list. But if they did...

There is no substance to any of those accusations. If you have a case, perhaps you could choose one, show how the "Leftist" media misrepresented it by referencing actual reports, then show what the truth is, and how you know.

[attofishpi]

...so Danes are higher represented in lots of the more 'petty' crimes in those stats clearly.j

The graph is purely VIOLENT crimes..(RELATIVE to POPULATION)

Conviction rate of VIOLENT crime relative to native DANES.

The graph says blacks and Arabs are more likely to get convicted of violent crime. If your point is that blacks and Arabs commit more violent crime, you need a different graph.

Yes they commit a LOT more violent crime per capita of Danes..

The point being made is very clear, PER POPULATION people from predominantly Islamic countries are far more likely to commit violent crime than Danes.

That is to say, on average from Afghanistan upwards these immigrants are averaging a violent crime accounting for appx 6.5 times that of the local Danish people.

Are we on the same page yet?



ps. I have no idea what colour of their skin is, nor do I care.

pps. The main point being, Islamic ideology preaching hate and violence is not what one should be allowing unfettered migration of into Western countries..if you don't take the stats and my word for it, watch the warning from plenty of ex-Muslims online WARNING us of the danger their former religion poses.

[Will Bouwman]

The point being made is very clear, PER POPULATION people from predominantly Islamic countries are far more likely to commit violent crime than Danes.

It doesn't say that. It says people from Islamic countries are more likely to be convicted. You can speculate as to why that may be, but to conclude that Kuwaitis commit more violent crime in Denmark than any other nationality would, I am reasonably confident, be a mistake.

[attofishpi]

Committed v Convicted <-- that's your point of contention..

I think you'd agree that Convicted, which is what the graph is representing is far more potent than mere committed.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Oh for fuck’s sake! A migration advocate. A notable difference.

There's a notable difference between a migration expert who cares about facts, and an anti-migration demagogue who doesn't!

The object — his apparent object and certainly that of the UN — is to foster and encourage mass immigration. As an expert — an expert advocate with a specific view of the cultural, social and political issue — he advocates for that changement du peuple (replacement, switching of peoples) that is becoming increasingly unpopular. Note the political situation developing in France and Europe generally.

Those who sponsor and encourage mass immigration present their case through deceptions and lies — and this is what your “expert” is doing. His learnèd analysis is then exploited by larger powers operating behind the scenes.

See Enemy of the Disaster by Renaud Camus. Here is an article by Jared Taylor about Camus’s book.

To include the blurb (Amazon) for the book will be helpful to understand Camus’ political affiliation:

Enemy of the Disaster is the first authorized translation to appear in English of Renaud Camus' political writings and includes his notorious 2010 speech, "The Great Replacement." Though forty-two years have passed since his work was last translated into English, Camus is endlessly and irresponsibly discussed in the media, his vast and complex oeuvre reduced to a single phrase devoid of all context. In the English-speaking world, at least, he is the opposite of an author; he is a floating signifier, a rumor, an element in someone else's narrative.

This volume aims to change that. Spanning the years 2007-2017, its ten chapters present a very different Camus, one freed from the opportunistic glosses of “friend” and foe alike. Instead of a conspiracy theorist, the reader discovers a committed opponent of conspiratorial thinking of all kinds. Instead of a proponent of rightwing terrorism, one discovers the founder of a political party devoted to the promotion of civic peace. Above all, one discovers in Camus a man of culture, of the high European culture that he sees everywhere in retreat amid a generalized debasement of humanity.

The book opens with a critical Introduction by its editor, Professor Louis Betty of the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. Betty seeks to free Camus from the various polemical misrepresentations to which he has been subjected in order to situate him in the context of recent French debates concerning immigration and identity, debates that have only become more intense since Camus first entered the fray. Each chapter is thoroughly annotated to help non-French readers better navigate what might be unfamiliar references.

Enemy of the Disaster will prove a precious resource to any serious student of contemporary France. The issues it addresses, however - issues, not just of immigration and identity, but of culture, education, and the future of humanity itself - resonate well beyond the French context. These are issues with which we all, sooner or later, will need to reckon. By showing us what we have so blithely abandoned in our mad embrace of an increasingly posthuman future, Renaud Camus helps us do just that.

[Alexis Jacobi]

….

I don’t wish to disrespect you solely for rhetorical effect, however you spoke out of your asshole; you made false statements that you were unable to back up; and you were soundly shown up.

More interesting though to try to trace out, or back, the errors in thinking which inhabit you. You are (i.e. you seem to me to be) a particular outcome of a debased American intellectual culture. In this sense I will employ the abbreviation: infested with wokeness. Your progressivism is (again in my opinion) corrupt. Simply put, there is a whole range of topics about which you have no real familiarity and knowledge. Your opinions are similar to vapors which, when examined, are, well, vaporous.

You say you are well-read in categories of literature — very well then. But you also admitted to unfamiliarity with topical sociological and political questions and issues — an honest statement.

The MSM can be said to be universally corrupt. To say that is a meaningful, relevant statement of “fact”. Why that is becomes then an open topic of conversation.

Go back and apologize to that poor soul (potentially impoverished intellect) who declaimed to you that the MSM is corrupt. At the very least gather together a sense of why he believes that.

It may happen that one day it will be your own teeth, jackass, that you will pick up off the ground when your arrogant assertions are aggressively confronted because they detail lies, deceptions and that corruption of which I speak. It is coming down to that, you see. The rise and the strengthening of a mood of intolerance for horseshit.

[Immanuel Can]

...all the major news outlets I saw repeated all the so-called "conspiracy theories" that turned out to be completely true: such as the Jussie Smollett nonsense, the "mostly peaceful protests" coverups, the multitudinous COVID lies, the Biden laptop discovery, the Russia hoax, the alleged precipitation of the Ukraine war, and so on. If your papers did not report those things in the same way as other major news outlets, then I guess you can excuse them from the list. But if they did...

There is no substance to any of those accusations.

Is that the case?

You can find out easily. Just see if your preferred news sources once reported these things as truth, and what they report now. And you can find as many examples of that as they offer. Or you can exonerate them completely, thereby.

Either way, you don't need my say-so. The evidence is what they said and now say.

[Will Bouwman]

Committed v Convicted <-- that's your point of contention..

I think you'd agree that Convicted, which is what the graph is representing is far more potent than mere committed.

Well, firstly I do not agree that the graph represents convictions. From what I can gather it represents likelihood of conviction relative to the local Vikings, who of course have a long history of not involving themselves in violent crime.
I don't know that it suits me, but howzabout being serious? Look at what the axes say: x - Conviction Rate Relative to Danish Origin. y - Nation of Origin. So, what we can gather from the graph is that the Nation of Origin with highest Conviction Rate Relative to Danish Origin is Kuwait.
Now, I confess that I cannot tell from the graph whether the Nation of Origin with the greatest incidence of violent crime is Kuwait. I can say with no fear of contradiction that I would be surprised if that were the case.
How might I account for this discrepancy? Well, in the absence of further data, I would simply make shit up. One possibility is that this being Denmark with its recent history vis-à-vis Islam, you know, the cartoon episode; the police and judiciary are very careful to make sure the case they have against Kuwaitis,Tunisians, Lebanese, Somali, Jordanian, Moroccan, Iraqi, Algerian and other Muslims is compelling for fear of provoking the accusations of racism and Islamophobia they faced as a result of the cartoons. Maybe Danish lawyers are afraid to get involved. Maybe Danish justice is racist. Or maybe something about Denmark is peculiarly attractive to violent Muslims. I don't know which, if any of the above is true; if you have some further information or deeper insight, I am happy to consider it.
Secondly, I don't agree that Convicted is more potent than "mere committed". And I think if you were to reflect on it, hopefully nor would you.

[Will Bouwman]

...all the major news outlets I saw repeated all the so-called "conspiracy theories" that turned out to be completely true: such as the Jussie Smollett nonsense, the "mostly peaceful protests" coverups, the multitudinous COVID lies, the Biden laptop discovery, the Russia hoax, the alleged precipitation of the Ukraine war, and so on. If your papers did not report those things in the same way as other major news outlets, then I guess you can excuse them from the list. But if they did...

There is no substance to any of those accusations.

Is that the case?

You can find out easily.

If I can find out easily, you can demonstrate easily. It's your case to make.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Oh for fuck’s sake! A migration advocate. A notable difference.

There's a notable difference between a migration expert who cares about facts, and an anti-migration demagogue who doesn't!

My impression of you is that you do at least examine and consider the other sides in these contentious social and political issues.

Here then is an example of how an alternative narrative about immigration is organized and purveyed by a woman with (apparently) more average and common social affiliation. I.e. White but perhaps with cultural links to the so-called •fly-over country• which will likely determine the outcome of the next election.

She translates, she explains, she introduces to her audience (of those average Americans) ideas that could never be detailed in any MSM — as worthy, considerable topics.

What I want to illustrate is the changing landscape of political and social discourse.

[Alexis Jacobi]

There is no substance to any of those accusations

With what do you support this counter-contention? IC provided a list of various items. Can you explain one-by-one how it is they are all lacking substance?

It should be easy and quick, no?

[Will Bouwman]

There is no substance to any of those accusations

With what do you support this counter-contention? IC provided a list of various items. Can you explain one-by-one how it is they are all lacking substance?

It should be easy and quick, no?

Yes.

...the Jussie Smollett nonsense...

What are you talking about?

...the "mostly peaceful protests" coverups...

What are you talking about?

...the multitudinous COVID lies...

What are you talking about?

...the Biden laptop discovery...

What are you talking about?

...the Russia hoax...

What are you talking about?

...the alleged precipitation of the Ukraine war...

What are you talking about?