My country is commiting suicide

Recent studies have shown that the average native Dutch citizen costs the state 45,000 over the span of his entire life. An immigrant, refugee or not, costs the state an average of 120,000 over the span of their entire life. My country is commiting suicide, it isn't quick or painless, no. It is a long process filled with ethnic tensions, violence and hatred.

We have decided that, well, actually not we. 'They' have decided, the political parties in power have decided for us. They use the word "we" to pretend that they are doing what the majority of the public wants to do, subconsciously attempting to make you believe that if you do not find yourself on their side of the argument, you are simply the minority and should bend for the will of the majority. We live in a Democracy of course, for the people by the people, the majority decides. Unfortunately, they do not represent the majority, the represent a minority. So, allow me to correct myself. They have decided that we are going to commit suicide, we have agreed to enter a cult, a cult that sees the death of all its members as something positive, our deaths will allow us to transform, to blossom into something greater.

The media would like to have us believe that the average immigrant is an intelligent and well educated individual that will benefit our society greatly with his or her expertise. In reality, the average immigrant is a young male that has a poor background of education or none and will most likely end up in a low paying job or on state benefits.

A common argument made by the people in favour of these mass imigrations is that the immigrants will provide an economic boon to your country, their expertise will generate more wealth and everyone will be better off. This is incorrect, not only do significant portions of these immigrants end up on government welfare, another significant amount of these immigrants send most of the money they earn back home. So in reality we are losing money on these immigrants, quite a lot of it actually.

If you are in favour of immigration you might be thinking, what about the greying population of your country? Dutch people are living a lot longer and having less childern, their wellfare state will eventually collapse if we do not bring immigrants into our country. Immigrants have more childern on average and by bringing in young immigrants we can combat the greying population. Furthermore, even if the immigrants are making us lose money right now, they will eventually even out in cost with a native Dutch citizen over one or two generations.

I have one simply question for that argument. Do immigrants not grow old? I mean, all of these immigrants will grow old too and that will lead to an even larger problem with an even larger greying population. Should we just continously important young people? Mind you that we are going to need more and more young immigrants to stop the tide. And if we do this, how are we going to be able to cope if the average immigrant costs us a significant amount of money of their life span? It is not sustainable.

These truths have been carefully displayed to the public more and more in recent years and because of that, the people in favour of immigration tend to avoid this subject all together, it proves them wrong and therefor they jump to the next best thing in line that will prove without a doubt that immigration is the right thing to do.

Cultural enrichment and diversifying your country. One of the ways an immigrant might enrich your country is with its native foods, without them we wouldn't be able to enjoy Turkish foods, Chinese food or other dishes. Yet I am left wondering why my Turkish take out meal hasn't tasted any differently no matter how many thousands of extra Turkish people we allow into our country. I am left wondering how seperate Islamic schools enrich our society, and I am left wondering how seperate neighborhoods that effectively form little Turkey, little Morroco or little China are enriching our society.

The most ironic thing about these neighborhoods is that they are a product of Humanity at its core, we like to be with our own kind. That is why these people group together and form their own communities, seperate from the rest of the population. Even if they do not live in an all Turkish or Morrocan community, most their friends will be of the same ethnicity, they will speak their native tongue to eachother and they will practise a religion not native to my ountry.

Multi-culteralism and integration have been one of the biggest lies our politicans have ever told us and the people still voicing these lies should be made to face the consequences of their actions. It does not work and it will never work. Mixing foreign cultures with eachother rarely ever works out and integration is a myth.

Sometimes when I speak to a person that is in favour of immigration they point me to the United States of America. One of the strongest and most succesful countries on the face of the planet. They started out with immigrants, the far majority of their population started out as immigrants and they formed a county out of it and lived in peace with on another. That is proof that integration and a multi-cultural societ does work.

Is it, though? The far majority of immigrants to the early United States consisted of Western Europeans. If you look at an ethnic/heritage map of the United States of America it will tell you the exact same thing. Western European cultures mix with eachother extremly well, that is why America succeeded. My country for example has a significant German and Belgian population and we love them, in fact, they are never complained about, we get along great with them. Certain cultures get along others do not, this is just reality.

I ask you, what if half of the population of early America was white Christians from Western Europe and the other half consisted of Muslims from the Middle East. Do you think they would have lived in peace with eachother? If your answer is yes, then you are kidding yourself.

People that favour immigration usually think that everyone will simply integrate into our society, they will be overwhelmed by our European culture, our Human rights and our tolerance for the LGBTQ community and will, if given enough time integrate completely into our country.

Allow me to tackle these assumptions one by one. A study from late 2014 has found that 53% of Dutch Muslim found homosexuality unacceptable/wrong and 75% of Muslims believed that homosexuals should never be allowed to marry eachother. (Gay marriage is already legal in my country, but I suppose we should reverse that.)

Furthermore, 73% of Dutch Muslims agree that people that went over to fight in Syria with one of several Islamic groups should be considerd a hero. 70% of Dutch Muslims are of the opinion that the laws of the Koran superseed the laws of our country. 54% of Dutch Muslims are of the opinion that the West as a whole is out to destroy Islam. 45% of Dutch Muslims are of the opinion that Jews cannot be trusted, and last but not least, 11% of Dutch Muslims are of the opinion that religious based violence is acceptable

If the flow of immigration continues as it has then these numbers will only continue to grow significantly. But, I suppose we should let our LGBTQ community wait a couple more decades and maybe then they will finally be treated equally, assuming everyone has integrated perfectly by then. I find that unlikely given our long history that proves that multi-culturalism and integration aren't working, but maybe I am wrong.

So the conclusion we are coming to is that significant portions of the immigrant community (The far majority of immigrants to my country are Muslim) are in disagreement with our Human rights laws and in disagreement with how we treat our LGBTQ community. They are also not integrating let alone assimilating.

This needs to stop, we desperately need it to stop or we will end up repeating our history, extremists will rise. Extremists are all around us already, acquaintances of mine, friends, or strangers. With every passing year they take harsher stances against immigrants and Muslims, ever year extremist parties get more and more votes. The shocking win of alternative für Deutschland to give an example, that marks the first times since World War II that a right winged extremist party has taking a place in the German parlement.

You have to ask yourself, how many people sympathize with parties like these but do not vote for them, how many still cling to a moderate stance despite having more radical thoughts? Eventually, these people will also be pushed over the edge.

If our governments do not start listening to its people, things will eventually spiral out of control. The gas chambers of the future will not house Jews, they will house Muslims.

 

I'm not Dutch but the same sort of problems exist in my country too.

I don't like the economics either. It's a continuation of the Ponzi scheme. Get new people in = it will still fail, only later on and in a much bigger way.

Outside of that if immigration pisses off existing people, I'm with them first and immigrants second. Exclusive club is preferred.
However, my Mrs is not from my ethnicity and I intend to be a migrant myself one day. So this is not my fight.

 

If you have been well educated and you are migrating to a country that has a culture similar to your own, there shouldn't be much of a problem. Especially if your religion, if you have one at all, doesn't clash with the religion of the country you plan to migrate to.

 

Explain how they are not listening PVV didn't win? However, the PVV won 20 seats which for a new party is a good result if as you suggest the country is going to hell in a hand cart then in the next elections you should get your wishes?

 

Last time I went to Amsterdam, I befriended a Polish guy also named Robert (I'm Robert from London, he was Robert from Poland) and... He offered to take me to get my Dutch BSN if I wanted to in the morning. An offer I kindly declined.
He didn't strike me as anything special, just a young man living and working in Amsterdam - the only skill I saw required advertised in the help wanted notices I saw everywhere (that he also confirmed for me that employers there were looking for) was the ability to speak English.
This was June 2016, a week or two before the Brexit vote.

 

First time I went to Amsterdam, (September 2015) I befriended a homeless man called James from Camden (in my city) and... I offered to take him home with me, he kindly refused that offer, and told me he was homeless and waiting for his Dutch BSN and didn't want to leave Holland and had like another couple of months waiting.
I'd never forget what talking to him taught me that day, that this guy would rather be homeless on the streets of Amsterdam with his guitar there (it was why I engaged him, to ask him if I could play on his guitar for a small donation)... - He'd rather sit on the street all day and wait to become Dutch or whatever, than come home back to Britain where he'd get NHS and Job Centre support; This Brit from London decided he rather would be a homeless person in Amsterdam than live in the UK with everything he was entitled to in the UK.

I mean, Amsterdam is great, but, for my own self, after meeting him that day and everything, decided, yeah, it would be fun to live there, but, if I lived there, I wouldn't be on holiday/vacation - it'll be living there, having to work all day like I do in London, and then I remembered how much I like being from the big city (London) and all of that.
Like Slash and Jimi Hendrix etc and myself knowing Soho, is just cool - Especially back then when Soho was fun.

So when I thought about it (and I did think about it)... I decided London was better for me, and Amsterdam wouldn't be like a holiday if I worked there and had to go to work all day - which kinda defeated the object for me, and if push came to shove, I'd rather do that in London because London's bigger and in the English speaking world etc etc. (Two things I'm down with/alright with/like).

 

That is because a lot of people feel like Geert Wilders just says a lot of things but doesn't actually have a plan to effectively rule, he also has a bad track record of voting in favour of things that his party should be against. His main appeal for the people is his stance on Immigration and Islam. He still however gets a lot of votes, but that isn't enough. People aren't quite ready to vote for a right-winged populist party in large numbers. This is evident by looking at the polls from before the election. This year his highest rating was 33 seats I believe, but unfortunately for him we had a scandal with Turkey in my country and the current prime minister and his party took a harsh stance (Effectively immitating Wilders and some of his view points) and a lot of people therefor voted for the VVD as opposed to the PPV. Still, 20 seats is still something but it isn't enough. There is also the fact that all other political parties in my country refuse to work with the PVV, they can only rule if they get enough seats by themselves, in the Dutch system this would mean the PVV needs to get 76 out of a 150 seats. In Germany they are doing the same to Alternative für Deutschland, nobody is willing to work with them.

So, to answer your question. I am not sure, it is a mix between being not ready to vote for a party that is considerd extremist and perhaps the fact that all other political parties have refused to work with them, giving off the "your vote is wasted if you vote for him" vibe. But, perhaps most of all it is the other parties that start to agree with Wilders and express his view points right before elections only to drop them afterwards. "The common man's a fool." and a lot of people buy into that and vote for another party instead. As is evidenced by Wilders gaining 20 seats instead of 33. It is also worthy to note that previously "worthless" parties such as the Party for Animals and a party called Green Left, have suddenly gotten a lot of votes. These are votes from people dissatisfied with the previous ruling parties that now find it hard to identify with something else and therefor vote for these parties, a safe guess or a protest vote if you will. These are people that do not want to vote for parties like the VVD or the PVDA but aren't ready or willing to vote for the PVV. I believe however that in time the support for the PVV will grow.

 

Dutch employers exploit low wage workers, especially those from Poland and other Eastern European countries. They work for extremly low wages and this has caused some minor scandals in the past but the practise still continues to date. The Poles have a bad reputation here as well, they are known to steal and an image that comes to mind is that of Polish men buying cheap beer and chocolate, something that is a common sight, especially for those working in low paying construction jobs.

 

Indeed, definitely an unskilled worker that I met last time.
But then, in England/London, we have them too, so, I'm used to it. (It's just the nature of the EU).

 

Amsterdam, is the only part of the NL I've been to and... It's also a world city too... I've been to London, New York City and Amsterdam so far, as far as world cities go.
They're all alike and they're all different, unique.
IDK what's unique about London except my flag, my Queen, IDK... Fish & Chips IDK. everything else I've seen everywhere else.
Things that used to be unique to New York City when I went in 2001, was the NFL, it's now 2017 and somehow without me paying too much attention - London has the NFL too. It's cool but... Amsterdam has Surinamese and Indonesian fusion places.
Maybe London has Indian food... I don't remember seeing it in New York City in 2001 or when I went to Amsterdam those 2 times, so, - We all have things that are unique.
But we all have the same MNCs and the same touristy things with our own cities stamped on them, the same shows, amusements, just your city's branch of it, we all have our history, mine, I love the music here and am from that place so, YAYA ME y'know what I'm saying? I'm saying... London, Amsterdam, New York City, are world cities... I haven't been to anywhere else in the NL, just passed through it by land, so I did see Dutch flags like I've seen the England flag... So I can understand fully/totally, how Amsterdam isn't the rest of NL and, I can guess what it's like when compared to Amsterdam.

Ever been to Amsterdam? @SvenO100

 

The issue then is one of rhetoric. The message probably needs to be couched in "eurospeak". In the UK up until recently it was anathema to speak out against immigration and the right wing parties that did so were quite rightly ridiculed as their rhetoric was quite frankly absurd. However, once you calm down the vitriol and hard luck stories and make a strong and coherent narrative you start to make gains - Nigel Farrage was good at that and now basically because of him we have Brexit. He is still regarded by the political elite as a bit of a basket case but he can point out to the UK now effectively following his agenda.

Its not what you say its how you say it. If there are enough voters listening to you then you can start to make the agenda and as long as politicians are reacting to the voters then to some extent one can control the direction of travel.

 

But if London has Indian food, what does Bombay have?

 

I have been to Amsterdam and I can tell you that it isn't like the rest of The Netherlands, or perhaps the rest of The Netherlands isn't like Amsterdam. Immigrants and refugees do the same thing everywhere, namely going to the large cities and trying to get a house there. Amsterdam, much like London is filled with refugees and immigrants. In Amsterdam 49,5% of the population consists of immigrants. In my country the immigrants either get placed or go to large cities on their own accord, so most of the province capitals have a large number of immigrants/refugees and the rest of the country is sparsely distributed.

The province that I am in for example has the lowest number of immigrants/refugees in the country, with only 9%. Slightly more then half of that 9% consists of Western immigrants, Germans for example. We love the Germans, they're not a problem. The remaining 4,5% consists of non-western immigrants. I can tell you that 1/3 of all non-western immigrants are concentrated in the province capital and the rest is spread out over the province, but mainly located in other sizeable cities. For North Holland this is the same, with a significant number concentrated in Amsterdam. In North Holland (Dutch province) here they make up about 16% of the population, that doesn't include western immigrants, only non-western immigrants. So as you can see, cities like Amsterdam do not represent The Netherlands correctly because of the significant migrant populations.

 

Well there you go. At some point, The Netherlands (and most other Western countries) are just going to have to do what the US did and roll the dice and gamble on a big unknown. You already know what the sure thing brings you; more of the same. So you're going to have to take a chance, if not with Wilders, than someone else who also wants to protect your country.

It's a really weird mental disorder that's afflicted the elites of almost every Western country that they actually think they can save their welfare systems by importing unskilled, unassimilatable immigrants who in reality will drain it further, and as a bonus, destroy their countries.

 

Yeah, but, you've got to look at places like Germany as the void of all culture.
When you look China or Africa, you see Asian people or Blacks.
Like in Germany, you see trees and mud and white people.

 

Having 1 race, only tolerating 1 culture (your own culture) and not being able to vote is third world / like Bongo Bongo Land.

 

It's diversity that separates us from the Germans or the Africans or the Chinese. It's tolerance that separates us from the French or the Africans or the Chinese. It's democracy that separates us (UK) from the rest of the EU, Africa or China.

We have one of the oldest parliaments with our bill of rights that dates back the Magna Carta in 1215 and USA, we love the Americans. USA has some of the neatest freedoms and liberties us Brits only wish we had.
Like the freedom for a child to open up and operate a lemonade stand, or the birthright of gun ownership. If you want to love anybody, why not love the Brits or Americans, sure, we've got refugees and Muslims and whoever else too, but we're also great for it. We love Canada/Australia etc too but.. USA we respect as well for teaching us a country a lesson we learned when they fought and died against us and won - as well as our respect when, then after fought and died with us, with Canada/Australia etc too in WWII and WWI so, a pretty neat people to have in the world the Americans.

 

Diversity is not a strength, it's a weakness. I prefer that everyone sticks to their own country but certain cultural groups can get along perfectly fine with eachother and should therefor be allowed to migrate to and from other countries in that cultural group. In the case of my country those would include the Germans and the Belgians, both of whom we get along great with.

 

That's why Africa is backward (sorry, but, you are) etc etc, that's why single race societies have crap we wouldn't put up with in the civilised world - I mean, look at Catalonia, it's like Africa to me when you see them all getting hit on the head and people saying it didn't happen.

 

I don't think progress is ever made sticking to comfort zones in life.

You can prefer and get all you want - but then it'll be like Africa.
Sticking to what suits you and not going to the Moon, not having tolerance, not having diversity - not having democracy

Spoiler

when EU members are made vassals for an un-elected EU parliament. - Having a president you don't get to vote for, it's like Africa

.

 

I'm sure that is precisely what people in Brazil, Ceylon, Guyana, Indonesia, South Africa, and other parts of the world thought when you Dutch invaded their lands, killed their people, and stole their resources.

 

As you've caught on, it's not a sustainable solution. Kind of like a pyramid scheme, you'll just have to keep bringing in more and more to keep the scheme running.

Of course whether there's going to be enough decent paying jobs and availability of affordable housing for everybody is another matter. Not looking good for the next generation.

 

It's because people are so BRAIN DEAD. These people would be singing a different tune if they had to live in third world style poverty, with all the crime that comes along with that. Their ignorant little minds can't see the connection between the policies they are proposing and the results it's going to have on their children. Then when their children turn to drugs and suicide in 15 years because they can't find a job, these middle class parents are just going to burry their heads in the sand and act dumb, like "Oh well, that's just the way it is".

And no, you ignorant stupid stupid people, the government can't always solve all your problems. Why do you think Eastern Europe is so poor? In Ukraine there are children living on the streets and this was before the civil war. They crawl into the sewers trying to keep warm.

It seems relative affluence and a nanny state providing for people's needs make people lose all basic practical sense.
Do you think a country like India would ever let refugees in? (Hint, they can't even provide for all their own people)

No, rather this all seems like an intentional and deliberate attempt to flood Europe with populations from other parts of the world. They'll think of any excuse to make this all palatable.
Once Europe is all brown and mixed that will be the end of Nationalism standing in the way of a unified Europe, so the reasoning goes. Getting closer to "global equality" and a unified one-world government as a bonus.
This all sounds terribly harsh, but that's probably the truth of the matter.

Ironically as the society becomes poorer and poorer the whole welfare state is going to collapse; it will be a slow-motion collapse. There will be a few riots and media blaming the rich, but ultimately the people will just have to resign themselves to the new permanent reality.

To look into the future you only have to take a look at some other parts of the world, things that happened or the way daily life is for the average people in those countries. As one example, take a look at California. The tax rate shot up and a lot of working class people got displaced and had to move elsewhere. The state government started having to increase prices for publicly funded services. Public university in the state, once virtually free, now has the most expensive tuition in the country, putting a severe financial strain on many families. Hospital bills shot up too. That's what happens when the hospitals have to pass on the costs of all the poor people to the paying customers. So now sick families are being bankrupted and in some cases losing their homes because government is forcing the hospitals to provide care to the indigent.

If government was so capable of helping people why can't they help all these people in their own countries they're already in? Why do they have to pay them to get up and move?
Some government leaders treat the job market and government services like a bottomless resource that will never run out.

 

If the USA spent its tax dollars on helping its own people rather than wasting resources on its endless wars overseas none of those conditions would exist here. The easy solution - stop voting Republican since this is the party that continues to create overseas wars.

 

Excellent and perceptive post. An apposite aphorism would be 'Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.'