Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by simianparrot 275 days ago
So do you consider what the Danish PM said racist?

> There are really a lot of us Danes who believed that when people came to this ‘world’s best country’ and were given such good opportunities, they would integrate. They would become Danish, and they would never, ever harm our society. All of us who thought that way have been wrong.

That's objectively observed reality in Denmark. And in Scandinavia in general. It's not about race, it's not about skin color, it's about cultural heritage and values.

All we're saying is that to retain a country's cultural heritage and carry it -- and obviously shape it -- into the future, you have to retain a majority of that heritage, and integrate newcomers. Otherwise it's no longer Denmark.
2 comments
em-bee 275 days ago
They would become Danish

you have to retain a majority of that heritage, and integrate newcomers. Otherwise it's no longer Denmark.

what you are asking is not possible without rejecting immigration.

that is the delusion. it is the same all over europe. people expect 100% integration. yet at the same time, prejudices will reject them if they are not completely invisible. that is not possible, and it is not the integration i would want. i have written about this before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44746099

link
maleldil 275 days ago
Danish PM's comment is about integration. You're mischaracterising it. I'd say it's pro immigration, not what you're trying to spin it as.

"We want immigrants to integrate" is not the same as "we don't want immigrants", which is the point you're trying to make.

link
simianparrot 275 days ago
DHH didn’t say he is against immigration. Neither did I. Why are you straw manning?
link
em-bee 275 days ago
how is this not against immigration?

https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64

London is no longer the city I was infatuated with in the late '90s and early 2000s. Chiefly because it's no longer full of native Brits. In 2000, more than sixty percent of the city were native Brits. By 2024, that had dropped to about a third. A statistic as evident as day when you walk the streets of London now.

Copenhagen, by comparison, was about eighty-five percent native Danes in 2000, and is still three-quarters today. Enough of a foreign presence to feel cosmopolitan, but still distinctly Danish in all of its ways. Equally statistically evident on streets and bike lanes.

But I think, what would Copenhagen feel like, if only a third of it was Danish, like London? It would feel completely foreign, of course. Alien, even. So I get the frustration that many Brits have with the way mass immigration has changed the culture and makeup of not just London, but their whole country.

link
simianparrot 275 days ago
It’s being against unlimited, uncontrolled immigration. Is the difference not obvious?
link
em-bee 275 days ago
no it isn't because everyone has a different idea what limited, controlled immigration means. for some 20% is ok, for some 10% is to much. and for some only those who can integrate to 100% and become invisible is ok. practically speaking, for most people controlled immigration means: only allow the people that we like, and don't allow any of the people that we don't like.
link
simianparrot 275 days ago
We will never solve the scale of what's acceptable or not. That will always require dialogue and will change over time with the economic state of a country and many other factors, including culture.

However this argument is usually used to imply "there should be no limits", and that's obviously not practical nor ethical for anyone involved.

link