The problem of Muslim integration

[sunshine51]

Most Muslims in non Islamic countries want/demand non Muslims to understand Islam.

However Muslims do not have, even the least desire to understand non Muslims as many

Muslims feel this is haram...forbidden. Muslim sects always argue and shed blood between

each other as to which is more Islamic...example - Sunni vs Shia. Muslim integration

within a Muslim nation populated by different Muslim sects is a sticky situation in itself,

just look at Iraq as a recent example.

I reckon the author of the ANN article made a valid point concerning my last sentence

in her Jkt Post piece.

As for me...well... before I can believe in any religion I must believe in myself first...

It would be hypocritical to do otherwise.

Edited June 6, 2015 by sunshine51

[Neurath]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Perhaps, but to my knowledge no farang group is proposing to execute Thais in the street for not accepting their way as the only way.

Already covered that issue in post #10 above. You're welcome Mind you, I've heard many say that they would kill for good English Breakfast - something that I took seriously as a terrorist threat.

[KarenBravo]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Bit of a difference that you are ignoring.

In Thailand, no matter how well you speak, read and write Thai. No matter you become Buddhist and follow the Thai way, you will never be accepted as Thai.

Once you know this, it's hard to not think "why bother".

In Britain, if you integrate, you are considered British.

[Neurath]

Muslim integration doesn't exist...

I reckon that Dr. Surin Pitsuwan might disagree with that.

[Neurath]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Bit of a difference that you are ignoring.

In Thailand, no matter how well you speak, read and write Thai. No matter you become Buddhist and follow the Thai way, you will never be accepted as Thai.

Once you know this, it's hard to not think "why bother".

In Britain, if you integrate, you are considered British.

Really? On another thread I had some joker telling me that someone born in Sweden, to two parents born in Sweden shouldn't be 'accepted' as a Swede, because they weren't ethically Swedish. I reckon that this view is prevalent with boisterous crowd in the UK/Aust/US too.

Anyway, I can agree with you that Thai essentialism is as tiresome as it is trite and retrograde.

[CrummyJuggler]

"They endure the lowest education levels, often have the lowest paid jobs and are more prone to unemployment than the French majority."

And what did they have in their Muslim countries they were so eager to leave? Religious education, slavery, no jobs, war. I cannot sympathize.

[KarenBravo]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Bit of a difference that you are ignoring.

In Thailand, no matter how well you speak, read and write Thai. No matter you become Buddhist and follow the Thai way, you will never be accepted as Thai.

Once you know this, it's hard to not think "why bother".

In Britain, if you integrate, you are considered British.

Really? On another thread I had some joker telling me that someone born in Sweden, to two parents born in Sweden shouldn't be 'accepted' as a Swede, because they weren't ethically Swedish. I reckon that this view is prevalent with boisterous crowd in the UK/Aust/US too.

Anyway, I can agree with you that Thai essentialism is as tiresome as it is trite and retrograde.

Yes, really.

Look at all the ethnic minority British actors, newsreaders, sports people, members of parliament etc.

And these are only the high visibility people. There are tens of thousand of British Asians, Africans and from the Caribbean that have integrated, consider themselves British and are considered British by the rest of society.

In Britain, it seems the people that don't want to integrate have one thing in common. Their religion.

Islam is incompatible with a free and open democracy where equal rights for gays and women are enforced by law.

Britain is a tolerant society and that very tolerance is being used to spread intolerance.

Britain should come out and say what the Australian prime minister sais:-

'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT.. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society. Learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.' 'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

[Neurath]

Yes, really.

Look at all the ethnic minority British actors, newsreaders, sports people, members of parliament etc.

And these are only the high visibility people. There are tens of thousand of British Asians, Africans and from the Caribbean that have integrated, consider themselves British and are considered British by the rest of society.

In Britain, it seems the people that don't want to integrate have one thing in common. Their religion.

Islam is incompatible with a free and open democracy where equal rights for gays and women are enforced by law.

Britain is a tolerant society and that very tolerance is being used to spread intolerance.

Britain should come out and say what the Australian prime minister sais:-

'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT.. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society. Learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.' 'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

Got to agree that where religious belief is perceived as, or in fact is, incompatible with the laws of a democratic secular state like Australia then it's tough luck for the religiously inclined. No apology for that most certainly. Don't like it then tough. Want to change it, then a democratic secular state provides the mechanisms for doing so. Any and all practices and beliefs that do not violate the law are more than welcome. The more different they are from prevailing norms (cultural and otherwise) then all the better. Bellicose and bombastic twaddle from the likes of John Howard and Tony Abbot is just embarrassing, but not as embarrassing as those who believe that sort of stuff though.

[chuckd]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

From forum rules:

"English is the only acceptable language anywhere on ThaiVisa including Classifieds, except within the Thai language forum, where of course using Thai is allowed."

[Scott]

A post commenting on moderation has been removed.

[FredNL]

Quote: "the restriction on halal food in the Netherlands". There are more HALAL butchers than native butchers in the Netherlands.

It's a f#¢k!n' lie. Muslims in the Netherlands have MORE rights than the native Dutch !!!

It is the law called: Positive Discrimination. For example if there is a job opening, a Dutch and a muslim apply for it, the job goes to the muslim !!!

If both of them lose their job, the Dutch native has to fulfill so many demands to get wellfare and the muslim hasn't.

I had several companies in the Netherlands and so many lawsuits because I refuged to hire muslims that weren't qualified for software development. I even had a court order to have them trained in developing software. One just spend 1 year on my payroll and had all study expenses paid by my company, without passing one exam and failed. I had him send back to wellfare and my company had to pay him for another year's salary by court order!!! Most of the time he spend in some muslim Coffee shop smokin' weed rather than working or studying.

It was either the moslims move out of the Netherlands or I do.....

Well, I moved out in 2001 !!! Not to return to a country where a native doesn't have rights.

Edited June 6, 2015 by FredNL

[Neurath]

Yes, really.

Look at all the ethnic minority British actors, newsreaders, sports people, members of parliament etc.

And these are only the high visibility people. There are tens of thousand of British Asians, Africans and from the Caribbean that have integrated, consider themselves British and are considered British by the rest of society.

In Britain, it seems the people that don't want to integrate have one thing in common. Their religion.

Islam is incompatible with a free and open democracy where equal rights for gays and women are enforced by law.

Britain is a tolerant society and that very tolerance is being used to spread intolerance.

Britain should come out and say what the Australian prime minister sais:-

'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT.. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society. Learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.' 'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

Got to agree that where religious belief is perceived as, or in fact is, incompatible with the laws of a democratic secular state like Australia then it's tough luck for the religiously inclined. No apology for that most certainly. Don't like it then tough. Want to change it, then a democratic secular state provides the mechanisms for doing so. Any and all practices and beliefs that do not violate the law are more than welcome. The more different they are from prevailing norms (cultural and otherwise) then all the better. Bellicose and bombastic twaddle from the likes of John Howard and Tony Abbot is just embarrassing, but not as embarrassing as those who believe that sort of stuff though.

Oh, and just so I'm not seen as giving Howard or Abbot a hard time - the supposed quote above is a hoax: http://www.hoax-slayer.com/howard-muslim-speech.shtml

[elgordo38]

Many have little or no education or skills and expect to live off the government and taxpayers in their host country, all the while complaining about how unfair and intolerant the host country is. Simple, stay where you are born and make something of yourself and that country

Some Muslim Countries are more advanced and have good hard working people. Others, just make too many babies and have no infrastructure to develop into a second or first world country.

Another problem was the European countries colonizing the North African countries and exploiting them for years.

Are the chickens coming home to roost?

[KarenBravo]

Righto. It's a fake, but, I agree with everything it says.

[Neurath]

Righto. It's a fake, but, I agree with everything it says.

Bravo

[simple1]

If you click through on the link the writer is clearly talking to the concerns regarding Islamism in Indonesia and similar challenges being faced in Western countries.

"Islamisation in the sense of imposing Islamic values in people’s public life is not only an Indonesian phenomenon. It can be found in other predominantly Muslim countries whose constitution is not based on Islamic law. Turkey is a clear example in point.

If disintegration refers to the process of disassociating people from the bigger group, what Islamists have been doing in all over the Muslim world is unquestionably an act of disintegration. Like in Europe, Muslim fundamentalists are trying to disengage from nations not merely because of the failure of policies set by secular governments, but mainly due to the failure of Muslim themselves"

Doesn't "disintegration" imply that there was a previous "integration"?

Or, to quote my very Thai ex-girlfriend: You give me to think too much (holding her hands up to her head)!

I am certain you understand the writer is talking to the threat of Islamist political ideology to fracture democratic society in Indonesia and elsewhere. Its evident even within this forum many are contributing to the Islamist goal of undermining democratic institutions by their support of the far right.

contributing to the Islamist goal of undermining democratic institutions

Since when was supporting the "far right" undemocratic? Unless they intend to suspend voting, the right is just as democratic as the left.

Post removed to enable response.

If a far right / far left government came to power they would destroy democratic institutions, kill their opponents etc etc; just the same as any Islamist group.

[MaxYakov]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Bit of a difference that you are ignoring.

In Thailand, no matter how well you speak, read and write Thai. No matter you become Buddhist and follow the Thai way, you will never be accepted as Thai.

Once you know this, it's hard to not think "why bother".

In Britain, if you integrate, you are considered British.

I wouldn't even expect that they should accept me as Thai, just knowing the language and adopting their most-practiced spiritual belief system (for lack of a better term).

BTW, I've me a few Thai Christians in Thailand so I don't see how being Buddhist is anything other than a specious requirement. Or are Thai Christians not really considered to be legitimate Thai by Buddhist Thais?

It's the basic "Thainess" that most of us outsiders (if not all) would not be able to attain because one has to be born and raised in Thailand of Thai parents. Then there is the issue of which Thai social class one is born into and a myriad of other issues.

Integrated in Britain? Considered "British"?

Considered British by whom exactly and what level of integration are you talking about?

I know, I know. I ask too many questions.

Edited June 6, 2015 by MaxYakov

[arjunadawn]

This has got to be the most intellectually barren products I have yet read on issues related to "muslim integration," or more appropriately, "the failure of muslims to integrate." Read it; don't, but it is correct.

The numbers roughly translate to the author's paragraphs.

Without question this piece has been bastardized in the edit. In fact, there are so many non sequitars and disjointed paragraphs that it seems quite likely the author himself lost his way, quit during the edit, or perhaps it was assigned to an underling that did not understand the author's intent. It is apparent, however, that no cogent, overriding message is trafficked at all in this oped. (If he has already paid for his Ph.D he should try and get a refund). Lets look at it more closely.

1. It is not correct that western media and polity have talked about this problem as if it were just a western problem. What the author reveals instead is that the muslim media and polity do not talk about this problem relevant to their own countries because foundationally, those who refuse to assimilate into secular arrangements for governance are actually scripturally correct, and the religious pillar of muslim society, semi sharia or not, would have heads roll. Relative to this absence of commentary it may seem western audiences only talk about western countries- why should it be otherwise?

Why? Because the underlying lack of assimilation in the west and in muslim countries is based on the prophet's own admonishments and clear duties incumbent upon the muslim regarding shar'ia and hijra. That is the issue- the non assimilated are actually following the rules demanded of them. This is the problem and its rarely discussed in muslim countries because secular government is the imposter to muslims, and nearly all muslims accept this in the order of 80 or more percent globally.

2. Perhaps the recent atrocities committed by the "muslim criminals" in Paris have reignited awareness in the author but for those of us living in the west this horror was only one more exclamation point on Western awareness that muslims refuse to integrate, locally, globally, as a group. That the author chooses to write in English and not Bahasa I presume his intended audience is not in Jakarta; therefore, this point is revealing because it demonstrates the author only recently awakening to the problem of muslim integration and presuming the Paris debacle was some entry point into awareness of the problem. Most western readers find Charlie Hebdo not to be a harbinger of an emerging problem but further evidence of what is already now well known.

3. Nonsense; why is this point important to underline "here?" "Many" is surely more than 3; who are these scholars and experts? From what sources do you derive these 3 explanations for failure of muslim integration?

4. Nonsense; this is the contrived fallacy of suggesting the host should conform to the invader- and they are invaders because muslims are not simply protesting the countries to which they seek shelter and succor they are actively trying to supplant secular authority with sharia. They are not just opposing, they arrive with replacements. If they dont like it, get out. If they remain, and dont like it, they are invaders with malfeasance. It can be decorated, but it is actually not more complicated.

That muslims arrive from N Africa and feel insecure does not make it incumbent on Spain to significantly accommodate their self defined emotional states nor assure some government mandated equality in outcomes. I will return to #4 when I last look at some statistics.

5. Why is it incumbent that policies of any government be made competent to a narrowly defined swath of migrated population? The underlying assumption evident here, and evident in all worldwide muslim protests, is that it is expected that muslims will be accommodated. Period! When mulsims are not afforded special rights and outcomes, the polices are incompetent. This is utter nonsense and is no more than the societal fulcrum attack of the global jihad Lawfare efforts to cripple host governments by their own systems and processes. As the Muslim Brotherhood documents reveal in their "Civilization Jihad" long range plans to destroy America-

“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…”

The introduction of Right Wing here is a red herring. The Right Wing hardly controls EU or US policy for some time. These are words designed to deflect. I would prefer one single example where it has been argued, at policy level, that "welcoming muslim immigrants was the first mistake." It may now appear true in retrospect, but the author just made this up and inserted it assuming it would fly. BS!

"Granting migrants' requests for their religious rights was another blunder" is a total lie. First of all, referring to these populations as migrants requires, by and large, that they work. The majority of muslims integrated into a random sample population of countries overwhelmingly demonstrate they do not work rather enter the social welfare system grossly disproportionate to their numbers as a percentage. The further presumption that religious rights can be either granted or withheld by the state is a fraudulent lie or reveals the intellectual bankruptcy of the author- it must be one or other other. Muslims, for the most part, are not routinely seen demanding access to their rights to practice their faith rather they are seen demanding novel accommodations that may have been commonplace in Somalia or Amman but remain alien in Cardiff or Des Moines. Example: The veil and the workplace.

It is nonsense that the tendency of muslims to race toward extreme expressions of their faith is a consequence of tolerance for their religious traditions. This further reveals the disconnect from even educated muslims and western realities of freedom of expression. This is headed under the author's second fabricated argument explaining muslim integration. Not cleverly, he conceals a second argument within his second argument transferring again blame for muslim integration onto the host, to a fictitious leniency of granting religious rights in the 1970s that have facilitated the current morass.

6. If "the third argument is similar to the second with a different tone" we can assume that it is also similar to the second second, with a "different tone." Indeed, it is increasingly obvious there is only one argument here, it actually has no "scholars or experts," and has a single "tone."

Who are they? It is incumbent upon the author to reference this invisible counsel that advises on such a pressing and weighty topic. Whereas argument 2 indicts the west for fostering non assimilation because of tolerance argument 3 closes the loop by stating western governments are inflexible and intolerant toward muslims. By this point we can detect the author grew tired editing or surrendered the piece to another.

'Unless you bend over and accommodate all our needs...'- in other words- allowing us to come from whatever homes we fled and set up the same exact regressive sh_t_ole here- you are intolerant. Unless you allow us the special exclusions to bypass zoning laws and build minarets and permit us to make our call to prayer over, across, and through any christian/jewish/muslim/hindu/atheist neighborhood we choose to, you are inflexible. Unless you permit us to have every animal cruelly slaughtered in contravention to your own values and means of animal husbandry, you are inflexible and intolerant.

What the author unintentionally stirs in the reader's mind and recollection is that this sounds so familiar. Why does this sound so... familiar? Perhaps the reader would concede it sounds familiar because every day, every where, all the time, muslims are increasingly complaining about something, anything, and every concession we yield in violation of both our own rights and mores and values only results in empowering the demand for more... more... more, until the cupboard is bare, the heart is empty, and patience grows tired.

By now the author transitions to Indonesia as an example of integration; this would be the bridge to extend the body of his opinion unto muslim countries as well. The problem is all the proceeding issues have nothing to do with muslim countries. All the above issues revolve around muslims in western lands, imaginary migrants, immigrants, and western failures of policy and tolerance and intolerance, and failure and...

I agree all muslims live uneasily with efforts at integrating their own but the problem is not technically the orthodox muslims, it is the secular muslims. While I prefer secular muslims this is simply not what islam proscribes. This is the problem- the extremists are correct, thus the secular or moderates are always silent. I totally disagree with the author's assertion that those muslims who espouse shar'ia are disassociating from the larger group. History and islamic jurisprudence would agree with me. It is the moderate secular muslims who are acting in bad faith to their religion/sharia. Until muslims stop denying this they will never be able to find a solution. I know this. Jihadis know this. Indeed, secular muslims know this but they do not want to concede imaginary high-ground to the orthodox nor concede they are apostates to everyone else. By the letter of islamic law, they are apostates.

The author nears a close repudiating the merit of his own post and torturing the edit further: "It is ironic for anybody, whether in Europe or in Muslim countries, to keep blaming government policies but fail to understand the complexity of Muslim communities." How is this ironic? Was the author up to "I" in the dictionary? Why then cite an invisible group of scholars and experts who assert exactly what you posted above regarding policies? Why not instead write a series first beginning with complexities, which are not addressed here?

"The failure of Muslim integration might be shaped by the discrepancy of social and political system in secular governments" would be evident and expressed in their policies- see preceding paragraph.

"But it should not be ignored that disloyalty and the spirit of disengagement are inherent in some Muslim groups." Disloyalty to whom? Who is disloyal? The only oaths muslims take are to Al Lah and his prophet. Who is disloyal, the muslims who demand shar'ia or the muslims who pray each night they do not come to get him for being an apostate or secular moderate? What loyalty?

This article is pure nonsense. No other population has these problems anywhere on earth, at any time in history. No other population has the very same problems everywhere, all the time. There is a reason these problems exist and always look the same and this author's sophomoric attempt at redirecting fails in its chief aim. It is self evident where the problem lies. Migrants? Nonsense. Muslims in other lands are acting out the general and specific injunctions set forth by their prophet when he made the first migration to Medina, and then laid down specific rules for how to live in other lands, and how to slowly torture the host into a vehicle for expressing islam.

They do not integrate because it has never been intended to be a part of your country. They intend you to be a part of their country. This is generally the problem.

Germany: 80% of Turkish Muslims claim welfare payments

https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/germany-80-percent-of-turkish-muslim-settlers-claim-welfare-payments/

Denmark: 90% of applicants for economic help to celebrate Christmas are Muslim - Fraud report https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/fraud-statistics-90-of-applicants-for-economic-help-to-celebrate-christmas-in-denmark-are-muslims/ Spain’s illegal Muslim immigration increased by 68% in 2014 https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/spains-illegal-muslim-immigration-increased-by-68-in-2014/ Australia: Muslim jobless rates twice the national average, says census data

https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/02/14/australia-muslim-jobless-rates-twice-the-national-average-says-census-data/

Britain: 24% of Muslims have no qualifications and 21.3% have never held a job https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/02/14/britain-24-of-muslims-have-no-qualifications-and-21-3-have-never-held-a-job/ Britain: 80% of London’s Muslims support the Islamic State – poll https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/britain-80-of-londons-muslims-support-the-islamic-state/ Sweden: 77.6% of all rapes are committed by Muslim males, who total only 2% of population – Gov report https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/sweden-77-6-percent-of-all-rapes-in-the-country-committed-by-muslim-males-making-up-2-percent-of-population/

[for real]

Don't care for integration one bit. Neither necessary nor desired. Provided new arrivals agree to hold to the laws of the (new) land (and materially do so) what else they do is up to them. If their religious scruples dictate otherwise then that's just tough. Don't like a law? Well, there are secular democratic mechanism to get them changed (in secular democracies). Other avenues - no chance, nick off.

In England the 2 mafor parties each have roughly 95% of lifetime voters.

When there are enough immigrants or people with allegiance to foreign lands to sway the vote[there are now] democracy is finished and the minority will choose who runs the country.

[for real]

Kipling wrote about 120 years ago.And nothing has changed [worse even].

'East is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet'.

[wabothai]

Integration has never worked (except for a few individual cases) and it will never ever work.

Who of all posters here feel intergrated?

America is still dealing with the 200 year old intergration problem.

Simple: people just do not want it.

[razer]

Yep ... It's everyone's fault but the Muslims. What else would one expect in a publication in an Islamic country.

It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or execute honor killings. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals.

My message to all peaceful non violent Muslims. It is the fundamentalists ... the fanatics ... who rule Islam at this moment in history. You are not safe be you Sunni or Shiite.

Something similar happened in Europe in the late 1930s.

[quandow]

[Neurath]

Don't care for integration one bit. Neither necessary nor desired. Provided new arrivals agree to hold to the laws of the (new) land (and materially do so) what else they do is up to them. If their religious scruples dictate otherwise then that's just tough. Don't like a law? Well, there are secular democratic mechanism to get them changed (in secular democracies). Other avenues - no chance, nick off.

In England the 2 mafor parties each have roughly 95% of lifetime voters.

When there are enough immigrants or people with allegiance to foreign lands to sway the vote[there are now] democracy is finished and the minority will choose who runs the country.

Yeah, I see the problem. This is why each and every democratically elected government should enshrine as a central plank of their immigration policy that all immigrants (as condition of their immigration) must vote for their party and their party only for next 40 years on pain of deportation if they fail to do so. It's the only way to ensure that democracy thrives. Sometimes you've just gotta destroy the village to save the village. For real, for real.

[Scott]

Inflammatory and off-topic posts removed.

[JB300]

[Assurancetourix]

God dosnt integrate, god demands obedience and that is all.

The insanity and fanaticism people give all religions and the dogma spewed on its behalf guarantees discord.

Until religion is reduced to the realms of sci fi writing and fairy stories for the under 10s there will always be death and conflict over religious beliefs.

Dont care what religion, all are a parasite on humanity not just Islam.

You are right;

Have a look at what's happening in Myanmar ;

They are in a majority bouddhists and they fight against muslim people ;

The tilte can be :

Replying to The problem of Bouddhism integration or the Christian integration ;

I can understant Saudia Arabia and other middle orient countries , they don't want churches on their ground ;

They know what european people did in the last centuries when they arrived in the two Americas ;

Kill them all, God will recognise the goods from the bads ...said the Jesuites

http://amerika.revues.org/3988?lang=en

[geriatrickid]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Both of you are unfair. Your argument does not take into consideration that many foreigners have done more than integrate even though they may not be fluent in the Thai language. I draw your attention to several common characteristics of foreigners in Thailand that are quite different from the demographics of certain immigrants in their former homelands:

- The farangs are typically married to a Thai and often have children. The other immigrants stay within their own people when marrying.

- The farangs with kids make sure that their kids integrate into the local society. Theother immigrants, keep their children away from the locals.

- The farangs are often big contributors to local charities and wats and are typically respectful of local customs. They may not have converted to Buddhism, but they are certainly respectful of the local practices. The other immigrants certainly don't support the local churches and typically demand accomodations and services, and they usually have brought their sectarian opinions with them.

- The farangs do not receive state support or special benefits and more often than not support their new families and their extended families. The other immigrants take as much financial support as they can obtain and certainly are not supporting any of the locals families.

- The farangs don't attempt to impose their customs on others and are open to local ways. The other immigrants resist local customs and want to keep their old country ways.

I can go on and on, but if you wish to latch on to one characteristic, language fluency as a defining feature of integration, than I say that you have allowed your bias to blind you to the other more important characteristics.

[chuckd]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1433638277.412294.jpg

Did you ever pause to think that some feel the same way about atheists and their continual dialogue on this forum?

Nobody waves it in your face quite like an atheist.

[samran]

Why isn't this conversation being conducted in Thai? Integration and all that....

Stunning that it hasn't occurred to many posters isn't it. They're too busy integrating themselves into their own ethnic and religious group(s). Really though, they're desperately ingratiating themselves with said ethic/religious group(s). Of course, for this group, integration works one way - towards whatever they happen to be no matter where they happen to be - because what they are defines by default what is good. Integration in Thailand therefore means Thais becoming more like them. Integration of other groups in Western countries means these groups becoming more like them. "Heathens, purveyors of foreignness, smelly food and wrongness in dress! Thou shalt become like me for I am Excellence and rightness Embodied!"

Both of you are unfair. Your argument does not take into consideration that many foreigners have done more than integrate even though they may not be fluent in the Thai language. I draw your attention to several common characteristics of foreigners in Thailand that are quite different from the demographics of certain immigrants in their former homelands:

- The farangs are typically married to a Thai and often have children. The other immigrants stay within their own people when marrying.

- The farangs with kids make sure that their kids integrate into the local society. Theother immigrants, keep their children away from the locals.

- The farangs are often big contributors to local charities and wats and are typically respectful of local customs. They may not have converted to Buddhism, but they are certainly respectful of the local practices. The other immigrants certainly don't support the local churches and typically demand accomodations and services, and they usually have brought their sectarian opinions with them.

- The farangs do not receive state support or special benefits and more often than not support their new families and their extended families. The other immigrants take as much financial support as they can obtain and certainly are not supporting any of the locals families.

- The farangs don't attempt to impose their customs on others and are open to local ways. The other immigrants resist local customs and want to keep their old country ways.

I can go on and on, but if you wish to latch on to one characteristic, language fluency as a defining feature of integration, than I say that you have allowed your bias to blind you to the other more important characteristics.

The point is tarring everyone with the same brush which tends to happen on these clickbait threads.

Otherwise it is entirely fair to hold the entire farang population to the same opinon we have of the fetid criminal scum that wash up in pattaya or bangkok. And I used the farang catchall deliberately, given so many people here hate being rolled in with others.

As for integration... Bashar Houli played a cracker of a game Friday night against Freo.