On April 21 2012 22:01 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I just can't agree with the decision of giving this guy a platform for his message to reach out to millions of people via television. That's what he wanted and that's what he got.
What? he is revealed to be a clown. he is basically destroying himself and his message.
What in the world? For any sensible person he was revealed to be something much worse than a clown on 22 July 2012. For random idiots who found him inspiring when the massacre just had happened, it's not like they're suddenly going to realize he's a clown now.
He is inspiring no one. That's the point. And Breivik is slowly being forced to realize that, along with many other things that contradict his delusions. Undrass is Norwegian and because of his local media he knows much much more about this case than you do. It's embarrassing to see.
My father was like "How pissed off must all those parents be to see the killer of their children get a fair trial." when in fact all those people feel very proud about the way they carry out this trial. And rightly so. That's what you get when you don't know the facts and just blurt out something based on your own gut feeling, unguided and unrestrained by a sophisticated moral compass.
I'm Swedish and have full access to the televised trial as well as all other media coverage. I guess you assume I'm American just because I'm a bit critic of this part of the trial. I'm not talking about not allowing him a fair trial, that Norwegians are "pussies" for not giving him the death penalty or the Norwegian criminal system is too soft. The only embarrassment here is you lumping me together with others for no reason, kind of like how Breivik does.
I guess you haven't been watching the news. He is basically speaking nonsense, and has several times been factually wrong. Anyone who watches are being convinced that Breivik is actually a bumbling fool that is living in his own world, not a cold, intellectual killer with a message.
He could not even get very simple, well-known facts right, for example which party is ruling Oslo atm.
That's besides my point. All sensible people know he's a lunatic, but giving him this much of a platform to reach out to other lunatics is in my opinion unnecessary. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't follow the trial btw.
The lead headline of the international edition of CNN.com
The article closes out with this gem.
Most troubling of all is Breivik's obsession with the multiplayer role-playing World of Warcraft, a violent online game that he played "full-time" between 2006 and 2007. Indeed, one of the few times that he smiled this week was when the image of his World of Warcraft character was displayed in court. Some apologists for video games have suggested that Breivik's addiction to World of Warcraft "means nothing at all." But they are wrong. Given his absolute absence of remorse over the murders, it's not hard to imagine that this obsession with violent online games has enabled him to somehow virtualize the killing of real people, transforming them from flesh and blood characters into abstractions. I have to agree with Thomas Indrebo. The death penalty is, indeed, the only just sentence in the Breivik case. That said, however, this case isn't just about a single delusional character. Breivik's obsession with violent online games, his narcissism, his reliance on Wikipedia and Facebook are warnings about how digital media can corrupt our grasp of reality. Breivik may be a worst case scenario, but I fear that there will be more young men like him in future if virtual reality becomes our only reality.
Funny, playing WoW obsessively from 2004 to 2006 did not turn victims of murder, like Breivik's, into abstractions for me, or for anyone else here at TL, or for anyone around the world who play lots of "violent" video games - except for those who were immature or already as crazy as Breivik.
If violent video games desensitize the people who play them, then all those people, not only the very small number who go commit acts of violence, should care less or not at all about violence. That clearly is not true.
On April 22 2012 00:58 DeepElemBlues wrote: Funny, playing WoW obsessively from 2004 to 2006 did not turn victims of murder, like Breivik's, into abstractions for me, or for anyone else here at TL, or for anyone around the world who play lots of "violent" video games - except for those who were immature or already as crazy as Breivik.
If violent video games desensitize the people who play them, then all those people, not only the very small number who go commit acts of violence, should care less or not at all about violence. That clearly is not true.
Agreed, just amazes me that a major news organization will run that as the lead headline.
On April 21 2012 22:01 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I just can't agree with the decision of giving this guy a platform for his message to reach out to millions of people via television. That's what he wanted and that's what he got.
What? he is revealed to be a clown. he is basically destroying himself and his message.
What in the world? For any sensible person he was revealed to be something much worse than a clown on 22 July 2012. For random idiots who found him inspiring when the massacre just had happened, it's not like they're suddenly going to realize he's a clown now.
He is inspiring no one. That's the point. And Breivik is slowly being forced to realize that, along with many other things that contradict his delusions. Undrass is Norwegian and because of his local media he knows much much more about this case than you do. It's embarrassing to see.
My father was like "How pissed off must all those parents be to see the killer of their children get a fair trial." when in fact all those people feel very proud about the way they carry out this trial. And rightly so. That's what you get when you don't know the facts and just blurt out something based on your own gut feeling, unguided and unrestrained by a sophisticated moral compass.
I'm Swedish and have full access to the televised trial as well as all other media coverage. I guess you assume I'm American just because I'm a bit critic of this part of the trial. I'm not talking about not allowing him a fair trial, that Norwegians are "pussies" for not giving him the death penalty or the Norwegian criminal system is too soft. The only embarrassment here is you lumping me together with others for no reason, kind of like how Breivik does.
I guess you haven't been watching the news. He is basically speaking nonsense, and has several times been factually wrong. Anyone who watches are being convinced that Breivik is actually a bumbling fool that is living in his own world, not a cold, intellectual killer with a message.
He could not even get very simple, well-known facts right, for example which party is ruling Oslo atm.
That's besides my point. All sensible people know he's a lunatic, but giving him this much of a platform to reach out to other lunatics is in my opinion unnecessary. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't follow the trial btw.
This is exactly how you deal with extremist ideologies. A public trial, exposing it for the garbage is really is. A trial behind closed doors, or with otherwise limited rights, just reinforces all their crazy conspiracy theories: Just look at how Gitmo has actually become a recruitment tool for radical islamists.
Hundreds of millions play videogames. How many people die because someone got somehow influenced by violent videogames and went on a psychopathic shooting spree?
Half the world drinks alcohol. How many people die because of the influence of alcohol?
On April 21 2012 22:01 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I just can't agree with the decision of giving this guy a platform for his message to reach out to millions of people via television. That's what he wanted and that's what he got.
What? he is revealed to be a clown. he is basically destroying himself and his message.
What in the world? For any sensible person he was revealed to be something much worse than a clown on 22 July 2012. For random idiots who found him inspiring when the massacre just had happened, it's not like they're suddenly going to realize he's a clown now.
He is inspiring no one. That's the point. And Breivik is slowly being forced to realize that, along with many other things that contradict his delusions. Undrass is Norwegian and because of his local media he knows much much more about this case than you do. It's embarrassing to see.
My father was like "How pissed off must all those parents be to see the killer of their children get a fair trial." when in fact all those people feel very proud about the way they carry out this trial. And rightly so. That's what you get when you don't know the facts and just blurt out something based on your own gut feeling, unguided and unrestrained by a sophisticated moral compass.
I'm Swedish and have full access to the televised trial as well as all other media coverage. I guess you assume I'm American just because I'm a bit critic of this part of the trial. I'm not talking about not allowing him a fair trial, that Norwegians are "pussies" for not giving him the death penalty or the Norwegian criminal system is too soft. The only embarrassment here is you lumping me together with others for no reason, kind of like how Breivik does.
I guess you haven't been watching the news. He is basically speaking nonsense, and has several times been factually wrong. Anyone who watches are being convinced that Breivik is actually a bumbling fool that is living in his own world, not a cold, intellectual killer with a message.
He could not even get very simple, well-known facts right, for example which party is ruling Oslo atm.
That's besides my point. All sensible people know he's a lunatic, but giving him this much of a platform to reach out to other lunatics is in my opinion unnecessary. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't follow the trial btw.
This is exactly how you deal with extremist ideologies. A public trial, exposing it for the garbage is really is. A trial behind closed doors, or with otherwise limited rights, just reinforces all their crazy conspiracy theories: Just look at how Gitmo has actually become a recruitment tool for radical islamists.
I'm not suggesting it to be held behind closed doors. There's a huge middle ground between behind closed doors and broadcasting every minute live for millions of viewers over five days. Extensive media coverage is of course necessary, but in my opinion not in this form.
The thing is he has confessed to the crime, he has said he'd do it again and that he wish he would've killed even more people. There is no issue of guilt to be resolved. Yet he gets FIVE days of live covered trial for his rambles about, for the trial irrelevant, political issues. The trial is dragging out for too long and having it all broadcasted just makes it worse.
On April 21 2012 22:37 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: The only embarrassment here is you lumping me together with others for no reason, kind of like how Breivik does.
Yeah, I am like Breivik. Thank you for pointing that out. How embarrassing...
Seems you just want to call a circle a square no matter what. I am not even going to argue. If you had your head on straight you would see that nothing does a better job at dismanting Breivik like this trial does. All survivors that want to talk to the media said so. I guess they are wrong and you are right, since I am exactly like Breivik.
Also, pointing out to me that you aren't an American but actually Swedish following the media in your country, who cover it in detail, quite closely, is not helping your case. You should have kept that for yourself.
On April 21 2012 22:01 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I just can't agree with the decision of giving this guy a platform for his message to reach out to millions of people via television. That's what he wanted and that's what he got.
What? he is revealed to be a clown. he is basically destroying himself and his message.
What in the world? For any sensible person he was revealed to be something much worse than a clown on 22 July 2012. For random idiots who found him inspiring when the massacre just had happened, it's not like they're suddenly going to realize he's a clown now.
He is inspiring no one. That's the point. And Breivik is slowly being forced to realize that, along with many other things that contradict his delusions. Undrass is Norwegian and because of his local media he knows much much more about this case than you do. It's embarrassing to see.
My father was like "How pissed off must all those parents be to see the killer of their children get a fair trial." when in fact all those people feel very proud about the way they carry out this trial. And rightly so. That's what you get when you don't know the facts and just blurt out something based on your own gut feeling, unguided and unrestrained by a sophisticated moral compass.
I'm Swedish and have full access to the televised trial as well as all other media coverage. I guess you assume I'm American just because I'm a bit critic of this part of the trial. I'm not talking about not allowing him a fair trial, that Norwegians are "pussies" for not giving him the death penalty or the Norwegian criminal system is too soft. The only embarrassment here is you lumping me together with others for no reason, kind of like how Breivik does.
I guess you haven't been watching the news. He is basically speaking nonsense, and has several times been factually wrong. Anyone who watches are being convinced that Breivik is actually a bumbling fool that is living in his own world, not a cold, intellectual killer with a message.
He could not even get very simple, well-known facts right, for example which party is ruling Oslo atm.
That's besides my point. All sensible people know he's a lunatic, but giving him this much of a platform to reach out to other lunatics is in my opinion unnecessary. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't follow the trial btw.
This is exactly how you deal with extremist ideologies. A public trial, exposing it for the garbage is really is. A trial behind closed doors, or with otherwise limited rights, just reinforces all their crazy conspiracy theories: Just look at how Gitmo has actually become a recruitment tool for radical islamists.
I'm not suggesting it to be held behind closed doors. There's a huge middle ground between behind closed doors and broadcasting every minute live for millions of viewers over five days. Extensive media coverage is of course necessary, but in my opinion not in this form.
The thing is he has confessed to the crime, he has said he'd do it again and that he wish he would've killed even more people. There is no issue of guilt to be resolved. Yet he gets FIVE days of live covered trial for his rambles about, for the trial irrelevant, political issues. The trial is dragging out for too long and having it all broadcasted just makes it worse.
I'd like to add that he is not being broadcasted live to the world. The press is not allowed to film inside the court room. And it is not being dragged out, it is a complicated case. It is no different from any other trial in Norway, if the defendant wants to explain himself, he is always encouraged to do so. It wouldnt be fair if we didn't hear his side of the story. The only people that get to watch it live over TV link are approved journalists and people that were harmed and are thusly involved in the case. The rest of the world gets shots outside the courtroom, shots inside when it is not underway, and journalists telling us what they heard.
Most troubling of all is Breivik's obsession with the multiplayer role-playing World of Warcraft, a violent online game that he played "full-time" between 2006 and 2007. Indeed, one of the few times that he smiled this week was when the image of his World of Warcraft character was displayed in court. Some apologists for video games have suggested that Breivik's addiction to World of Warcraft "means nothing at all." But they are wrong. Given his absolute absence of remorse over the murders, it's not hard to imagine that this obsession with violent online games has enabled him to somehow virtualize the killing of real people, transforming them from flesh and blood characters into abstractions. I have to agree with Thomas Indrebo. The death penalty is, indeed, the only just sentence in the Breivik case. That said, however, this case isn't just about a single delusional character. Breivik's obsession with violent online games, his narcissism, his reliance on Wikipedia and Facebook are warnings about how digital media can corrupt our grasp of reality. Breivik may be a worst case scenario, but I fear that there will be more young men like him in future if virtual reality becomes our only reality.
Wow, just Wow!!! What the hell were they thinking when writing this :D first they lay haevy smack on gamers and then new media (fb & wikipedia)... it's just too absurd. Haha?
On April 21 2012 22:01 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I just can't agree with the decision of giving this guy a platform for his message to reach out to millions of people via television. That's what he wanted and that's what he got.
What? he is revealed to be a clown. he is basically destroying himself and his message.
What in the world? For any sensible person he was revealed to be something much worse than a clown on 22 July 2012. For random idiots who found him inspiring when the massacre just had happened, it's not like they're suddenly going to realize he's a clown now.
He is inspiring no one. That's the point. And Breivik is slowly being forced to realize that, along with many other things that contradict his delusions. Undrass is Norwegian and because of his local media he knows much much more about this case than you do. It's embarrassing to see.
My father was like "How pissed off must all those parents be to see the killer of their children get a fair trial." when in fact all those people feel very proud about the way they carry out this trial. And rightly so. That's what you get when you don't know the facts and just blurt out something based on your own gut feeling, unguided and unrestrained by a sophisticated moral compass.
I'm Swedish and have full access to the televised trial as well as all other media coverage. I guess you assume I'm American just because I'm a bit critic of this part of the trial. I'm not talking about not allowing him a fair trial, that Norwegians are "pussies" for not giving him the death penalty or the Norwegian criminal system is too soft. The only embarrassment here is you lumping me together with others for no reason, kind of like how Breivik does.
I guess you haven't been watching the news. He is basically speaking nonsense, and has several times been factually wrong. Anyone who watches are being convinced that Breivik is actually a bumbling fool that is living in his own world, not a cold, intellectual killer with a message.
He could not even get very simple, well-known facts right, for example which party is ruling Oslo atm.
That's besides my point. All sensible people know he's a lunatic, but giving him this much of a platform to reach out to other lunatics is in my opinion unnecessary. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't follow the trial btw.
This is exactly how you deal with extremist ideologies. A public trial, exposing it for the garbage is really is. A trial behind closed doors, or with otherwise limited rights, just reinforces all their crazy conspiracy theories: Just look at how Gitmo has actually become a recruitment tool for radical islamists.
I'm not suggesting it to be held behind closed doors. There's a huge middle ground between behind closed doors and broadcasting every minute live for millions of viewers over five days. Extensive media coverage is of course necessary, but in my opinion not in this form.
The thing is he has confessed to the crime, he has said he'd do it again and that he wish he would've killed even more people. There is no issue of guilt to be resolved. Yet he gets FIVE days of live covered trial for his rambles about, for the trial irrelevant, political issues. The trial is dragging out for too long and having it all broadcasted just makes it worse.
I'd like to add that he is not being broadcasted live to the world. The press is not allowed to film inside the court room. And it is not being dragged out, it is a complicated case. It is no different from any other trial in Norway, if the defendant wants to explain himself, he is always encouraged to do so. It wouldnt be fair if we didn't hear his side of the story. The only people that get to watch it live over TV link are approved journalists and people that were harmed and are thusly involved in the case. The rest of the world gets shots outside the courtroom, shots inside when it is not underway, and journalists telling us what they heard.
Well in Australia at least there was footage of the proceedings inside the courtroom for extended periods of time. It may have been delayed I think due to the time difference, but nonetheless it was shots inside while it was underway.
can any Norwegians describe what exactly brievik is talking about in terms of multiculturalism? I heard it's heavily under discussion in Norway at the moment, and I wanted to understand the contrast between Norwegian policy and US policy
On April 22 2012 17:03 Endymion wrote: can any Norwegians describe what exactly brievik is talking about in terms of multiculturalism? I heard it's heavily under discussion in Norway at the moment, and I wanted to understand the contrast between Norwegian policy and US policy
Short version: He wants foreigners to gtfo. He thinks Europe is getting "islamized" and in Norway he puts blame on the labourparty since they have been the major political force for a significant amount of time, opening up the floodgates, so to speak. He wants everything based on a nationalistic, monocultural christian system and sees Islam as an enemy.
He, as he says, didn't go for muslim targets because it was Norway as a state that accepted the foreigners to come in the first place and he went for the people sitting with the power.
On April 22 2012 01:44 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I'm not suggesting it to be held behind closed doors. There's a huge middle ground between behind closed doors and broadcasting every minute live for millions of viewers over five days. Extensive media coverage is of course necessary, but in my opinion not in this form.
The thing is he has confessed to the crime, he has said he'd do it again and that he wish he would've killed even more people. There is no issue of guilt to be resolved. Yet he gets FIVE days of live covered trial for his rambles about, for the trial irrelevant, political issues. The trial is dragging out for too long and having it all broadcasted just makes it worse.
Let him state his opinion and let him be confronted. He basically attacked our democracy, and our principles. This is a big deal, and concerns all of us. He is turning out to be quite the ignorant clown, and it's better to let him speak and prove it than locking him up in a dark cell and not going through everything properly.
We're not China, we're not North Korea, we're not USA (trollface). We're Norway.
When you deal only with people through the internet you will get a very negative view of humanity. People are all nastly online. People act completely different online that they would act face to face. On the internet bullying is the norm while normally it would be seen as wrong behavior.
I find it really surprising people jump so fast to the conlcusion games and the internet can do no harm. Yeah games are new media and surely gamers don't become murderers. But comparing it to novels or movies is different because games are interactive. Just like marksmanship practice helps you kill people, games may do the same. And engaging in simulated violence is different from watching someone else engage in violence in some movie.
Traditionally new media will always be under attack by conservative people acting irrational. But why do we just all rally blindly to protect 'our' media without examining it critically ourselves?
On April 22 2012 17:03 Endymion wrote: can any Norwegians describe what exactly brievik is talking about in terms of multiculturalism? I heard it's heavily under discussion in Norway at the moment, and I wanted to understand the contrast between Norwegian policy and US policy
Basically, he has for core models countries such as South Korea/Japon... since they're the living examples of successful nationalistic policies who cope well with modernity without massive immigration and population replacement.
In fact, he is opposed to the glorification of national traditionalistic, conservative policies, and other particular-ism... so that all countries of Europe can be united under the flag of a "tolerant" Christianity (is Christian anyone who celebrates Christmas). To those who don't know history too well, let me remind you that the unification of European countries under the banner of Christianity happened previously, during the "Reconquista" (reconquest of Spain), the several "Crusades" (reconquest of Middle-East), and the creation of the "Holy league" (reconquest of East-Europe) in the XVI th century.
In fact, when you look at history, European countries only stopped fighting each other to ally against the Islamic Ottomans. Ironically, the creation of an European identity started with the persecution of Byzantine Christians in the Middle-East which launched the first crusades.
So judging at history, it's true Islam, Turkey ... don't seem to belong to Europe. And I'm of the one who believe you can have this opinion without feeling the urge to open fire on a bunch of kids. Let's be clear, I'm not opposed to have some Muslims living in Europe, but passed a certain ratio, (I guess 1/3 of the population), I believe Muslims will start to ask for certain privileges, certain particular rights, all of which will be supported by leftist parties since they will be the majority of their voters. Of course, once their demographics will be even more preponderant, they will start creating their own parties and stop voting for leftists. All this will imo lead to an increasingly divided Europe, on the perpetual verge of civil conflicts, and maybe even war.
On April 22 2012 17:03 Endymion wrote: can any Norwegians describe what exactly brievik is talking about in terms of multiculturalism? I heard it's heavily under discussion in Norway at the moment, and I wanted to understand the contrast between Norwegian policy and US policy
I'm not from Norway, but the situation in the Netherlands is very similar and the same discussion exists here.
There are certain parts of the population that believe that Europe is about to be overrun by Muslims, who are planning to establish some sort of Islamic state with Sharia-law here. They see it as a grave threat to traditional European culture, which -in their eyes- is based upon Judeo-Christian principles/values (they must have missed the Enlightenment I guess). So it their eyes there will be a 'clash of civilizations' between the superior European civilization and the inferior Islamic civilization.
The dominant idea (at least in Western Europe) for the last decades has been that of multiculturalism: the idea that these two cultures can coexist and live together in peace. So generally, when Muslims came over here they could keep their traditional culture. It led to certain issues, especially in the last 10 years as their culture sometimes prevents them from functioning in the larger society. This gave rise to the new right-wing movements which have become very popular in many parts of Europe. It's based on the idea that multiculturalism is a lie and the cultures cannot actually co-exists. It's based on the idea that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim, as their religion is inherently violent and militant. When given the chance, any Muslim will gladly install a theocratic Islamic state. And the more extreme elements of this new-right equate supporters of multiculturalism with traitors. Anyone who supports it is effectively selling out his own country. This has let to severe demonizing of the liberal left and which is also why Breivik actually didn't go after Muslims, but after people with left-wing ideas. The only thing worse then a Muslim, is a Muslim-collaborator (not my actual opinion, but something my co-worker said recently).
On April 22 2012 17:03 Endymion wrote: can any Norwegians describe what exactly brievik is talking about in terms of multiculturalism? I heard it's heavily under discussion in Norway at the moment, and I wanted to understand the contrast between Norwegian policy and US policy
Most troubling of all is Breivik's obsession with the multiplayer role-playing World of Warcraft, a violent online game that he played "full-time" between 2006 and 2007. Indeed, one of the few times that he smiled this week was when the image of his World of Warcraft character was displayed in court. Some apologists for video games have suggested that Breivik's addiction to World of Warcraft "means nothing at all." But they are wrong. Given his absolute absence of remorse over the murders, it's not hard to imagine that this obsession with violent online games has enabled him to somehow virtualize the killing of real people, transforming them from flesh and blood characters into abstractions. I have to agree with Thomas Indrebo. The death penalty is, indeed, the only just sentence in the Breivik case. That said, however, this case isn't just about a single delusional character. Breivik's obsession with violent online games, his narcissism, his reliance on Wikipedia and Facebook are warnings about how digital media can corrupt our grasp of reality. Breivik may be a worst case scenario, but I fear that there will be more young men like him in future if virtual reality becomes our only reality.
Yup, couldn't take it seriously after that. Actually I could never take it seriously, but at least I couldn't get pissed about it in the slightest after that.
"wikipedia! 'Tis evil, people! We must stop the spread of information! Let me lead the way back to the dark ages! NO INFORMATION! YES!"
On April 22 2012 17:03 Endymion wrote: can any Norwegians describe what exactly brievik is talking about in terms of multiculturalism? I heard it's heavily under discussion in Norway at the moment, and I wanted to understand the contrast between Norwegian policy and US policy
I'm not from Norway, but the situation in the Netherlands is very similar and the same discussion exists here.
There are certain parts of the population that believe that Europe is about to be overrun by Muslims, who are planning to establish some sort of Islamic state with Sharia-law here. They see it as a grave threat to traditional European culture, which -in their eyes- is based upon Judeo-Christian principles/values (they must have missed the Enlightenment I guess). So it their eyes there will be a 'clash of civilizations' between the superior European civilization and the inferior Islamic civilization.
The dominant idea (at least in Western Europe) for the last decades has been that of multiculturalism: the idea that these two cultures can coexist and live together in peace. So generally, when Muslims came over here they could keep their traditional culture. It led to certain issues, especially in the last 10 years as their culture sometimes prevents them from functioning in the larger society. This gave rise to the new right-wing movements which have become very popular in many parts of Europe. It's based on the idea that multiculturalism is a lie and the cultures cannot actually co-exists. It's based on the idea that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim, as their religion is inherently violent and militant. When given the chance, any Muslim will gladly install a theocratic Islamic state. And the more extreme elements of this new-right equate supporters of multiculturalism with traitors. Anyone who supports it is effectively selling out his own country. This has let to severe demonizing of the liberal left and which is also why Breivik actually didn't go after Muslims, but after people with left-wing ideas. The only thing worse then a Muslim, is a Muslim-collaborator (not my actual opinion, but something my co-worker said recently).
What I'm aware of from talking with young people from Muslim families is that, as they put it, their parents are "more stuck up the ass" than their relatives over e.g. in Turkey.
Maybe someone can find a good source for this, but to my knowledge in Germany most of the immigrants we got over the past 50 years are from a lower class background (we obviously wanted cheap workers) and their generation pretty much missed everything that happened back in their home countries in terms of development and therefore lived here cut off from both their original but also the German society due to language issues.
That in combination lead to those living over here actually being "more backwards" in their attitude and thinking than those people living in the countries they're originally from.
Now, the 3rd generation and beyond (those who are now like 20-25) who were born and raised here aren't that much different from other people, except for the lower class background which results, in average, in a lower education for them. That's nothing specific to their group, but it stands out because the total amount of people from a lower class background is simply higher.
I personally believe the solution to these issues does NOT lie in some artificial form of "integrating" the older generations, but in pushing the education of the younger generations specifically. That alone solves most of the problems with people not "functioning in our society" in the long run, not matter where they're from.
EPT
