5 ms·
It looks like they are proud of their country and want to keep it as is. They’ve seen what limitless immigration did to other countries and want none of it. Re
by nslsm 5mo ago
It looks like they are proud of their country and want to keep it as is. They’ve seen what limitless immigration did to other countries and want none of it. Respect to them.
- kakacik 5mo agoThis is the correct reality. If there would be public vote in surrounding countries, ie mosques would be banned there too (btw those standing and having permit before the vote keep functioning). But none of the german, french, italian etc politicians have the balls to let society decide for themselves, controversial topic or not. And people then wonder why in extremely left-leaning country like France there is high popularity for extreme right parties. Maybe british with their one self-kneecaping brexit vote cured them, but public voting in general was never on the table. Swiss are the most free nation globally. At least I havent hears of any on similar level. They vote responsibly, heck they have 3x the amount of immigrants per capita then next top country in Europe, but they want only people who can find work there, plus they host tons of refugees. And yes they dont want to lose their unique identity, they have enough examples around them to be wary and smart. I'd say they do their share and some more
- raw_anon_1111 5mo ago[flagged]
- mothballed 5mo agoI'm not saying you should ban mosques but when they do the whole call to prayer thing at 2am, I understand. Guessing you've never had to sleep any extended period of time near a mosque. If church bells rudely woke me up at 2am I'd understand the church banners too.
- raw_anon_1111 5mo agoWell maybe molesting children and covering it up should be more of a reason to ban churches. But I agree that should come under noise ordinances. I don’t care who someone chooses to worship as long as it doesn’t interfere with me.
- mothballed 5mo agoIt's a numbers game as to why, not an argument being raped isn't worse. Relatively fewer people have been raped by a priest. Easily 100+x have been sent into a rage by the fucking call to prayer at 120 decibels. People tend to get more upset about things they have actually experienced.
- LAC-Tech 5mo agoThis discourse feels like you are deliberately pretending not to understand things.
- raw_anon_1111 5mo ago[flagged]
- tomhow 5mo agoComments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Please don't fulminate... Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- GuB-42 5mo agoSwitzerland has a fertility rate of about 1.4 and decreasing, unless they do something, there won't be much of a country left in a few generations. Solutions can involve immigration or natalism, but something has to change. Japan is worse.
- rayiner 5mo agoI don’t know anything about Switzerland, but immigration isn’t a solution to the prospect of Japan “not having a country left in a few generations.” There might be more or fewer people living on the islands, but “Japan” will be gone either way.
- platinumrad 5mo agoHow do you define "Japan"?
- rayiner 5mo agoThe standard way. The same way you define “Thailand” or “Bangladesh” or “Vietnam?”
- platinumrad 5mo agoIt seems like "Japan" will very much still exist in either of your scenarios then.
- red-iron-pine 5mo agothey're islands mon ami, it's not hard to define them -- the borders are fairly straightforward you can piddle around about a few tiny islands elsewhere, e.g. okinawa, but the main islands are undisputedly "japan"
- platinumrad 5mo agoSounds like it will still exist then, barring climate catastrophe.