How Denmark's 'ghetto list' is ripping apart migrant communities

[Celerity]

Copenhagen and other cities are planning mass housing evictions in a ‘social experiment’ to encourage integration

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/how-denmarks-ghetto-list-is-ripping-apart-migrant-communities



From the outside, Copenhagen’s Mjølnerparken housing estate is pretty unremarkable. Located just beyond the Danish capital’s hip Victorian tenement belt, this sturdy-looking complex of squat red-brick 1980s blocks surrounded by lawns seems quintessentially Scandinavian – green, tidy and even a little prim. The estate is nonetheless at the heart of a storm, shaken by a drastic set of policies that Danish media have called “the biggest social experiment of this century”. Mjølnerparken has, along with 28 other low-income neighbourhoods nationwide, been classified by the Danish government as a “ghetto”.

Denmark has compiled this “ghetto list” annually since 2010; the criteria are higher than average jobless and crime rates, lower than average educational attainment and, controversially, more than half of the population being first or second-generation migrants. The government essentially sees these neighbourhoods as irremediable urban disasters, and in May 2018 it proposed dealing with them by mass eviction and reconstruction. The homes of up to 11,000 social housing tenants could be on the chopping block.

Understandably, many residents are reeling. “This is a beautiful place to live,” says Asif Mehmood, 52, a Pakistani-born taxi driver who has lived on the Mjølnerparken estate for 26 years. His building has been selected to be cleared, renovated and turned into private rental. “Of course there have been problems here – but if a fire in a building is traced to a single gas leak, surely the best idea is to fix the leak. It’s not to clear out the entire building and start again. That’s what is happening here, though. Instead of solving a limited problem, they want to clear the whole block.”

In addition, the law itself applies differently in these neighbourhoods. The first stage of the government’s so-called ghetto deal set higher penalties for crimes, and allowed for collective punishment – by eviction – of entire families if one of their members commits a criminal act. Other laws seem designed to force the integration in Danish society of immigrant communities. Pre-school children must spend at least 25 hours a week in state kindergartens with a maximum migrant intake of 30%, and face language tests. Otherwise their families’ benefits can be revoked. But the most stringent part of the plan came into force on 1 January 2020, when these areas must slash their public housing stock to no more than 40%. To achieve this within 10 years, entire blocks will be emptied and converted into private and co-operative housing, from which people on low incomes will be barred. In some cities (though not Copenhagen) the blocks will simply be demolished.

snip

my thoughts

Much of this has been pushed by a combined centre-right/centre-left (with far right wingers tossed in as well) coalition that uses the Swedish example to drive fear. Norway and Finland do the same thing, with Norway being the least punitive (Finland simply has far less immigrants than the other Big 4 Nordics, but they also can be the most RW at times.) but even they are far beyond Sweden and have many problematic policies as well. Sweden as whole is more passive aggressive and many adhere to an 'out of sight, out of mind' stance that leads to vast immigrant/refugee clusters shoved out into the middle of nowhere or on the fringes of the larger Swedish metropolitan areas like Stockholm, Göteborg (Gothenburg), and Malmö (in Skåne, the far south of Sweden, across the Öresund from Copenhagen and the rest of Sjælland aka Zealand.) The greater Malmö area, at over 50%, has the highest percentage of non European-descent 1st and 2nd generation immigrants of any EU standalone metro area over 100,000 in population.

Danish - Swedish Refugee debate with English Subtitles

4 plus year old video (NOT the article, that is brand new), but still very relevant

[virgogal]

1. Shame on Denmark.

[Jake Stern]

2. Why is it

That Denmark is expected to accommodate immigrant’s culture and values instead of immigrants integrating and embracing Denmark’s?

[DonCoquixote]

3. many of them do

just, as was with every immigrant, especially in america, the bad ones get the camera time. Remember when the movies described every jew, italian or irishman as a mobster?, same mechanics.

[Jake Stern]

5. It's not just the bad ones though

Italians and Jews also learned English, moved away from Little Italies/Lower East Side tenements and integrated into American life. With the exception of areas with high Orthodox Jewish populations I've never heard of Jews demanding that public schools stop serving ham sandwiches or bacon. I've never seen Italians gather to demand the government provide Italian only education for their children.

How many Irish are pushing to allow Catholic religious tribunals to adjudicate matters that are normally the jurisdiction of secular law?

[DonCoquixote]

6. and many of the Muslims do learn english and integrate

I can see about the Sharia, even though one can argue that with some of the billionaires that donate to ant abortion and anti lgbt causes, the Catholics are doing the same thing, just cutting out the middleman. Look ay how many Opus Dei members are in high positions of power, including the supreme court?

[pat_k]

4. So much for integration:

"To achieve this within 10 years, entire blocks will be emptied and converted into private and co-operative housing, from which people on low incomes will be barred."

Why not have something like 20% percent of the units in the remodeled complex earmarked as low cost housing? If "integration" was the real goal, any plan would include keeping some percentage of the "old neighborhood" in place as the more affluent moved in.

Current tenants will be offered alternative accommodation, but no control over its location, quality or cost.

WTF? They don't even give lip service to ensuring the same, or better quality at the same cost? (Not that I would trust on follow-through without some enforcement mechanism). And having no choice about new location is horrible. What about important social ties that would be broken by distance? (Ties that might be able to remain intake if the individuals had a say in where they ended up.)

“The case we are preparing is based on the notion that the whole idea of passing of legislation is really about something else – targeting specific groups based on religion and ethnic origin.”

They are so transparent about it!