https://translate.google.no/translate?sl=no&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/debatt/Innvandringsmotstanden-skyldes-mer-enn-IS-og-terrorisme--Helge-Luras-601295b.html&edit-text=
Immigration Opposition caused more than IS and terrorism | Helge Lurås
HELGE LURÅS, HEAD, CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (SISA)
UPDATED: 03.AUG.2016 10:36
PUBLISHED: 02.AUG.2016 9:15 P.M.
Even relatively "tiny differences" can have major effects on the number of immigrants coming to the country.
The split that occurred in Norway on immigration and Islam, is unfortunate and a unified approach should certainly be objective forward. But it is far forward. For we are not talking about "small, internal, Norwegian disagreements" or "tiny political disagreements within the liberal consensus",
so Henrik Thune writes in an article Monday .
The level of immigration from Muslim countries will be crucial for European countries' cultural, political and social climate, degree of stability, and freedom of speech and freedom of action for generations to come. And it's not unnecessary alarmism but worrying realism.
Thune seems to think that it's terrorism from IS that has gotten us to go at loggerheads about immigration and Islam. He therefore comes with the familiar trick of the immigration liberals: We must not make the IS will. They will divide us. Now we must stand together!
It is possible there are rose train for multicultural harmony that is here desired revived, this time against IS and Breivik in the same spirit.
Tip of an iceberg
But opposition to immigration occurred long before IS came on in 2014, and it was also a fact before Al-Qaeda-emergence in the 1990s. Immigration from Muslim countries has implications far beyond the dangers of terrorist attacks, and that is immigration skeptics largely unaware of.
For someone coming terrorist attacks just like tip of the iceberg. Others use them more cunning, because it is impossible to argue that the part of the immigration consequences is any enrichment.
Thune is probably so devoted to the "liberal consensus" that he believes it is a reality.
It's probably true that ethnic Norwegians are brought up on a reasonably equal value basis. Therefore, it is timely to ask how such uncompromising fronts could arise about the benefit of ethnic and cultural homogeneity versus immigration and diversity.
But the explanation of it we'll take another time. Now it is sufficient to note that the controversy is there, and that even relatively "tiny differences" can have major effects on the number of immigrants coming to the country.
The differences between Denmark, Norway and Sweden in immigration related issues is instructive in this respect.
opinion pioneers
Immigration skepticism is increasing, and there has been much meaningful climate in Norway since last summer. Immigration Criticism has been "decent" and intellectual spokespeople, and stamping on racism is no longer as unchallenged.
But skepticism about immigration and Islam was formerly a sure path to damnation and brown stamped dog sing from the liberal herd, which Thune think we all belong. Some trodden trail to warn about immigration and Islam, often at great personal, financial and career sacrifices. Most of us were cowardly and kept his mouth shut.
Had not these immigration critical voices expressed themselves and constituted a political force, could Norway quickly been in the same predicament as Sweden.
To change a community's demographics through immigration and then especially from a cultural circle which the West has been in conflict with from and to over 1,400 years is no trifle.
The harsh language responsibility rests essentially the immigration liberals, who have tried to stifle the debate before it could get started.
On Twitter: @helgeluras
Catch debates in Aftenposten opinions on Facebook and Twitter .
These are the features that started the debate:
