Have you ever seen a poll of a European country where people wanted more immigration (from the 3rd world)?

The claim is wild because the german constitution does not encourage immigration.

It contains paragraphs that prohibit discrimination. It guarantees asylum for people that are prosecuted in their home country for political views [1]. There's also a paragraph that widens the definition of "German citizen" in the GG to those that were german citizens in 1937 or who lost their german citizenship due to the nazis. After the reunion some groups from russia emigrated to Germany (Russlanddeutsche) [2]. That is wildly different from wanting more immigration.

[1] there's a long laundry list of exceptions to that rule, for example you have to travel straight to germany without passing through a safe country. It's effectively void. See Art 16a https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_16a.html

[2] Article 116 https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_116.html

You're being disingenuous. And given on your follow-up you're actually misrepresenting what I say, which is wilfully malicious behaviour in a discussion. German politicians have repeatedly called for a reform of article 16a of the GG. The paragraph is about the right of asylum. And yes, during what they call the "migration crisis" article 16a clearly supported the case for mass migration to Germany.

https://www.merkur.de/politik/asylrecht-oettinger-will-grund...

You claim was that the GG imposes immigration on the unwilling german citizenship. That's just plain wrong. Are there applicants for asylum that try to apply despite not being covered? Probably. Is that in the GG? No.

I am as sympathetic to the Germans who dont want racial diversity and as anti globalist as it gets.

But here is the counter argument. Europe (if you don’t take the Slavs and the albenians into account) has a negative birth rate. There is no way to sustain current standard of living without immigration. The politicians in Bundestag who control the EU knows that. And if there is one thing that they are afraid of is to encounter the shortage of labour and have to increase wages that comes from that. As the crisis from Covid has shown us.

I think the root cause of the decline of the national and cultural identity of Europe is not because of immigration but because of a local population that has mostly no interest in family formation.

>"but because of a local population that has mostly no interest in family formation"

I am in Canada so do not know what the trends are in Europe but I can clearly see that having kids here is quickly becoming a financial burden many people can not afford. Part of it because people want higher living standard while the other is our fucking politicians creating such conditions.

Taiwan has a completely different demographic and a negative birth rate and no real immigration "problem" and to me it is clear that the negative birth rate is indeed more related to the cost of living crisis than it is to other factors that people like to attribute it to. Their salaries have stagnated for 30 years, while cost of living has skyrotted for anyone but expats. In relation to the income Taipei is one of the most expensive cities in the world. Who wants children if you have to live in a room in your parents flat(at 35) because you can't afford to live on your own.

And yes, while Germany and other European countries have great benefits for child rearing, regardless of that a lot of Germans are actually struggling being able to afford living in the cities. Everyone here, myself included probably makes a lot more than an average worker in Germany.

A significant portion of Swedes legitimately want more immigration.

What do you mean by “want more immigration”? More tax payers? More potential customers? More cheap workforce? Immigration as a help for unfortunate people in other countries?

From the very small sample I've had, a majority would want immigration as a help for unfortunate people in other countries.

Can you back this up? Most swedes I know are reluctant to speak, but in confidence say that “it’s a bit too much”

You're perhaps in a sociopolitical bubble if you find that claim wild. Even if you don't personally know anyone with this perspective, I would hope that it's logical, rational, and expected that a significant proportion of an indigenous population targeted for "diversification" would be opposed to the idea.

(As a counter-anecdote, I don't personally know a single person in my social circle, in Australia, who is supportive of racial diversity, ranging from indifference to a depressing powerlessness and helplessness to protest what is being done to us by the government, to open and outright racist hostility to the concept.)

When I read the original post I was getting nervous, a little angry and wanted to make the same post and mark that claim as wild. But now that I've read your comment I thought a little about my experience here in southern germany.

I recently left Berlin after over 30 years. I have been outside, but not for long to get to know "other germans". And yes, you are right, the mindset here in the south is a lot more narrow minded and what people say about refugees/foreigners is just mind blowing. Which is kinda sad. I like it here, but I doubt I can live around these people for much longer.

I'm curious which population in Australia you are designating as "indigenous". Here in the UK, "indigenous" usually means white. But I think of indigenous Australians as the aboriginals.

So there's history in Australia of white immigrants trying to force aboriginals to "integrate" with whites. I suppose you could call that "targeted diversification". But you make it sound as if your social circle is white people, objecting to "diversity" in the sense of deviation from whiteness.

Would you mind clarifying?

Oh dear.

Well I'm not going to argue with a blood-and-land white nationalist from Oz, telling me how people feel here in Europe. I'm going to butt out, because I have blood-pressure problems. Bye.

> indigenous population targeted for "diversification"

Oh, come on. That's QAnon conspiranoid bollocks.

> I don't personally know a single person in my social circle, in Australia, who is supportive of racial diversity

Racial diversity exists. Supporting it or opposing it isn't going to change that.

It exists in the world, and people in a region might agree they don't want too much there.

Maybe you just hang around with racists?