I'm an immigrant (see my other comment) and I do everything I can to continue the "high trust" atmosphere.

A simple example: If the bike stoplight is red, I'll sit there and wait even if no cars are coming. As an ex-Manhattanite, this feels weird every time. But it is part of the larger society of hard-core rule following.

I thought cycling past red lights was one of the only exceptions to the general conformity.

Denmark is one of the few countries that actually has targets for integration, not just immigration. It's extremely draconian and I'm surprised (actually, not surprised) the article doesn't mention it.

See, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_residential_area_(D...

Slow integration actually being enforced by uncomfortable laws is the only way we get to enjoy diversity and multiculturalism. The friction is otherwise too large. I would personally like an utopia where we all magically get along no matter the culture, race, ethnicity etc. but the real world is a different pair of shoes.

It needs to be much slower than anyone thinks. America is pretty good at integration, for example. But every high trust place in the country is homogenous. And the diverse places are uniformly low trust and have low levels of social order.

I’m persuaded integration isn’t possible: https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=35594

There’s studies that show that half the variation between European countries in levels of social trust is still displayed by descendants of various European immigrants in the U.S. generations later.

The article does discuss these.

Denmark has about the harshest asylum law west of the Oder. Practically zero pull factors, and the total immigration stats reflect that.

If Germany copied the relevant Danish law (and the copy survived a subsequent challenge at the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe), the European migration crisis would be mostly over.

May I ask why you bother to specify the geographical location of the Constitutional Court? I assume you guys don't have several of those. I mean, in general for other countries people just say "constitutional court" and that is it, and it seems to make sense that way. I am curious.

Yes, I can explain that.

I am not a German, but I read German news and German journalists use "in Karlsruhe" as a shortcut for the Constitutional Court. So, in my original post, I just wrote "a challenge in Karlsruhe".

Before posting, I reviewed my comment and said to myself, hmm, people won't know what "in Karlsruhe" means, so I added the name of the Constitutional Court, but didn't think of removing the location.

I suspect a similar process resulted in some fluff in our beloved RFCs :)

If Germany would, the Dutch have to follow.

But with Geert Wilders and the PVV in the lead, likely it will be the other way around.

Europe has had it with migrants, that much is clear. Either deal with it, or set up a breeding ground for more right-wing voters.

I don't think it has anything to do with race. White immigrants from the US would be just as disruptive because the US is a low-trust, high-inequality society.

There might be a bit of synergy between immigration and the surge in international trade they've had of late.

https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/oekonomi/betalingsbala...