World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
This is the conclusion from the study you linked.
One thing I've seen often is that people who claim "certain types of immigrants" are problematic don't read studies properly or cherry pick what they like.
No, they just complain about people who look like them, have the same skin color as them, and sometimes them (by mistake, I suppose?). "No one" is a huge generalizing in this time when even the highly-skilled "right" type of immigrants are now having problems thanks to this SD rhetoric, and some are even considering leaving the country.
Unfortunately a lot of those committing those crimes now are teenagers who have lost touch with society and they are most likely Swedish citizens by now. So how do we go from here?
I encourage you to read that paragraph again if you think it says anything other when what I have already claimed. Please pay particular attention this part: "The correlation between socioeconomic background and crime is weak".
Well you'll have to take it up with those alleged people. Myself and those in this post are not making that argument.
The solutions are complex, and Sweden is beginning to look to Denmark. The first step is to prevent the problem getting worse. This means halting all migration from regions where immigrants demonstrate a higher per capita rate of crime. Clearly their cultural values are incompatible with Sweden. Secondly, ghettos are causing major issues in Sweden. Denmark prevents the formation of ghettos by limiting the proportion of refugees by region in any single area. Refugees are encouraged to integrate by being placed into Danish neighbourhoods. This encourages refugees to learn the language and adopt Danish values. This is crucial for integration. Finally, more demands must be placed on refugees. In Denmark, refugees must complete gates, including learning Danish, and finding a job. There are consequences for failure to comply. Sweden has no such obligations on refugees. Or at least, they did not until recently.
Despite Sweden investing more into integration than arguably any other country on Earth, their outcomes are poor. So the issue isn't about resources. It's about compliance. Their method isn't working and it's time they start imposing obligations on refugees.
You and I read the same conclusion. You took out the single part that supports your claim and ignored the rest. The whole study is about how socioeconomic status related to crime and that the factors and explanatory models are varied with no consensus among researchers. The idea of the correlation being weak is that you cannot predict criminality risk with only socioeconomic. Instead, the chain of cause and effect is much more inderect and nuanced. Look at this paragraph:
You are misreading it and possibly misinterpreting what a correlation entails. If I wanted to predict the criminal risk for a person, I cannot rely on socioeconomic alone. That, however, does not mean that socioeconomic reasons don't contribute to this, and if that was part of your conclusion then I think you are seriously misinterpreting this meta study...