A filmmaker and a crooked lawyer shattered Denmark's self-image

Also, I don't think someone who wants limited immigration is necessarily far right.

Nobody in Europe has a problem with LEGAL immigration, but the left wing parties and MSM keeps ignoring this and sweeping illegal immigration along the legal immigration banner to drive the narrative that Europeans are racists who hate all immigrants in order to justify (social) media censorship and restrictions on free speech to fight the "right wing extremist nazi" boogie man, which ironically, actually fuels the swing towards the extremist right wing, because the regular public discourse and communication channels for criticizing illegal immigration in public are censored/disabled.

Maybe because people have been duped so much in the last 10+ years to know that the loaded statement of "more immigration" from the government only means legalizing more ILLEGAL immigration, driving them to hate all forms of immigration because the governments have proven themselves useless at enforcing border controls and depurations of those who brake the law.

That's the result that you get when you maliciously sweep ILLEGAL immigration under the same political banner used for legal immigration, as the liberal European governments have done, so you end up hurting the image of legal immigration as well but this is the fault of politicians, not the people whoa have suffered form illegal immigration and have next to no channels of changing this other than voting far right.

Specifically, the rise of far-right parties in Scandinavia, Germany and France is very much a reaction to legal immigration from Arab and African countries. The argument is not "they're stealing our jobs", but "they're abusing our welfare benefits, driving up crime and raping our women".

2) Even huge amounts of legal asylum seekers can end up straining the already thin welfare state, so it's only normal that taxpayers paying for the welfare state, ask their politicians "where are you goanna house all these newly arrived asylum seekers when even citizens and taxpayers are struggling with housing?" or "how do you know all those unvetted people you're letting in aren't criminals or if they're compatible with our culture and values so that we and our children can feel safe in public?"

So when politicians provide no answers to those questions, how are you surprised voters aren't taking this well and choosing the extreme right?

But illegal and legal immigrants from other countries mainly consume taxpayer resources and spread crime and violence.

When you use a list of tattoo elements to identify "Venezuelan gang members" and that list is also matched by the cheap options on the wall of any random tattoo shop, you tend to get a lot of false positives.

Mr. Mota can absolutely stay in my neighborhood.

Getting stabbed on the street vs somebody giving a government contract to a buddy? If I must choose, I’d rather take the later tbh.

Why do you worry more about the very unlikely events and not at all about the almost sure events?

Yes. You answered your own question. A person who is her legally is here legally. If their claim is denied (and I'd argue in many cases the bias would be towards denying valid claims then the other way around) and they refused to leave then they'd be an unathorized immigrant without legal right to stay in the country. But before then they are explicitly there legally.

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-incredible-trump-admin-r... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/20/deported-bec...

Having your amnesty application rejected (whether the court judged fairly or too harshly) is not in any way or shape fraud. Law is complex and many refugees and asylum seekers don't fully understand the law. Even hoping it applies to you optimistically would not be fraud. Fraud is only when you purposely lie to try to gain the right to stay here. Such things happen but not nearly as often as anti immigrant people claim. Something that seems to happen more often is anti immigrant politicians lying and trying to break the law in order to restrict immigration such as by withdrawing TPS by claiming unsafe countries are now safe(so people can be deported)

2) Maybe build more housing? Maybe hire some of the new immigrants to build more housing. They're not unvetted because they are going through a vetting process. Statistically we know most aren't criminals.

But non-Western immigrants are more likely to commit crimes (i.e. on a per-capita basis).

This blog post goes into some detail, and also adjusts by sex & age (also important!).

https://inquisitivebird.xyz/p/the-effects-of-immigration-in-...

You can easily confirm the basic “Danish origin vs non-Western immigrants” statistics by doing simple math from official sources.

https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/sociale-forhold/krimin...

Persons of Danish origin commit 75% of crime yet represent 84% of the population. Immigrants are only 16% of population yet commit 25% of crime.

Or is official Danish statistics lying?

Also having an economic as well as other reaspns to immigrate does not mean someone isnt a qualified refuge or or not facing persecution or are committing fraud.

Taxes are complicated just like our immigration system. Many people make innocent mistakes every year, most people don't want IRS to come down as hard as they can on every innocent mistake by treating it as fraud without any proof. They expect corrections and if necessary small fines.aw

You not acknowledging there's a racial bias just makes you a racist.

Until you propose solutions to rising crime, rape and fracturing societal trust, then I'll listen.

Improving the living conditions and let it be known that equal opportunities exist and are viable would improve the situation.

Because when a person with dark skin is fully aware that the nice jobs aren't open to them, they'll behave consequently.

But of course you think all dark people are criminals so you wouldn't hire a dark person. You're part of the problem.