Wrong.
What do you consider to be "trivializing" are these parts where I painstakingly explain to you why military conflict or street clash between Germans and firemen cannot be considered to be a part of any national culture by very definition of the term. I do not trivialize these incidents at all.
You're under the assumption that I ever made the claim this had anything to do with culture. I am trying to make the point that you can not make a clear distinction between 'culture' and 'behaviour', and that you can find negative 'group behaviour' in every nationality if you're looking hard enough. You're trying to tell me that events like cologne have something to do with a certain 'culture'. However, I am not convinced that growing up inside a patriarchy household has necessarily to lead to people which are showing viollence toward women or even going so far as to rape them. I am not saying that those are ideal conditions, or that I agree with such views. But I do not immediately assume that people aren't capable of actually learning and adapting or that all of those chauvinists are rapists, most people coming here actually obey the laws - see refugees and crime statistics. I work with a lot of troubled teenagers with all kinds of ethnicities (mostly muslims though) for weeks now, and I have a feeling their issues and views, has a lot more to do with finding their own identiy, being simply confused and frustrated, like many teenagers, with the addition of having no father, family issues and eventually even dealing with discrimination. I am far from beeing an expert, and I am looking for an education in that field, but that's simply the experience I made. And many of them are very willing and eager to learn, once you actually simply give them a little bit of recognition and attention.
I just now realize how much of a difference it actually is if you're working with people from Syria, children/teenagers of immigrants and asylum seekers. Strange enough, refugees are extremly greatefull to everything you do and very friendly, except for those that are traumatized, but they are usually silent types not one that cause trouble. Second and third generations of immigrants, are much more difficult to deal with, showing frustration, anger issues, and all sorts of behavioural issues something that is simply typical for neglected children since I know that behaviour also from German ones. I often have no chance of reaching them, before I actually learn something about their history, possible abbuse and broken families with single parents beeing often the cause. I often have the feeling, that problems with the authorities have more to do with confussion rather than the culture of their parents which are often very hard working people, that have actually loost the right way to communicate with their children.
Call me naive if you want. But I somehow can not imagine that any decent muslim who's teaching conservative and traditional values is kinda teaching his children that he should rape any women that's not veiled or covered. But I am sure you will find some obscure example again, and extrapolate it to 100 000 of people.
I never assumed anything like that, this is just you wrongly assuming what I assume, dude. As you always do, nothing new. All I wrote is that I don't see anything wrong with subjecting a group of people with the same cultural background, be it Tunisian or Slovak background, to a targeted check if they behave aggressively or suspiciously. Check them out, arrest anyone breaking local law, let the other walk away free. Applied personal responsibility. And don't tell me that groups of aggressive native Germans are allowed to rampage freely in the street without police noticing, please.
Except, this might be actually in conflict with our constitution and that it is also highly ineffective in preventing crimes. See the US and their history of racial profiling. I am not against racial profiling because I see it as something highly immoral, I am against it because it simply doesn't work and creates more issues than it solves.
According to new research, it is no more effective to profile strongly—that is, subject individuals to increased scrutiny in proportion to their presumed likelihood of malfeasance—than it is to randomly flag individuals in the general population when it comes to rooting out terrorism. The reason, says study author William Press, a computer scientist and computational biologist at the University of Texas at Austin: terrorists are vastly outnumbered by innocents, and it's a waste of time and money to screen and rescreen the same benign people.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/racial-profiling-terrorism-statistics/
And it is even more likely that it will be at some point used aginst normal citizens, see here:
But what it does, is creating a certain image in the head of every police officer and citizens about a certain group. I mean seriously the United States is the best example when it comes to black people.
You know, you might think "yeah! Freaking leftists they always protect those
minorities!". But history simply teached us some very harsh lessons when it comes to that, and where it can end up if we aren't carefull here if we're, mixing culture, ethnicity etc. into all of it, without ever looking at the nuances and correctly analysing the sitution at hand - See cologne and the links I provided. A lot of innocent people are affected by this, normal citizens.
How often has the state accepted draconic measures, with the argument of safety and in the end it hits more innocent people than actually preventing crimes which are quite often blown out of proportion. Even cologne as horrorible as it was, is just a small number compared to all the rape incidence that happen each year with a population of 85 million people, same with terrorist attacks, like in London or Paris. Civil rights are there to protect minorities and normal citizens alike! And right now, we're not doing the right things - see the video from Kurzgesagt - but actually making it worse with this cry for more safety.
Bollocks, you can put any other example instead of football here. Consider football to be publicly accessible event, just as the new year celebrations in Cologne. When hundreds of Slovaks carrying baseball bats or suscpiciously looking bags appear in Cologne, they would be rightfully subjected to the same police check as any other, skin color doesn't play any role here.
So stereotypes don't exist for you? Is every human like a mindless robot juding people indifferently without ever placing any value on it? Please ... not even you can believe in that.Hell, even I have sterotypes in my mind for christs sake ... everyone has. Some have more, some have less.
What you're doing is comparing apples with organes, are you even aware of what you're saying? You're saying that someone is already suspicious simply beacuse of his ethnicity or skin colour and comparing it with a group of people carrying baseball bats in to a public event. What exactly is a black tunisian doing to look suspicious which warants a profile based on his ethnicity? Because one year ago there was a huge crime it means every african in cologne is now 'suspicious' at new years eve? And you seriously don't see where the problem here is regarding civil rights?
Again, a Slovak carrying baseball bats, can drop the bats and change his fan-clothes to ordinary ones. But a black person can not stop being black.
If you're a police officer and you see someone carrying a potentially dangerous object in to a public event, then of course you have a REASON to detain and search that person. But the same is not true for someone just because he's looking like a
typical Slovak, Tunisian, Arabian etc.
