According to a BBC story released yesterday, Switzerland's Federal Commission on Racial Discrimination believes that the Swiss method of naturalizing citizens is racist and discriminatory, and must incur far-reaching changes. The full story is posted below... An official report into the process of naturalisation in Switzerland says the current system is discriminatory and in many respects racist.
The report, from Switzerland's Federal Commission on Racial Discrimination, recommends far-reaching changes.
It criticises the practice of allowing members of a community to vote on an individual's citizenship application.
Muslims and people from the Balkans and Africa are the most likely to be rejected, the report points out.
Switzerland has Europe's toughest naturalisation laws. Foreigners must live for 12 years in a Swiss community before they can apply, and being born in Switzerland brings no right to citizenship.
Under the current system, foreigners apply through their local town or village.
They appear before a citizenship committee and answer questions about their desire to be Swiss. After that, they must often be approved by the entire voting community, in a secret ballot, or a show of hands. This practice, the report says, is particularly likely to be distorted by racial discrimination.
It cites the case of a disabled man originally from Kosovo. Although fulfilling all the legal criteria, his application for citizenship was rejected by his community on the grounds that his disability made him a burden on taxpayers, and that he was Muslim.
The report recommends that decisions on citizenship should be decided by an elected executive and not by the community as a whole. But such a move is likely to encounter stiff opposition.
Foreigners are a key issue in the run-up to Switzerland's general election next month.
The right-wing Swiss People's Party, currently leading in the opinion polls, claims Swiss communities have a democratic right to decide who can or cannot be Swiss.
My only question is this, doesn't any naturalization process imply discrimination? If it doesn't involve some level of discrimination, it's not a naturalization process at all is it? Interesting also that there's no "birthright" citizenship in Switzerland, not even for natives. I have to say, that's pretty appealing to me.
"God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it." -Daniel Webster
Yes, Terry, I would argue that there are only two ways to craft a "non-racist", "non-discriminatory" immigration policy:
ReplyDelete1. Let everybody in.
2. Let nobody in.
So when leftists say they want a "non-discriminatory" policy, we know they mean they want to let everybody in. Any policy that lets some in and not others is inherently discriminatory.
Local control of naturalization can be racist, but it doesn't have to be. There should be pre-determined qualifications on citizenship. Naturally, there will be those that are going to find some fault in those qualifications. And said persons, will call them racist qualifications. Not unlike universities, however, cities and states should want the best qualified candidates to become members of their citizenry. That doesn't have to mean that racism is present. The fact is, not just anyone can go to Harvard University (or Yale or Stanford and so on). These universities have set a high standard and I don't believe that that standard has been set forth out of racism. You know going in, that if you want to attend one of these universities, you have to rise and meet the challenge set forth by said university. We don't have to set a policy that includes or excludes everyone. There are always going to be those that will cry wolf. Let them cry. That is what free speech is all about. However, it doesn't mean that we have to react, everytime they cry.
ReplyDelete