If the unskilled young men were left in their home country, they would still be unskilled for the rest of their lives. But, by bringing them in we are not only teaching them how to be more skilled, but also teaching our society how to more efficiently take unskilled workers and bring them up to a highly skilled workers who can live a middle class life style like you or me. This is because the more you focus on something the better you are at it, even at a societal level. For example, a town living outside a desert is much more effective at preserving rainwater than one besides a jungle.
So, after western society has learned how to take care of immigrants better, not only is it helping them, but helping itself as well.
One could also say that having an abundance of a cheap, low quality resource, steers the economy into exploiting it instead of learning to use better alternatives.
In the case of low-skilled immigrant workers, this means not being forced to improve processes and technologies, because you can rely on a lot of cheap, unskilled manual labour.
Same logic, and I think a little bit less far-fetched than yours.
I didn't say economy, I said society. Society has a responsibility to take care of the people who live there. The capitalist economy would as soon leave them to rot, as take care of them.
In theory yes, but not in Amsterdam and the Randstad where there's too many people and too few schools. Not much chance of a middle class lifestyle there either, not with housing prices being what they are. It's a poverty lifestyle even if you manage to get a decent house; no wonder people are looking for fast, big money. Especially if they have family connections and can get away with it easily.
The best way to help Africans is for Africans to help themselves in Africa first, then we can see how to help through investments in Africa.
All the "let's welcome immigrants" discourse might give warm feelings to some but it does not help solving the issues in the countries of origin, and it also creates social issues in the countries of destination.
I think it would be much more helpful to e.g. have more students programs whereby bright young people from these countries can get visas and scholarships to study and get a professional experience in Europe with the hard requirement that they must then return to their home countries afterwards.
> The best way to help Africans is for Africans to help themselves in Africa first
That's akin to telling a homeless person, “Get a job!”
> ... creates social issues in the countries of destination.
Social pressures, which may lead to solutions.
> ...get a professional experience in Europe with the hard requirement that they must then return to their home countries afterwards.
What's to prevent these bright young professionals as soon as they are flown back to their country from just getting sponsored by a company in another foreign country and then hopping on a plane again?
What you're advocating for is a very weak attempt at finding a solution by doing much of the same. Unless society is pushed, it will never change. Immigration provides pressure for society to learn how to integrate poorer people, whether homegrown or foreign, helping everybody.
That's an incredibly naive and irresponsible approach to building a society. You're basically inviting a huge social challenge and stressor into otherwise perfectly functional and harmonious societies just to possibly further your own political and social agenda. You're like an engineer who throws a few bugs into a functioning system because "it will force the system to improve".
The prosperous parts of the world are prosperous because the people living there made them prosperous. Unprosperous parts of the world could do the same if they followed the well worn path of development (law, order, stability, individuals working hard to learn and build business and enterprise, etc.) that all developed nations have followed.
> You're like an engineer who throws a few bugs into a functioning system because "it will force the system to improve".
You realize societies develop on their own, right? And they deal with stressors all the time, right?
Unlike, say, an engine, which is only a collection of moving parts designed to work only one way...
> > You're like an engineer who throws a few bugs into a functioning system because "it will force the system to improve".
You realize societies develop on their own, right? And they deal with stressors all the time, right?
Unlike, say, an engine, which is only a collection of moving parts designed to work one way...
> The prosperous parts of the world are prosperous because the people living there made them prosperous
Now who's being naïve? You think the world is some sort of boardgame where everyone starts with the same amount of resources and gets the same options? I really don't know where to start with this...
Yes, usually the solution is clamping down on immigration...
> Immigration provides pressure for society to learn how to integrate poorer people, whether homegrown or foreign, helping everybody.
It does not create such pressure. As said, it only creates pressure to implement tougher rules on immigration.
And it certainly does not help the countries of origin, which see their working age population leave and help a foreign economy instead of staying and helping the country.
Again, Africans need to help themselves at home. No-one will or can develop African countries but Africans (the same goes for all countries, not only African ones).
> Yes, usually the solution is clamping down on immigration...
That's not a solution more than a choice not to face a problem.
> It does not create such pressure. As said, it only creates pressure to implement tougher rules on immigration.
Seeing people suffering all around you does create social pressure, in normal human beings, at least. I'm not trying to be trite here, but I don't think you really can deny that people seeing other people suffer inspires them to give.
> And it certainly does not help the countries of origin, which see their working age population leave and help a foreign economy instead of staying and helping the country.
Immigrant workers often send money home that far exceeds what they could ever make if they stayed. And they often do come back, after saving enough to retire, enriching their culture with western ideas as well.
> Again, Africans need to help themselves at home. No-one will or can develop African countries but Africans (the same goes for all countries, not only African ones).
Will you take a second to look at what you're saying? You might as well be talking about any group in need, ex. No one will or can help the homeless, but themselves. No one will or can help the disabled but themselves.
People can help other people, and often do. All you're doing here is basically saying “Everyone only for themselves” only you've cut the dividing lines by country. You might as well cut it by race, or social strata, it amounts to the same thing.
> If the unskilled young men were left in their home country, they would still be unskilled for the rest of their lives.
Most people involved in these groups are either second or third generation children of immigrants who specifically came for work which was available in the late 50's, 60's and early 70's which were specifically targeted since there was a major lack of available manpower due to fast economic growth and reduced workforce (since there was a small war a decade or so ago). Unskilled maybe but they definitely had work.
The vast majority of narco crime in NL is done by ethnic Dutch people. Sure, there's other ethnicities too. Like most crime, generally it's a pretty representative mix of the poorer classes.
Immigration causes all kinds of things, good and bad, but increased drug crime isn't really on the list so far.
Source: I live in the south of NL (narco hotspot) and I read the local newspaper. Majority of drug criminals caught have Dutch names. I'm sure there's better stats somewhere but can't be arsed.
To be fair, TFA's take stresses these connections: "Young Moroccans call each other 'Mocro'...", and "... West Africa. The drugs then went north over old smuggling lines from Morocco, and young Moroccans whose parents had moved to the Netherlands still had family connections and migration routes to tap into."
Only one part of it. Most synthetic drugs are made on site or smuggled in though different routes not involving the parties described. It's a wide mix but due to some "grouping" of certain ethnicity in groups they easily get called out the same while there is a wide variety of people involved.
Most is coming in via the Rotterdam harbor (and possibly Vlissingen, IJmuiden and others). And as far as I can read up on it, every ethnic group available is somehow involved in some part of it.
To be clear I don't have a position on this, I don't know enough about NL. The now-invisible top-level comment was being taken to task for stressing the Moroccans' involvement, which the BBC also focused on. I'm sure there are other aspects to the drug business.
Well I have heard narratives about white kids in poorer neighborhoods not applying for that gas station/fast food job because they see it as something that the immigrants do. And then getting stuck in a poverty trap leading to crime.
The solutions to that from conservatives is obviously reduce immigration. Progressives need to think about how these kind of dynamics can be changed.
The Dutch have been manufacturing and trafficking drugs for decades, MDMA, LSD, 2CB, speed, cocaine. A lot of the stuff you see online in Dark Net markets comes from Holland.
“Our findings suggest that even a first low cumulative dose of Ecstasy is associated with decline in verbal memory. Although the performance of the group of incident Ecstasy users is still within the normal range and the immediate clinical relevance of the observed deficits is limited, long-term negative consequences cannot be excluded.“
I’m curious to see if there are, or have been any studies in the long term effects?
It needs to be used incredibly frequently and at very high doses.
“Some people taking MDMA have died following severe overheating and other medical emergencies. Deaths following the use of MDMA usually involve high doses and/or the simultaneous use of other substances. MDMA overdoses and drug combinations can also cause serotonin syndrome, which can be fatal. MDMA-associated deaths may alternatively involve overcompensation of the risk of dehydration by drinking much too much water, which coupled with the fact that MDMA may stop a person from urinating, causing fatally low concentrations of salt.”
This website contains a lot of information and is well sourced. All in all, compared to other drugs MDMA is quite safe when taken properly and in proper doses. A lot of deaths come from what people think is MDMA but actually isn’t.
Oh cmon. I live in Europe and I'm all for legalizing drugs, all drugs, but only a few popular drugs come to my mind which are more harmful then MDMA...
Americans can talk about how harmful fake MDMA is and how you can manage risk better if it's legal. But anyone living in Europe, where there's loads of high quality stuff selling for a few euros per dose, and socialising with other users can easily see the harm it does.
As far as drugs go, legal and illegal, MDMA is fairly safe, unless abused. But I think that's irrelevant when it comes to legalizing or decriminalizing.
It doesn't really matter how bad it is for you since, at the moment, nothing is stopping you from buying and swallowing as much as you can. The ones who will do harm with it when legalized are the same ones who do it now. The legality of it does not do anything to stop harm from being done.
I think you're confusing MDMA and ecstasy. Most non-users think they're the same thing, when, in reality, they're like tea and Nestea: MDMA is the main component of XTC pills, but they often also have MDA, 2CB, amphetamine, methamphetamine, mephedrone and other components inside, which break through habitual users tolerance, but also significantly raise neurotoxicity and hangover. Pure crystal MDMA is much less toxic and often can surprise someone who used pills before by an almost complete lack of suicide Tuesday syndrome.
Yes, although many ecstacy pills tested in the Netherlands consistently show that they have very high purity in terms of the MDMA content and almost never contain the other things you mentioned bar some occassional exceptions (like the PMMA containing pills, which is ofcourse very dangerous).
What also doesnt help is that drugs is kind-a accepted in the party scene. XTC, Cocaine, in certain circles its quite normal that its used. And buying it is very easy.
Also the police doesn't prioritize handling this. I heard that accross one police station taxis would stop, get somebody in the cart, drive 100m, and then the person gets out.
The police knew that drugs was being dealed here, but they didnt prioritize dealing with that. I don;t know exactly why.
Also: In the evening/night, in Amsterdam city centry, you can see certain guys wandering around: They are drugs dealers, everybody who know how to recognize them will see them popup everywhere. Including the police.
But as long as the police doesn't SEE them dealing the drugs, they cant do anything.
That including tall the XTC producing labs in the south of holland, and the perfect infrastructure, big harbours make the Netherlands an ideal breeding ground for big drugs networks.
To be honest, i think we should legalize more, and accept that there is a market for it. Yes i'm dutch too :-)
I was there just recently and you practically need to push them away. Even when I got an uber back to the hotel the driver tried to sell me weed, some kind of gas canisters with laughing gas or something, and a handful other similar shit.
Please do not buy drugs from the street. Ask for a reliable dealer through a Dutch friend. Also either way always send the pills to a test lab if you have the time. They will tell you how much is in there so you know what you are taking and can dose accordingly. The infrastructure for safe usage is there; so use it!
Black (or of African descent), alert, hands in hoodie's pockets, locking gazes, and trying to understand the message in your gaze. Usually everyone's moving except them (except people on their phones), when they move it's back and forth within a short distance.
Before you scream: "Racist!"
I'm black (African, to be precise). I'm describing my experience in several places in Germany (where I live), Prague, and Amsterdam. I trade nods (of acknowledgement) with them and sometimes stop to speak with the Africans who speak my type of pidgin English.
These are just runners. A significant portion of the (Amsterdam) drug trade is handled by the so-called mocro-maffia, a group of predominantly Moroccan-descended criminals. Much of the Dutch production is however commonly in Dutch hands.
We can reliably get this brown looking molly sent over to the UK from Amsterdam. Not sure what the risks involved are but it usually arrives in a birthday card.
Answer: no. Not by any real definition of a narco-state[1].
There is a lot of drug trafficking/production, but there is no meaningful infiltration into the official institutions/government.
The reason for people being upset is not the drug usage, which is actually not much of an issue (arguably less so than in other countries). The local drug policies actually work in preventing that from becoming an epidemic issue like elsewhere.
The real reason is the high profile violent murders of witnesses, lawyers, etc. associated with trials of high profile criminals with Moroccan roots. This particular minority has been the focus of populist politicians for decades because of the much higher crime rates in that community (compared to other minorities). Murders and assassinations are of course not specific to that minority. Recently, re-convicted Willem Holleder (famous for his part in kidnapping Freddie Heineken in the eighties) is basically in jail for ordering the liquidation of several of his criminal partners. Unlike his Moroccon colleagues he's somewhat of a celebrity and has been for decades.
In any case drug production and export is of course illegal but not considered much of a problem as long as people don't go about machine gunning each other down. I'm not a user of any of this stuff but if other people want to take some pills, smoke some weed, or snort some cocaine that's fine with me. I doubt it's very good for you but most people doing this seem to not end up being homeless drug addicts. The ones that do tend to have psychological issues. Decriminalizing them seems like a humane thing to do. In any case, legalizing this stuff so people don't have to engage with and enrich hardcore criminals would probably be a good thing. Like it or not, this is a multi billion dollar business and it's not going away.
> They are aspirational, they are looking for a career in the underworld.
I bet they would have been really happy to become corporate lawyers, highly paid computer programmers or big-4 accountants, but I have a slight feeling those career opportunities were never quite open for them (except for a very lucky few). In other words, if you only provide a "life of crime" as a way of getting out of poverty you can be sure that there be will lots and lots of people choosing that. And who can blame them?
The thing is, they have so many opportunities in the Netherlands.
The true problem is the culture, and I'm not talking about maroccan culture, but "mocro". This is a culture that developed over 3/4 generations where the criminal path is the "cool" option.
The right basically imported them to do jobs the dutch felt too good for. Then they were told by the left not to hit their kids, but weren't told how to raise them instead. All respect for the father (important in that culture) got lost and the kids ended on the streets, giving each other a feed back loop to "screw those stupid dutchies".
The dutch also failed in regards of spreading them, which allowed for this culture to develop.
For example, white or black schools were unthinkable about 20 years ago. It simply didn't exist because everything was mixed. Nowadays this is a real thing.
I like how the conservative BBC, writing from a country whose murder rate is double that of the Netherlands, is trying to hype up violence Amsterdam because they don't like drugs. What a bunch of shit.
Even so, liquidations are on the up in the Netherlands, and they are almost always drug-mob related. There's not enough money to patrol the south-Dutch countryside for illegal production and disposal, which is turning into the number one environmental issue the country has (apart from climate-related problems). The Police of Amsterdam had to shutter their major crimes unit for lack of funding, Dutch Police has some of the worst solving rates in Europe anyway, liquidations are predominantly in this city and are spilling over into non-criminal life, lawyers are being killed in the streets, are recusing themselves every day.
Thing may not be as violent as in Britain, but the country is on course for it, mainly due to drug related criminal activity. Some newspapers, even the justice minister recently, theorize that the lack of experience of Police in dealing with major crime is just not well developed in general, which together with a generally relaxed attitude and a central and well connected location in Europe (port of Rotterdam, airport of Amsterdam) make the country an ideal place to conduct such drug-business in relative quiet.
Derk Wiersum, Philippe Schol recently. I lost track of the number of recusations. The professional club has openend a hotline for judges and laywers in case of threats (which largely go unreported in the media for obvious reasons) [1].
Most liquidations (attempts) are indeed other criminals, so far, but also that number is rising. A somewhat dated (2016) timeline from Amsterdam newspaper Het Parool [1].
The scary thing is that the Netherlands basically doesnt have major crimes units. There a good forensics bureau, which is also under heavy strain [2], and a small department at the National Police. That makes is trivial for hardened criminals to stay under the radar: there is (almost) no radar.
Unfortunately, I think a less favorable Dutch trait lies at the root for a lack of interest in such matters: people believe so strongly this is a nice and 'civilized' place, most people refuse to even entertain the idea anything could be seriously out of whack in 'paradise'.
There is a sort of reinforcing feedback loop to preferring to pretend all is well: to most people things of course are usually well and if everyone thinks all is well most people will behave well. But if you're one of the unlucky ones affected by such issues, you'll find it very difficult to convince people, after all, all is well.
Thank you for the comment. To be fair, the Netherlands is as close to paradise as I can imagine, as long as the definition of paradise is not one of palm trees and warm weather.
Even though I am outraged by what is happening, I can't help but feel that something is happening to tackle this. The Netherlands is a very sane place, after all, and I'd like to think that whoever can do something about this is doing something about it.
I'm afraid I don't share your optimism. The Ministry of Justice is widely reported to be in disarray, a fiefdom with warring factions out of control, all the while neoliberalist governments have been gutting it, as have the Police (hence the cancellation of the Major Crimes unit in Amsterdam, which was tiny to begin with) and the prosecutors office, and legal assistance and general availability of the judiciary to citizens (closure of courthouses).
Things are on course to become worse, at this time. Carefully some people start to suggest we need Italian-style investments to be able to track, uncover and handle this level and amount of crime, but we are nowhere near understanding or funding that. There is just no expertise, and no(t much) electoral pressure to fund it. Half of our 'sanity' is simply looking away from problems and hoping they pass of their own accord. That works sometimes, but here I'm not getting my hopes up.
For those like me who never heard the term "supergrass" before, and are even more confused after Googling and finding out the entire first page of results are about an English rock band of that name:
> Supergrass is a British slang term for an informant who turns Queen's evidence, often in return for protection and immunity from prosecution. In the British criminal world, police informants have been called "grasses" since the late 1930s, and the "super" prefix was coined by journalists in the early 1970s to describe those who witnessed against fellow criminals in a series of high-profile mass trials at the time
79 comments
[ 201 ms ] story [ 2662 ms ] threadSo, after western society has learned how to take care of immigrants better, not only is it helping them, but helping itself as well.
In the case of low-skilled immigrant workers, this means not being forced to improve processes and technologies, because you can rely on a lot of cheap, unskilled manual labour.
Same logic, and I think a little bit less far-fetched than yours.
All the "let's welcome immigrants" discourse might give warm feelings to some but it does not help solving the issues in the countries of origin, and it also creates social issues in the countries of destination.
I think it would be much more helpful to e.g. have more students programs whereby bright young people from these countries can get visas and scholarships to study and get a professional experience in Europe with the hard requirement that they must then return to their home countries afterwards.
That's akin to telling a homeless person, “Get a job!”
> ... creates social issues in the countries of destination.
Social pressures, which may lead to solutions.
> ...get a professional experience in Europe with the hard requirement that they must then return to their home countries afterwards.
What's to prevent these bright young professionals as soon as they are flown back to their country from just getting sponsored by a company in another foreign country and then hopping on a plane again?
What you're advocating for is a very weak attempt at finding a solution by doing much of the same. Unless society is pushed, it will never change. Immigration provides pressure for society to learn how to integrate poorer people, whether homegrown or foreign, helping everybody.
The prosperous parts of the world are prosperous because the people living there made them prosperous. Unprosperous parts of the world could do the same if they followed the well worn path of development (law, order, stability, individuals working hard to learn and build business and enterprise, etc.) that all developed nations have followed.
You realize societies develop on their own, right? And they deal with stressors all the time, right?
Unlike, say, an engine, which is only a collection of moving parts designed to work only one way...
> > You're like an engineer who throws a few bugs into a functioning system because "it will force the system to improve".
You realize societies develop on their own, right? And they deal with stressors all the time, right?
Unlike, say, an engine, which is only a collection of moving parts designed to work one way...
> The prosperous parts of the world are prosperous because the people living there made them prosperous
Now who's being naïve? You think the world is some sort of boardgame where everyone starts with the same amount of resources and gets the same options? I really don't know where to start with this...
Yes, usually the solution is clamping down on immigration...
> Immigration provides pressure for society to learn how to integrate poorer people, whether homegrown or foreign, helping everybody.
It does not create such pressure. As said, it only creates pressure to implement tougher rules on immigration.
And it certainly does not help the countries of origin, which see their working age population leave and help a foreign economy instead of staying and helping the country.
Again, Africans need to help themselves at home. No-one will or can develop African countries but Africans (the same goes for all countries, not only African ones).
That's not a solution more than a choice not to face a problem.
> It does not create such pressure. As said, it only creates pressure to implement tougher rules on immigration.
Seeing people suffering all around you does create social pressure, in normal human beings, at least. I'm not trying to be trite here, but I don't think you really can deny that people seeing other people suffer inspires them to give.
> And it certainly does not help the countries of origin, which see their working age population leave and help a foreign economy instead of staying and helping the country.
Immigrant workers often send money home that far exceeds what they could ever make if they stayed. And they often do come back, after saving enough to retire, enriching their culture with western ideas as well.
> Again, Africans need to help themselves at home. No-one will or can develop African countries but Africans (the same goes for all countries, not only African ones).
Will you take a second to look at what you're saying? You might as well be talking about any group in need, ex. No one will or can help the homeless, but themselves. No one will or can help the disabled but themselves.
People can help other people, and often do. All you're doing here is basically saying “Everyone only for themselves” only you've cut the dividing lines by country. You might as well cut it by race, or social strata, it amounts to the same thing.
Most people involved in these groups are either second or third generation children of immigrants who specifically came for work which was available in the late 50's, 60's and early 70's which were specifically targeted since there was a major lack of available manpower due to fast economic growth and reduced workforce (since there was a small war a decade or so ago). Unskilled maybe but they definitely had work.
Immigration causes all kinds of things, good and bad, but increased drug crime isn't really on the list so far.
Source: I live in the south of NL (narco hotspot) and I read the local newspaper. Majority of drug criminals caught have Dutch names. I'm sure there's better stats somewhere but can't be arsed.
Most is coming in via the Rotterdam harbor (and possibly Vlissingen, IJmuiden and others). And as far as I can read up on it, every ethnic group available is somehow involved in some part of it.
The solutions to that from conservatives is obviously reduce immigration. Progressives need to think about how these kind of dynamics can be changed.
We are a very large producer (the largest?) and the stuff is not harmful enough to warrant the prohibition and all of the crime it entails.
“Our findings suggest that even a first low cumulative dose of Ecstasy is associated with decline in verbal memory. Although the performance of the group of incident Ecstasy users is still within the normal range and the immediate clinical relevance of the observed deficits is limited, long-term negative consequences cannot be excluded.“
I’m curious to see if there are, or have been any studies in the long term effects?
“Some people taking MDMA have died following severe overheating and other medical emergencies. Deaths following the use of MDMA usually involve high doses and/or the simultaneous use of other substances. MDMA overdoses and drug combinations can also cause serotonin syndrome, which can be fatal. MDMA-associated deaths may alternatively involve overcompensation of the risk of dehydration by drinking much too much water, which coupled with the fact that MDMA may stop a person from urinating, causing fatally low concentrations of salt.”
Source: https://drugscience.org.uk/drug-information/mdma/
This website contains a lot of information and is well sourced. All in all, compared to other drugs MDMA is quite safe when taken properly and in proper doses. A lot of deaths come from what people think is MDMA but actually isn’t.
Americans can talk about how harmful fake MDMA is and how you can manage risk better if it's legal. But anyone living in Europe, where there's loads of high quality stuff selling for a few euros per dose, and socialising with other users can easily see the harm it does.
It doesn't really matter how bad it is for you since, at the moment, nothing is stopping you from buying and swallowing as much as you can. The ones who will do harm with it when legalized are the same ones who do it now. The legality of it does not do anything to stop harm from being done.
What I do see is MDMA being more and more accepted as a therapeutic tool, given further studies will confirm what the research has told us until now.
Also the police doesn't prioritize handling this. I heard that accross one police station taxis would stop, get somebody in the cart, drive 100m, and then the person gets out. The police knew that drugs was being dealed here, but they didnt prioritize dealing with that. I don;t know exactly why.
Also: In the evening/night, in Amsterdam city centry, you can see certain guys wandering around: They are drugs dealers, everybody who know how to recognize them will see them popup everywhere. Including the police.
But as long as the police doesn't SEE them dealing the drugs, they cant do anything.
That including tall the XTC producing labs in the south of holland, and the perfect infrastructure, big harbours make the Netherlands an ideal breeding ground for big drugs networks.
To be honest, i think we should legalize more, and accept that there is a market for it. Yes i'm dutch too :-)
Just out of curiosity, what are the tells for a drug dealer in Amsterdam? Asking for a friend.
I was there just recently and you practically need to push them away. Even when I got an uber back to the hotel the driver tried to sell me weed, some kind of gas canisters with laughing gas or something, and a handful other similar shit.
Before you scream: "Racist!"
I'm black (African, to be precise). I'm describing my experience in several places in Germany (where I live), Prague, and Amsterdam. I trade nods (of acknowledgement) with them and sometimes stop to speak with the Africans who speak my type of pidgin English.
Legit great stuff 10/10, keep it coming boys.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco-state
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
"Is React going to upend the programming world forever?!"
"AMD Soars, is Intel's time over?"
etc. etc.
The real reason is the high profile violent murders of witnesses, lawyers, etc. associated with trials of high profile criminals with Moroccan roots. This particular minority has been the focus of populist politicians for decades because of the much higher crime rates in that community (compared to other minorities). Murders and assassinations are of course not specific to that minority. Recently, re-convicted Willem Holleder (famous for his part in kidnapping Freddie Heineken in the eighties) is basically in jail for ordering the liquidation of several of his criminal partners. Unlike his Moroccon colleagues he's somewhat of a celebrity and has been for decades.
In any case drug production and export is of course illegal but not considered much of a problem as long as people don't go about machine gunning each other down. I'm not a user of any of this stuff but if other people want to take some pills, smoke some weed, or snort some cocaine that's fine with me. I doubt it's very good for you but most people doing this seem to not end up being homeless drug addicts. The ones that do tend to have psychological issues. Decriminalizing them seems like a humane thing to do. In any case, legalizing this stuff so people don't have to engage with and enrich hardcore criminals would probably be a good thing. Like it or not, this is a multi billion dollar business and it's not going away.
I bet they would have been really happy to become corporate lawyers, highly paid computer programmers or big-4 accountants, but I have a slight feeling those career opportunities were never quite open for them (except for a very lucky few). In other words, if you only provide a "life of crime" as a way of getting out of poverty you can be sure that there be will lots and lots of people choosing that. And who can blame them?
Thing may not be as violent as in Britain, but the country is on course for it, mainly due to drug related criminal activity. Some newspapers, even the justice minister recently, theorize that the lack of experience of Police in dealing with major crime is just not well developed in general, which together with a generally relaxed attitude and a central and well connected location in Europe (port of Rotterdam, airport of Amsterdam) make the country an ideal place to conduct such drug-business in relative quiet.
I mean... that happened once.
This all is unprecedented.
[1] https://www.advocatenorde.nl/nieuws/contactpunt-beroepsgroep...
Either way, this is terrifying and would have never expected this in the Netherlands.
The scary thing is that the Netherlands basically doesnt have major crimes units. There a good forensics bureau, which is also under heavy strain [2], and a small department at the National Police. That makes is trivial for hardened criminals to stay under the radar: there is (almost) no radar.
[1] https://www.parool.nl/nieuws/tijdlijn-de-vete-in-de-marokkaa... [2] https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/07/13/nfi-onderzocht-wegens-v...
Is this something that concerns people around you? Is it like a major shock to everybody?
There is a sort of reinforcing feedback loop to preferring to pretend all is well: to most people things of course are usually well and if everyone thinks all is well most people will behave well. But if you're one of the unlucky ones affected by such issues, you'll find it very difficult to convince people, after all, all is well.
Even though I am outraged by what is happening, I can't help but feel that something is happening to tackle this. The Netherlands is a very sane place, after all, and I'd like to think that whoever can do something about this is doing something about it.
Things are on course to become worse, at this time. Carefully some people start to suggest we need Italian-style investments to be able to track, uncover and handle this level and amount of crime, but we are nowhere near understanding or funding that. There is just no expertise, and no(t much) electoral pressure to fund it. Half of our 'sanity' is simply looking away from problems and hoping they pass of their own accord. That works sometimes, but here I'm not getting my hopes up.
> Supergrass is a British slang term for an informant who turns Queen's evidence, often in return for protection and immunity from prosecution. In the British criminal world, police informants have been called "grasses" since the late 1930s, and the "super" prefix was coined by journalists in the early 1970s to describe those who witnessed against fellow criminals in a series of high-profile mass trials at the time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supergrass_(informant)