European Politics Thread

And clearly these migrants saw that they had little chance to get in through these regular channels. I'm not going to judge desperate people for resorting to desperate measures, I'm going to blame the people who create these desperate situations. The blame for which, by the way, is as often as not tied to the neocolonialism of the very European states that deny them entry.

'All shall love me and despar!'

The United States of America shares a lot of the blame too for creating these situations.

edited 1st Sep '16 9:20:57 PM by Bat178

Not if it comes at the cost of those who actually need it rather than people simply trying to game the system. Not when it gives undue burden to the host.

Syria is not some "fault of neocolonial policies of the same European countries", at least not at the present time. Syria destroyed itself due to its own contradictions.

I'm going to address the second part of this first, but basically saying that "Syria destroyed itself" due to unexplained "contradictions" completely neglects the legacy of both historic and modern imperialism in the broader Middle East region and its impact on both religious fundamentalism and the establishment of undemocratic states, not to mention the omnipresent geopolitical tug-of-war between the US and Russia, on top of Turkey's interests where Kurdish self-determination is concerned, and a whole mess of other factors that directly play into the Syrian Civil War.

As for the first part, these people "trying to game the system" are people who left their lives behind to move to a complete different continent with an unfamiliar culture. Often the countries they come from have very low life expectancies, poor healthcare systems, and high homicide rates among other issues. In short, they are at a reasonably high risk of dying prematurely. They do "actually need it". Yeah the case could be made that refugees need it "more" if there's even a point in quantifying it, but like I mean if one person has cancer and will probably die because of it and another has AIDS and will probably die because of it, they both need treatment. Just because a Syrian refugee risks being killed by bullet in a warzone doesn't negate that an Algerian risks being dying because of substandard healthcare and poor food security in a "stable" country. Both are deserving of sympathy and support, especially considering that the fault for both situations lies largely at the feet of the very western states that close off their borders and pretend not to see it.

'All shall love me and despar!'

Said contradictions were the fault of the French and British specifically in the historic sense you speak of. Germany had nothing to do with Syria's predicament either then or now. So the first part of your argument fails beyond mere generalities.

As for the second part, there IS a need to quantify it, as there is not infinite resources or space. Therefore, those who need it the most (refugees of war) get first pick. Everyone else can wait like every other immigrant. Using scare quotes around the fact that they are gaming the system does not make my statement any less false or give them any special justification. The flow is essentially a humanitarian triage operation right now due to sheer scale. Just as in triage, you can't see to everyone equally. Some guy with a bruise on his head does not require nor deserve the same attention and care and resources as an amputee. The situation between refugees and economic migrants is the same thing.

To lay the blame for colonialism and imperialism only at the feet of nations that directly colonised the regions in question is just silly. One state's imperialism is always interdependent on the imperialism of other states. In a specifically modern context, for example, although it is the US that routinely bombs the Middle East, it is Germany that hosts and supports large numbers of US troops and trade between Germany and the US gives the US access to capital which it uses to maintain and expand its armed forces, so even if the planes flying over Syria do not bear the German flag they are indirectly supported by Germany. Even nations where anti-colonialism has been subsumed into the national founding myth and which are nominally neutral, meaning Ireland and probably others, our economies are closely tied to modern imperialist powers and we permit said modern imperialist powers to use our airfields. It's been a feature of global capitalism since its inception.

As for the migrants, I mean no offence but I don't see how it's a case of bruises-versus-amputees when its literally a case of life or death. Like people regularly die young in stable but impoverished countries, just like they do in warzones. There is absolutely no point in quantifying which death is somehow more important. I'll continue to use scare quotes around "gaming the system" because it's belittling what is effectively a survival tactic for thousands of people globally. The only difference really is that war is a lot harder for us to ignore than poverty, and doesn't make our complicity in the systems that result in mass human suffering so blatant.

'All shall love me and despar!'

Not to diminish or trivialize the needs of the economic migrants because they do need help, but their actions can end up causing more disasters on the long run because their actions fuel the rhetoric of the right-wingers or anti-immigrants.

They always use economic migrants masquerading as refugees as an excuse to stop accepting refugees and close their borders, and if their rhetoric receives validation, there will be chaos on the streets at the very least and the right-wingers gain absolute power at worst. It's unfortunate, but the alternative is much worse. These immigrants are turned into some sort of political stepping stones by the right-wingers.

Only an experienced editor who has a name possesses the ability to truly understand my work - What 90% of writers I'm in charge of said.

Regardless of fault, Syria is all of Europe's problem.

Mind you, those same right-wingers also want to end the Globalism that dislikes.

The problem is that the infrastructure simply doesn't exist to cope with the current quantity of migrants — the homes, schools, hospitals, even roads just don't exist (or sometimes, even the room for them to exist). Especially in the regions where migrants want to work.

edited 1st Sep '16 11:49:07 PM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On

I don't necessarily disagree with your underlying point, that the Right scapegoats economic migrants, both in general and as part of anti-refugee rhetoric, but I mean honestly I can't see a world where the Right isn't going to maintain these positions regardless. We might as well pick the option that doesn't involve turning away those in need.

'All shall love me and despar!'

Except it would still involve turning away those in need...because there simply isn't enough materials to go around, a point you failed to understand because you decided to go after the analogy rather than see the point I was making.

The better solution, for those who actually have countries to go back home to, would be to develop those countries rather than abandon them.

(wtf did I answer the wrong thread? I no longer see the post I was responding to)

edited 2nd Sep '16 1:01:57 AM by Medinoc

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."

What scarcities are we talking about here? Because when it comes to the basics (food, housing, healthcare, etc.) there's enough to spare if it means saving lives.

Developing these countries and accepting migrants are not mutually exclusive, but one is an extremely long-term goal and the other something that can alleviate massive suffering in the here and now. Besides, the former is arguably impossible so long as Europe and the rest of the Global North benefit from neocolonial trading patterns, which is essentially until capitalism is abolished.

'All shall love me and despar!'

There is a limit to the number of people any country can accomodate. The limit depends on the wealth of the host country, the attitude of its' citizen towards the migrants, the skills of the migrants and of course how much ressources are allocated to the refugees. Just giving them food and shelter (which is difficult enough, many refugees are still living in school gyms) is not enough long term. Those people want work, education and the chance of living an independent life, which will take a lot of effort and help. You'd need teachers, bureaucrats, often psychologists (because many people are traumatized) and obviously those are expensive and finite. Furthermore people in the host country are bound to get unhappy if they perceive that they are getting less because the migrants are here or that the migrants are not fitting in because of cultural or religious reasons.

Economic migrants are rarely in a position in which they have to fear for their life. There is poverty and high youth unemployment in the Maghreb states, but people are not starving there. There are countries on the way to Germany where they could live, but they don't because Germany offers them more which is understandable from their point of view but nevertheless disproves their claim for asylum, which is offered to people whose life is threatened in their home country (technically those would also be unable to apply. since they travelled through safe country, but Germany makes an exception for them).

And yeah, I'd call those who come e.g. from North Africa and apply for asylum in Germany assholes if they lie about their country of origin (like many do), become criminals (according to statistics, migrants from North Africa are vastly more likely to commit crimes than other migrants) and thus fuel the case of right-wings against genuine refugees.

If Ireland has enough of the basics to spare then that's great, but not everywhere is in such a position ecenomically, Germany and Greece certainly aren't.

And again, it's not a matter of life or death, such people get asylum because fearing for your life is grounds for asylum.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

x3 Tangentially related: Suppose you have a bottle of water that can only save one person, who do you give it to — your father or a complete stranger?

edited 2nd Sep '16 7:04:52 AM by desdendelle

The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground

Oh but Western Europe and the US have far enough materials to go around for their resident populations and then some. They just aren't fairly spread among the population.

It infuriates me to see that when faced towards a dramatic migrant crisis, it seems that the right-wing ideas (fear and hate the stranger, stay among ourselves, foreigners responsible for everything going wrong) get a larger boost than the left-wing ones (how is it possible that we struggle to welcome migrants within our aged population considering the amount of money wasted on various luxuries every year?). It really makes it look like Westerners are rotten to the core.

edited 2nd Sep '16 8:24:01 AM by Julep

That might be true (I think that depends on the country but..), but if even the resident population doesn't get a fair distribution of otherwise sufficient goods and services, what makes you think the influx will make that situation better? Especially when countries aren't taking their fair share of said influx?

x5 Luckily enough there are enough unemployed teachers and psychologists to do the job. Also migrants not fitting in is generally attributable to misconceptions and right-wing scaremongering, not a natural consequence of migration, and which will not be solved by bowing to the right and putting their beliefs into practice.

I think we might have different definitions for fearing for one's life. I mean, impoverished people even within the developed world certainly have a lot to fear, like I mean food insecurity or poor access to healthcare can be every bit as deadly as a bullet. One's a lot more dramatic and harder to ignore, but you still end up with premature death. Not grounds for asylum perhaps, but we can support and be sympathetic to people who are not asylum-seekers. It's just basic empathy.

But no let's call desperate and vulnerable people assholes for resorting to deceptive tactics in order to get into countries that grow rich on their home country's poverty why don't we. Throw in some right-wing scaremongering of your own about migrants being criminals and support and justify the right's demands with regards to immigration while we're at it, all the while acting as if their positions and yours aren't pretty much the same.

x4 Lots of people fear for their lives and don't get asylum. Lots of people are in situations that are realistically life-or-death but would get no recognition as refugees.

And besides, the issues in Greece and Germany are less to do with an actual material scarcity and more to do with distribution. Like there are 11 million empty houses in Europe, quite a few of them in Greece and Germany.

x3 Not really sure how it relates but my dad I guess?

x2

That's a fair point but in the end the enemy is not migrants but the system which creates this unfair distribution. Dismantling this system is in the interests of both the migrants and the rest of the population. Looks like a win-win situation to me.

'All shall love me and despar!'

The trouble is that quite a few empty houses are in (usually economically-deprived) places people don't want to work or live — if you place refugees/migrants there, how do you make sure they stay there and don't go elsewhere?

And replacing it with what exactly? The transition period may also end up with anarchy and Civil War (like in Syria).

edited 2nd Sep '16 11:12:43 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On

No, there are not. The only reason why the system somewhat worked so far is because many teachers (many of them retired) volunteered to work with refugees. However the number of refugees arriving in Germany was untenable in the long run, an increase like you propose would be impossible to manage.

This is a very one-sided statement. Those do exisit and are a legitimate problem, but let us not pretend that there a no mayor obstacles for integration among the refugees. There has been a recent study among refugees according to which, those refugees are more far more likely to hold homophobic, misogynist and antisemetic views and and a general scepticism regarding democracy.

Ond those are among the voices who are most strongly against refugees with the right-wing partys catering to their fear. If you know that a refugees costs the tax payer approx. 3x as much as an unemployed person, you can kind of see why they are angry. If you worked decades and paid your taxes and then have to live from unemployment, you might not like the fact that those people who have never contributed are getting more.

I do not support this scaremongering, for example I support the acceptance of Syrian refugees since those are in need and quite likely to become properly integrated. It is however a fact that many people from North Africa have posed as refugees despite having no claim for asylum, and according to police data they are far more likely to commit crimes than other migrants. Than you have problems like in Cologne and those guys ruin it for the other genuine refugees. So calling them assholes is justified in my opinion. It is also what other refugees are calling them (or worse).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year%27s_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany

Such as? At least in Germany, the current ruling is better safe than sorry. if you can somewhat plausible prove that your life is in mortal danger, you won't be deported.

Perhaps, but those vacant houses are in the countryside, often in small villages, which are losing people at alarming rate. There are no jobs (almost all new jobs are created in big cities, which are growing). Furthermore many refugees do not want to live there and instead want to go where other countrymen live. There are attempts of settling refugees there, but it is not the solution for most of them.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/12/syrian-refugees-germany-welcome-asylum

You know hell is freezing right now when me and Zarastro are on the same side of an argument. O_o

I considered making that point about myself Shinra but felt it best I didn't.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

Even I seem to be same side (and since I don't like actually having a view, that is something).

Professional Reasons.

edited 2nd Sep '16 1:18:47 PM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On

When Green does anything other than asking leading questions designed to take the conversation to weird places we know we're doomed.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran