European refugee crisis [split]

[Levike]

Still the fact that you consider yourself better than people who are escaping war just because you didn't jump any fence, is quite disgusting.

Those people already escaped war once they got thousands of kms away from Syria into the nearest refugee camp.

No need to jump 5-6 countries further.

And let me know, is France building up any wall or fence in their borders?

France can't because Italy is part of the EU.

If Serbia were to be part of the EU then this construction would have been banned.

[loqu]

And let me know, is France building up any wall or fence in their borders?

Nope, right, that's your country.

France is only using cordons of policemen to keep the refugees out. I don't see much difference though.

First of all, Spain is not my country. It's the state I'm forced to pay taxes to. So I'd be thankful if you stopped using possessives related to me when speaking about Spain.

Second of all, same you did with vijayjohn, you seem to forget that the fact that we are citizens of a country doesn't mean we support every stupid measure their government does. I've been member of political parties and associations that actively opposed the Melilla fence since it is a freaking shame. So what now?

[Патрислав Андреевич]

In the beginning I need to say I'll ignore any allegations of racism and/or xenohobia, since - as Ludwig said - it prevents any meaningful discussion. And now I can start.

People can also join the 21st century.

Anarchy and uncontrolled flood of people who don't even want to register, and have demands from a host country they broke into, is your idea of the 21st century?

And some of y'all are apparently taking issue with the fact that these people are Syrian. Syria is closer to all of us geographically than India is, and for some of you, it's even closer than the US is. My culture is even harder for you to relate to than theirs is. So what position does that put me in then, did you ever think of that? You may think that as part of the Western world, your values, etc. are superior to those of the rest of the world. You may tell me that everyone including me should be themselves, feel free to explore their sexuality, and so on and so forth. But when you express your perception of a group of people as a huge threat apparently just because they're different from you, and those people are less different from you than I am, how do you expect me to trust you?

If even they have to put up with so much hate from you, just how safe am I on this forum? Ask yourselves that!

I don't see anyone taking issue with the fact they're Syrian. There were concerns about the fact that are crossing multiple country borders illegally, don't register as refugees but instead continue the illegal jourmey to Germany, while making a mess in the process; and there were also concerns about their religion and values.

And I don't understand why y'all are making that big of a deal out of it. (And for...is this the third time now? I don't think I ever will, either).

Because country borders are important shit, laws are important shit, having documents with you so that you can be identified is important shit! It wouldn't be cool if some uninvited group of strangers entered your house and started roaming around and making mess.

Sovereign countries must be able to decide who gets in.

Just because Eastern Europe is not Syria doesn't mean they can't face violence there, too. But anyway, it seems like your point is that they are refugees from the war in Syria, not from something happening in Eastern Europe (just to be clear).

And the only place in Europe without violence is Germany? Time to move and apply for refugee status... But seriously, yes, that's what I mean.

Will they really be safe? Does the country want them there, and if not, then how can they possibly be safe there? They're not.

So is there even a place that they can be considered "safe"?

Who's talking about dying?

You did!

They could be imprisoned or sent back if not obeying the law.

And sending them back is practically leaving them to die.

And that's exactly what Orbán's government will do with any illegal immigrant found in the country who hasn't registered. Finally some balls, gotta love him for that.

Oh yeah, sending thousands of people to their deaths. So brave and manly.

"who hasn't registered"

No. But there's a middle ground between that extreme and the other extreme of sending them all back or imprisoning them all.

That middle ground is "come with us peacefully, we'll register you and think what to do next." Or you mean something else?

The issue as far as I can tell so far is that no one really wants to take them in. No country seems to be interested in taking all of them in, but some countries don't seem to be interested in taking any of them in, either, which makes it difficult at best to divide them among the European countries.

I don't agree with whole countries taking them and putting in German concentration camps. Instead charity organisations, fundations, Church, and individuals should... if they want to stay. Funnily enough, the parish in my town took a family (or a group? reports vary) in, provided apartment, job, private school for kids, and parishians bought bikes for all of them. They ran away this week, I don't even have to say when, everybody knew that.


Oh, also, since there's a lot of criticism of Hungarian policies... At first Germany complained that so many unregistered immigrants fome through Hungary. Now there are complaints that Hungary is doing something with it. I don't know what would they have to do to not be criticised.

[Levike]

I've been member of political parties and associations that actively opposed the Melilla fence since it is a freaking shame. So what now?

The people who come through Spain though Melilla, what are they looking for?

Are they refugees? What's wrong with Morocco, why should they be allowed to come through?

In any case, Spain is a EU country and should protect the EU outer-borders.

[IpseDixit]

I simply wanted to point out the double standard.

Hungary builds a fence---> they're racist xenophobic fascists.

Spain builds a fence, France amasses droves of policemen on the border with Italy, France hunts refugees in Calais, Britain checks whether some refugees might have sneaked through the Channel tunnel, Denmark closes its doors to refugees from Germany ---> meh, ok.

[md0]

I simply wanted to point out the double standard.
---> meh, ok.

Only for the willingly ignorant.
The rest join political movements that oppose Fortress Europe.

[Varislintu]

Being deported to Serbia does not equal dying.

You do mean Syria, don't you?

No, I think he means Serbia, because that's how it works in Europe: a refugee (actually, I think the correct term we should be using is asylum-seeker) registers in the country of arrival, and if they then enter another country, that country is allowed to deport them back to the country of original registration. That's why many of the refugees are trying to avoid being registered for example in Hungary. If they then go to Germany, where they want to stay, Germany can deport them back to Hungary. They need to get all the way to Germany before authorities have a chance to register them, so that they can't be deported.

It truly is amazing how far the asylum-seekers are willing to travel. Apparently they are now crossing the Russia-to-Norway border up in the Last Rim of Europe, and they even know to do it on a bike because walking across the border is prohibited. I wonder if some of them then cross over to Sweden from Norway (in the wilderness), because they also enter Finland at the Sweden-Finland border town of Tornio. That is one lengthy detour.

[vijayjohn]

In the beginning I need to say I'll ignore any allegations of racism and/or xenohobia, since - as Ludwig said - it prevents any meaningful discussion.

It's racism and xenophobia themselves that prevent any meaningful discussion, not accusations thereof.

Anarchy and uncontrolled flood of people who don't even want to register, and have demands from a host country they broke into, is your idea of the 21st century?

Nope. But trying to reverse xenophobic policies is.

I don't see anyone taking issue with the fact they're Syrian. There were concerns about the fact that are crossing multiple country borders illegally, don't register as refugees but instead continue the illegal jourmey to Germany, while making a mess in the process; and there were also concerns about their religion and values.

Only you brought up making a mess, and what is so concerning about "their religion and values" given that their religion is also practiced by the majority of Bosnians and Albanians and their values are hardly more different from yours than Western European values are?

Because country borders are important shit, laws are important shit, having documents with you so that you can be identified is important shit! It wouldn't be cool if some uninvited group of strangers entered your house and started roaming around and making mess.

Sovereign countries must be able to decide who gets in.

I partially disagree; given the history of the group of people whose language I wrote my thesis on, I think of borders as being somewhat overrated. But even if you're completely right, laws are not static. Like loqu said, if you live in a democracy, you do have a say in determining the nature of said laws. So why keep them the way they are?

So is there even a place that they can be considered "safe"?

Apparently in Germany they are, relatively speaking.

"who hasn't registered"

To me, that makes no difference. Deporting people to war zones is cruel and unusual punishment, end of story.

That middle ground is "come with us peacefully, we'll register you and think what to do next." Or you mean something else?

I'm not so sure, and I think it may require a lot more careful consideration than that. But I don't think it's at all fair to come to a decision without taking into consideration the positions of all parties directly involved in the issue; in other words, the concerns of the immigrants/refugees/asylum-seekers/whatever themselves also matter, not solely those of Europeans.

I don't agree with whole countries taking them and putting in German concentration camps.

Huh?

Anyway, when I said I was willing to agree to disagree, I didn't just mean with Levike; I meant with everyone. Each of us is firmly convinced of our own views, and I didn't even mean to start an argument in the first place, just express my opinion and be done with it, even though that's exactly what ended up happening. So I'd like to ask you, are you willing to agree to disagree as well?

No, I think he means Serbia, because that's how it works in Europe: a refugee (actually, I think the correct term we should be using is asylum-seeker) registers in the country of arrival, and if they then enter another country, that country is allowed to deport them back to the country of original registration. That's why many of the refugees are trying to avoid being registered for example in Hungary. If they then go to Germany, where they want to stay, Germany can deport them back to Hungary. They need to get all the way to Germany before authorities have a chance to register them, so that they can't be deported.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation!

[Varislintu]

Each of us is firmly convinced of our own views,

I feel like I am lacking strong conviction in any direction at the moment, because this issue is complex on the practical level (even if we probably all have firm ethical frameworks that affect our opinions).

I do feel that 200 000 is not such a gigantic amount of people that Europe couldn't handle it. But of course I also realise that if the asylum seekers are dead-set on going to Germany or Sweden, then distributing them evenly will not work. They will go to a handful of cities anyway (because they don't even always want a specific country, they want a specific city, like the group of Arabs who recently in Sweden refused to step out of their transport bus because they were taken to an arrival centre in mid-Sweden, stating that it was too cold and forested and unpopulated and they want to go to Stockholm . I mean, bless their culture shock but still, it was probably not the best situation to start making demands. ).

[vijayjohn]

I feel like I am lacking strong conviction in any direction at the moment, because this issue is complex on the practical level (even if we probably all have firm ethical frameworks that affect our opinions).

Fair enough. I mostly meant Levike, Patrislav, and IpseDixit, since they're the ones who were basically arguing with me here (and not that that's necessarily a bad thing, just an endeavor that I see as pointless).

[linguoboy]

I do feel that 200 000 is not such a gigantic amount of people that Europe couldn't handle it.

200,000 people in a population of half a billion honestly sounds like nothing to me. That's less than one twenty-fifth of the number of natural births in the EU each year, and y'all have no trouble dealing with those.

[IpseDixit]

200,000 people in a population of half a billion honestly sounds like nothing to me. That's less than one twenty-fifth of the number of natural births in the EU each year, and y'all have no trouble dealing with those.

You're forgetting all the people that Europe is already hosting.

So I'd like to ask you, are you willing to agree to disagree as well?

Yes.

[Varislintu]

I do feel that 200 000 is not such a gigantic amount of people that Europe couldn't handle it.

200,000 people in a population of half a billion honestly sounds like nothing to me. That's less than one twenty-fifth of the number of natural births in the EU each year, and y'all have no trouble dealing with those.

Yeah, I think so too. However, children already have "pipelines", i.e. public systems set up for them, whereas an unusual amount of refugees would require setting up all kinds of things. That means an extra slice of the budget pie. I can understand the reluctance, but personally I feel that we need to just do it, put an end to this inhumane situation. Do we really want to contribute to the 13 million or so Middle-Eastern children who will miss out on primary education due to all the conflicts? No, we want them educated, and we would probably also benefit from the "love-handles" they would make in our pyramid of demographic age.

That is, if we can trust our economic right the invisible hand not to exploit the crap out of them so that they can never succeed or build up wealth.

You're forgetting all the people that Europe is already hosting.

Yes, and I know Italy is bearing a really big part of that load. Really I feel you've been left really alone in this by other EU countries.

[IpseDixit]

Yes, and I know Italy is bearing a really big part of that load. Really I feel you've been left really alone in this by other EU countries.

To be honest I wasn't even talking about that. I was talking about the millions of immigrants from the Middle East and (Northern) Africa that Europe has taken in in the course of the last decades.

[linguoboy]

Yes, and I know Italy is bearing a really big part of that load. Really I feel you've been left really alone in this by other EU countries.

To be honest I wasn't even talking about that. I was talking about the millions of immigrants from the Middle East and (Northern) Africa that Europe has taken in in the course of the last decades.

Frankly, I don't think of Europe as "hosting" these people. They're roommates, not guests.

[loqu]

I simply wanted to point out the double standard.

Hungary builds a fence---> they're racist xenophobic fascists.

Spain builds a fence, France amasses droves of policemen on the border with Italy, France hunts refugees in Calais, Britain checks whether some refugees might have sneaked through the Channel tunnel, Denmark closes its doors to refugees from Germany ---> meh, ok.

I'd like to congratulate you for building your own big sturdy strawman, since I (and lots of other people, but you were quoting and addressing me) have always opposed those policies, as meidei pointed out.

Frankly, I don't think of Europe as "hosting" these people. They're roommates, not guests.

A thousand times this.

[Патрислав Андреевич]

In the beginning I need to say I'll ignore any allegations of racism and/or xenohobia, since - as Ludwig said - it prevents any meaningful discussion.

It's racism and xenophobia themselves that prevent any meaningful discussion, not accusations thereof.

Anarchy and uncontrolled flood of people who don't even want to register, and have demands from a host country they broke into, is your idea of the 21st century?

Nope. But trying to reverse xenophobic policies is.

I feel like 'racism' and 'xenophobia' (as well as other 'phobias') don't mean anything anymore and are used as an umbrella term just to discredit the person/policies/whatever you disagree with. It brings absolutely nothing to the discussion. (Just to make it clear, I meant 'you' generally, not personally.)

Only you brought up making a mess, and what is so concerning about "their religion and values" given that their religion is also practiced by the majority of Bosnians and Albanians and their values are hardly more different from yours than Western European values are?

One was brought by me and the other wasn't. I didn't say anything about "their religion and values" before. It was to show that nobody really cares where they come from.

I partially disagree; given the history of the group of people whose language I wrote my thesis on, I think of borders as being somewhat overrated. But even if you're completely right, laws are not static. Like loqu said, if you live in a democracy, you do have a say in determining the nature of said laws. So why keep them the way they are?

Well, I think those are good laws actually. If anything, border control should be stricter, in my opinion. I want to be able to decide who enters my house.

Apparently in Germany they are, relatively speaking.

Let's relocate the whole of Europe to Germany since it's Heaven and everywhere else is dangerous.

"who hasn't registered"

To me, that makes no difference. Deporting people to war zones is cruel and unusual punishment, end of story.

But we can't give in to their demands! Europe must appear strong if we don't want everyone to do whatever they want. Otherwise it's like giving a child sweets everytime it asks, and with time the demands are bigger and bigger. Give a finger, they'll take the entire arm.

I'm not so sure, and I think it may require a lot more careful consideration than that. But I don't think it's at all fair to come to a decision without taking into consideration the positions of all parties directly involved in the issue; in other words, the concerns of the immigrants/refugees/asylum-seekers/whatever themselves also matter, not solely those of Europeans.

Fortunately it's the local people who still rule in their homes. Anyway, the only we hear from immigrants is "we want to Germany". We know their position. I think that most of those people would be content with the countries fleed to, but because so many succeeded in their journey - now everybody wants it.

I don't agree with whole countries taking them and putting in German concentration camps.

Huh?

The plan is to keep those people in camps or ghettos. Forcefully, so that they can't go back to Germany. They'd be forced upon us by the (anti-)European Union*, people themselves would be prisoners, paid by country's benefits, but with little chance for success. And why would we agree on something like that?

The proposal I support is that willing, and legal, refugees would be "distributed" to willing parishes, and to local fundations and organisations that want to help. We have 10 thousand parishes, and let's say each would accept one family of 5, that gives 50 thousand refugees that nobody would notice - there are many more immigrants, or even tourists, in Poland each year. Those families would get initial help, but then they'd be expected to work on the same rules as local population. Of course, first we need to find people who'd accept that...

* Yes, Martin Schulz, the president of the Europarliament, said in yesterday's interview that force could be used if a country doesn't comply. Worth mentioning is that Polish (on German orders) parliament has accepted a bill that allows EU police and troops to operate on Polish territory legally, even against Polish citizens!

Also, the Visegrád group (which Poland is a part of) rejected the EU quotas on immigrants (it's a ridiculous idea), but of course Polish government - being Germany's little bitch - stated that it's not true, and there are still negotiations. Fortunately, in next month we'll have a new government... oh wait, they're the ones who suck America's dick. Damn.

Anyway, when I said I was willing to agree to disagree, I didn't just mean with Levike; I meant with everyone. Each of us is firmly convinced of our own views, and I didn't even mean to start an argument in the first place, just express my opinion and be done with it, even though that's exactly what ended up happening. So I'd like to ask you, are you willing to agree to disagree as well?

Sure. It's a very complex issue and we can't even agree on the most basic (in my opinion) issues, so yeah.

[Saim]

Spain builds a fence, France amasses droves of policemen on the border with Italy, France hunts refugees in Calais, Britain checks whether some refugees might have sneaked through the Channel tunnel, Denmark closes its doors to refugees from Germany ---> meh, ok.

Where have you been? I've seen pretty biting criticisms of Spanish, French, British and Danish immigration and border policies.

I agree though it's unfair to single out Hungary when this is a pan-European issue and Germany had a hand in pressuring Hungary to act the way that it is. My dad was at first apprehensive of me and my mum going to Hungary last week because he thought we should boycott it or something but I said that's nonsensical and won't achieve anything, so...

I feel like 'racism' and 'xenophobia' (as well as other 'phobias') don't mean anything anymore and are used as an umbrella term just to discredit the person/policies/whatever you disagree with. It brings absolutely nothing to the discussion. (Just to make it clear, I meant 'you' generally, not personally.)

Sorry to be blunt but that's very easy for you to say as a white person.

[Yasna]

200,000 people in a population of half a billion honestly sounds like nothing to me. That's less than one twenty-fifth of the number of natural births in the EU each year, and y'all have no trouble dealing with those.

But keep in mind that immigrants tend to live in clusters. It is likely that some neighborhoods will be transformed by this immigration wave. And the people already living there won't have much of a say about it.

But I still support accepting Syrian refugees. The argument that they should just stay in safe countries neighboring Syria might make legal sense, but it doesn't make practical sense.

[Marah]

Where have you been? I've seen pretty biting criticisms of Spanish, French, British and Danish immigration and border policies.

I don't know but I would agree with Ipse. The criticism in the news was pretty mild in comparison. Here the message was basically "Look at those backwards, xenophobic Hungarians with their fascist government". In comparison what happened in Spain or Denmark was "This is pretty lame of us (Europeans) but what else can we do?"

At least, that's the impression I got by watching mainstream news.