European refugee crisis [split]

[vijayjohn]

Still doesn't change the fact that Levike is also a temporary migrant.

How can you say that?

Just because white people got their land through genocide and forced removal does not mean that that explains anything about why immigration after that into this country has been relatively successful.

And frankly, I in turn am sick of Europeans suggesting that immigration is at all comparable to foreign invasion.

Like the US with Mexico or India with Bangadlesh? In both cases you built walls and fences on the border in order to prevent entrace to immigrants, the same thing that Hungary is trying to do and being hardly criticized for.

Gosh, India even seems to have a shoot-to-kill policy.

Oh, and there is also the Nicaragua-Mexico border.

Then there is Australia which AFAIK dumps immigrants in the Fiji Islands, and probably a lot of other countries with the same immigration problems which I'm not aware of.

If there are also countries that do have similar issues with immigration, even if that includes both India and the US, that still doesn't make it any more justifiable in my view. Besides, that also doesn't negate the fact that there are also examples of countries not having similar issues with immigration. Sometimes we can even see these in the history or current situation of those same countries. India has had tons of invasions in its history, and yet it has one of the most lax immigration policies in the world. Plus the person who decided to stop Bangladeshi refugees from coming into India was an autocrat and can hardly claim to be representative of what the people of her country actually wanted.

[IpseDixit]

Still doesn't change the fact that Levike is also a temporary migrant.

He's a totally different kind of immigrant.

Just because white people got their land through genocide and forced removal does not mean that that explains anything about why immigration after that into this country has been relatively successful.

You cannot minimize that event. That is how the US was born.

And what are these successful waves of immigration anyway? The Black slaves being forcedly taken from Africa? Or the Irish and the Italians who were treated like sub-humans?

And frankly, I in turn am sick of Europeans suggesting that immigration is at all comparable to foreign invasion.

I'm not suggesting that. I'm simply saying the US has a totally different history.

If there are also countries that do have similar issues with immigration, even if that includes both India and the US, that still doesn't make it any more justifiable in my view.

But you cannot say that Europe is the only one with these kinds of problems.

Besides, that also doesn't negate the fact that there are also examples of countries not having similar issues with immigration.

For example? The only examples that come to my mind are the Gulf countries that AFAIK treat immigrants like slaves.

and yet it has one of the most lax immigration policies in the world.

And yet it built a wall on the Bangadleshi border?

Plus the person who decided to stop Bangladeshi refugees from coming into India was an autocrat and can hardly claim to be representative of what the people of her country actually wanted.

What I get from the article is that it's quite an accepted policy by Indian authorities.

[Aurinĭa]

My notebook is not turning on

But this is not the main problem. The main problem is: it has a broken screen. It would cost me R$ 700 to put a new. I'm using my TV as screen with a HDMI cable. So far so good, until I have money to fix the screen. BUT... how will I take it to someone to fix the turning on problem without a screen?

Computer repair places usually have external screens; they could use one of those. Just make it clear you don't want to screen to be replaced.

[Osias]

Computer repair places usually have external screens; they could use one of those. Just make it clear you don't want to screen to be replaced.

I'm almost doing that, but it's so depressing...

[vijayjohn]

He's a totally different kind of immigrant.

I doubt that the differences are really as huge as you or he may think they are.

You cannot minimize that event. That is how the US was born.

I'm not minimizing it. I'm saying it's irrelevant in the context of the current discussion.

Suppose you were pointing out that Israel has lots of immigrants from all over the world. Would it then make any sense for me to butt in and say, "But Israel has been shitting on Arabs ever since it was founded! Therefore you can't look at it!"?

And what are these successful waves of immigration anyway? The Black slaves being forcedly taken from Africa? Or the Irish and the Italians who were treated like sub-humans?

See? Were. That's the thing. They were treated as subhuman like one or two centuries ago. They're not anymore (at least, not to the extent that they used to be). So why are immigrants still being treated that way? Have we honestly learned nothing about whether immigrants really pose a significant threat after one to two hundred years? I mean, is it really so bad that some of y'all can't even be bothered to think about that?

I'm not suggesting that. I'm simply saying the US has a totally different history.

Every country has a totally different history. That doesn't mean there aren't also similarities or that those similarities should be ignored just because there are strong differences, too.

But you cannot say that Europe is the only one with these kinds of problems.

I never said it was. I just don't understand why certain users seem to have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to immigration, I don't get what the big deal is, and like I said, I don't think I ever will.

For example? The only examples that come to my mind are the Gulf countries that AFAIK treat immigrants like slaves.

When have you heard of Britain or Finland, for example, having similar issues with immigration? Don't both of those countries have lots of immigrants from all sorts of countries? Are they really treated the same way as immigrants in Eastern Europe are being treated now?

And yet it built a wall on the Bangadleshi border?

What I get from the article is that it's quite an accepted policy by Indian authorities.

What you perhaps are not aware of is how shitty Indian government officials are at actually representing their people, not to mention how rampant corruption is in India.

And it's Bangladeshi.

[Levike]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toL1tXrLA1c

What are you trying to prove?

The current refugees are in no position to take our jobs. Actually that's one of their main problems.

I doubt that the differences are really as huge as you or he may think they are.

I came legally, they didn't. I followed the procedure, they are breaking the law. Period.

The small town I'm living in now has 5,143 Italians. Even the train station has a "Welcome" sign in Italian.
Guess what, nobody ever complains about them.

[vijayjohn]

I followed the procedure, they are breaking the law. Period.

How are they breaking the law? Which law and whose law are they breaking?

[Levike]

How are they breaking the law? Which law and whose law are they breaking?

Crossing the border anywhere else than the checkpoints is illegal.

Even I have to show my ID when going to Romania from Hungary, otherwise I would be stopped by the police.

If they weren't breaking the law, Hungary wouldn't have built a wire fence and they wouldn't have sent the army to block them.

[Michael]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toL1tXrLA1c

What are you trying to prove?

The current refugees are in no position to take our jobs. Actually that's one of their main problems.

What a way to generalize the talents of a dozen million people. It seems as if the general Eastern European public view the refugees as mere parasites, incapable of contributing nothing to their host societies but spawn.

Money in itself does not discriminate between Arab and European; it's the lax labor laws endemic to a swath of Southern and Eastern Europe that enable oligarchic employers, empowered by their just-as-corrupt governments, to treat those of not-so-legal status less fairly, while at the same time enabling said employers and political entities to deflect blame off of themselves and use the migrants/refugees that they employ as convenient scapegoats.

This discussion is reminding me: Donald Trump at the moment is campaigning against the immigrant issue in general here in the US when his companies take advantage of the desperation of thousands in India and China.

[vijayjohn]

Even I have to show my ID when going to Romania from Hungary, otherwise I would be stopped by the police.

How do you get your ID and how are they supposed to get theirs?

If they weren't breaking the law, Hungary wouldn't have built a wire fence and they wouldn't have sent the army to block them.

If a similar number of, say, Hungarians from Romania (such as yourself) were crossing the border at a point other than the checkpoints, would Hungary have built a wire fence and sent the army out to prevent Hungarians from Romania crossing the border?

Please. We all know this bullshit about "illegal" and "unskilled" immigrants is just an excuse. We have heard it a million fucking times. There are legal and illegal immigrants in every group; it doesn't matter whether they're American or British or Hungarian or Romanian or Indian or Filipino. Same with skilled and unskilled. Look at your own examples that you contrast against these immigrants and refugees. You didn't even say anything about whether they were legal or skilled. All you said was that they were French or Italian. See? It has nothing to do with legality or skill. Just nationality and ethnicity.

It's straight-up racism.

[Levike]

If a similar number of, say, Hungarians from Romania (such as yourself) were crossing the border at a point other than the checkpoints, would Hungary have built a wire fence and sent the army out to prevent Hungarians from Romania crossing the border?

That would be border trespassing and they would probably be sent back and fined.

How do you get your ID and how are they supposed to get theirs?

The ones who are already in Hungary have the option to get registered and a lot of them refuse in hopes of going into wealthy countries like Germany and some even refuse to register there in hopes they'll get to Sweden.

Denmark blocked a number of trains coming from Germany, stopping the refugees.
Guess they are no better than us.

FYROM and Serbia are safe countries, why don't they stay there. Nobody would be bombing them.

Please. We all know this bullshit about "illegal" and "unskilled" immigrants is just an excuse.

Do most people not like them because they are different in "certain" ways. Yes. Are they rasist for that? Yes.

That doesn't mean sneaking into a country is an acceptable thing to do.

[IpseDixit]

Immigration in Britain has created social tensions; the same goes for Finland I think, otherwise they wouldn't have a True Finns Party.

I doubt that the differences are really as huge as you or he may think they are.

There's a reason if Romania belongs to the EU and Syria doesn't.

I just don't understand why certain users seem to have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to immigration, I don't get what the big deal is, and like I said, I don't think I ever will.

You really can't understand what the deal is for a gay person like me to see swarms of people coming to this continent from homophobic and sexist cultures?

[vijayjohn]

FYROM and Serbia are safe countries, why don't they stay there.

Because they don't want to?

And what the hell does a "safe country" mean anyway?

Nobody would be bombing them.

Who is bombing them in Europe?

That doesn't mean sneaking into a country is an acceptable thing to do.

It's no less acceptable than whining continually just because foreigners are at your door.

Immigration in Britain has created social tensions; the same goes for Finland I think, otherwise the wouldn't have a True Finns Party.

Still doesn't result in the same reaction that you get in Eastern Europe.

There's a reason if Romania belongs to the EU and Syria doesn't.

A reason for what?

You really can't understand what the deal is for a gay person like me to see swarms of people coming to this continent from homophobic and sexist cultures?

No, because Europe is also homophobic and sexist. Homophobia and sexism are everywhere. It's not like their culture is (or cultures are) homophobic and sexist and yours is not.

[Levike]

FYROM and Serbia are safe countries, why don't they stay there.

Because they don't want to?

So people should be allowed to go from country to country just like that? Definitely not.

There are these things called "borders" and there are certain conditions you have to fulfill in order to get from one side to the other.

And what the hell does a "safe country" mean anyway?

They are not being shot by terrorists and/or soldiers.

That doesn't mean sneaking into a country is an acceptable thing to do.

It's no less acceptable than whining continually just because foreigners are at your door.

One is punishable, the other one is not.

There's a reason if Romania belongs to the EU and Syria doesn't.

A reason for what?

Romania has been added to the EU because it fulfilled certain criteria, therefore Romanians as well as other EU citizens have certain agreed priviledges, such as free movement.

Non-EU countries don't. Ukrainians can't cross the border without a passport.

No, because Europe is also homophobic and sexist. Homophobia and sexism are everywhere. It's not like their culture is (or cultures are) homophobic and sexist and yours is not.

You can't compare it like that.

http://www.ilga-europe.org/sites/defaul ... _image.png

In some countries gays are more accepted than in others. And these kind of policies do reflect to some degree the way the local populations of those countries look at homosexuals.

I couldn't imagine Romanian gays being thrilled at hearing that hundreds of Russians are coming to town.

[IpseDixit]

No, because Europe is also homophobic and sexist. Homophobia and sexism are everywhere. It's not like their culture is (or cultures are) homophobic and sexist and yours is not.

European culture is way less homophobic and sexist than that of Middle Eastern and African countries, if you can't see the difference between Europe and the Middle East/Africa, I think you have serious problems. And anyway we are still working in order to completely get rid of these two scourges, and I don't see how Middle Eastern or African people could be helpful in this regard, actually to me they seem to represent a setback.

[Патрислав Андреевич]

Because they don't want to?

Should they be given everything they want?

Who is bombing them in Europe?

Exactly. Nobody. So why don't they respect the local laws and why do they continue, trespassing multiple countries? By the time they cross Macedonian border they can hardly be called "refugees." They must respect the law just like everybody else. Serbs can't pass the Hungarian border without a passport, and can do so only in specified points. Why should those immigrants be privileged?

Still doesn't result in the same reaction that you get in Eastern Europe.

Immigration to Britain and Finland doesn't involve illegally crossing borders of multiple countries in such big numbers, comparable to a march of an army, and making a mess, stopping communication of one of the main train stations in the region.

---

On topic, although it's a very small annoyance: usage of BCE/CE instead of BC/AD.

[vijayjohn]

FYROM and Serbia are safe countries, why don't they stay there.

Because they don't want to?

So people should be allowed to go from country to country just like that? Definitely not.

What? You just said "why don't they stay there," and now you're saying "so people should be allowed to go from country to country just like that?" What do you think what you just proposed was if not going "from country to country just like that"?

There are these things called "borders" and there are certain conditions you have to fulfill in order to get from one side to the other.

And what's your evidence that they don't fulfill those conditions?

They are not being shot by terrorists and/or soldiers.

Then by that definition, every European country is a "safe country," isn't it?

That doesn't mean sneaking into a country is an acceptable thing to do.

It's no less acceptable than whining continually just because foreigners are at your door.

One is punishable, the other one is not.

Yeah, well, one is inherently harmful and the other is not, too.

You can't compare it like that.

Yes, I can.

In some countries gays are more accepted than in others. And these kind of policies do reflect to some degree the way the local populations of those countries look at homosexuals.

And this is relevant to immigration how?

European culture is way less homophobic and sexist than that of Middle Eastern and African countries, if you can't see the difference between Europe and the Middle East/Africa, I think you have serious problems. And anyway we are still working in order to completely get rid of these two scourges, and I don't see how Middle Eastern or African people could be helpful in this regard, actually to me they seem to represent a setback.

Wow, you sure are eager to judge people based solely on which countries or cultures they come from, aren't you?

Should they be given everything they want?

No one is given everything they want.

So why don't they respect the local laws and why do they continue, trespassing multiple countries?

How are they supposed to know what the local laws are?

By the time they cross Macedonian border they can hardly be called "refugees."

Why not? Where they are in Europe makes no difference to whether they're fleeing violence or not.

Serbs can't pass the Hungarian border without a passport, and can do so only in specified points. Why should those immigrants be privileged?

How are they supposed to get a passport?

Immigration to Britain and Finland doesn't involve illegally crossing borders of multiple countries in such big numbers, comparable to a march of an army,

How do you know?

and making a mess, stopping communication of one of the main train stations in the region.

Oh, boo hoo, they prevented a train station from functioning normally! For this crime, they should DIE.

See the discrepancy between what they did (according to you, anyway) and what people want to do to them as a result?

If people want them to die, what exactly do they have to be grateful for? I'm not going to be grateful towards someone who wants me to die.

[IpseDixit]

Wow, you sure are eager to judge people based solely on which countries or cultures they come from, aren't you?

There might be some open-minded people in those places but I think Europe shouldn't risk too much.

Of course if you can prove that I'm wrong, I'll be glad to change my mind.

[Levike]

Vijay, congrats, you're a real keyboard-warrior, aren't you?!

There are these things called "borders" and there are certain conditions you have to fulfill in order to get from one side to the other.

And what's your evidence that they don't fulfill those conditions?

Sneaking under wired fences is evidence enough.

They are not being shot by terrorists and/or soldiers.

Then by that definition, every European country is a "safe country," isn't it?

Yes. Okay, maybe not Eastern Ukraine.

That's the point. You escaped Syria, got to FYROM, you're safe, congrats.

But a lot of them want the whole sausage and aren't satisfied with even Germany.

That doesn't mean sneaking into a country is an acceptable thing to do.

It's no less acceptable than whining continually just because foreigners are at your door.

One is punishable, the other one is not.

Yeah, well, one is inherently harmful and the other is not, too.

Law counts more then people's opinions and personal beliefs about morals.

In some countries gays are more accepted than in others. And these kind of policies do reflect to some degree the way the local populations of those countries look at homosexuals.

And this is relevant to immigration how?

A few Arab countries have homophobic policies and their populations are more likely to be homophobic.

Having homophobic people come to your door isn't really a gay's wet dream.

Wow, you sure are eager to judge people based solely on which countries or cultures they come from, aren't you?

They are more likely.

So why don't they respect the local laws and why do they continue, trespassing multiple countries?

How are they supposed to know what the local laws are?

They are sneaking in because they know that they cannot go further in the legal way.

They all know that passing borders like that is illegal.

By the time they cross Macedonian border they can hardly be called "refugees."

Why not? Where they are in Europe makes no difference to whether they're fleeing violence or not.

They already succeeded in fleeing violence once they got to Turkey or Jordan.

Serbs can't pass the Hungarian border without a passport, and can do so only in specified points. Why should those immigrants be privileged?

How are they supposed to get a passport?

They don't fulfill the conditions, so they aren't supposed to get a passport.

I'm saying it once again, countries can decide on who gets in and who doesn't.

[Varislintu]

I don't think you can completely equate a usual, constant trickle of immigrants (who go through normal border procedures) and who move country due to individual reasons, and a wave of refugees who are escaping a big social disaster within a few years time.

I mean, of course you can argue that ethically, it's the same thing. But you can't just erase the different natures of the phenomena, because then you end up erasing the practical consequences as well. (like what kind of services they need.)

Refugee is not exactly like immigrant.

There was mention that the refugees might not know about the local laws, but this is in my understanding not the case. TV is currently full of refugee interviews and spotlights, and they are not ignorant. It is, after all, the poeple who had money and resources left who have been able to buy smuggling or transport services through several European countries. The poor, penniless and ignorant are still in the Middle East, stuck.

EDIT: The numbers are, of course, interesting to look at. Tanzania, a refugee-friendly African state, has accepted and naturalised 700 000 refugees from neighbouring countries over the past years. Tanzania has 45 million people. They are preparing to accept 250 000 more from Burundi in coming years. Their refugee load is, if I can still calculate, 1.5% (using just the 700 000 number). If Europe took 200 000 Syrian refugees, our refugee load would be 0.06%.

Of course it's not that simple, since Europe is many countries with many wealths and budgets, and technically we are also not Syria's neighbour.