|
DarkCrawler posted:
What would be interesting is how many of the Somalis who arrived in Finland in the 90's are employed now. We can't get anywhere lumping them in with recent arrivals.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Starshark posted:Yes, and it's a poo poo one. Or maybe you have no knowledge about the topic whatsoever and aren't willing to listen anything contrary to your pre-concieved opinions about refugees in Finland.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Or maybe you have no knowledge about the topic whatsoever and aren't willing to listen anything contrary to your pre-concieved opinions about refugees in Finland. You got me!  Edit: The crux of Ligur's argument is that Finland can't take refugees because they'll be unemployed forever (never mind that Somalis and Iraqis are 15% unemployed compared to a 9% national unemployment rate. So it's not like none of them will get jobs - they're just overrepresented). I contend that with education they will be contributing members of society. Plus, their very presence will be useful for the economy because even refugees need goods and services. So feel free to explain to me what it is about refugees that they'll stay unemployed forever (the 15% of them that is) which isn't race. Starshark fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Starshark posted:You got me! According to all the available evidence I did. You've been given multiple posts with multiple paragraphs from actual people from this country, white AND black and you keep repeating the same mantra over and over again. Somalis don't make for very good employees in a modern 21st century economy. That's what you get when you take in a group of people who by and large can't read, can't write, don't have even the most basic education as it is understood by a first world country and don't speak the language. A random hobo I'd take from the street would meet all four standards. The relatively high degree of bureaucracy and standards that it takes to start a business in this country (we have a ministry for everything) makes it very hard for them to do things that poor immigrant groups usually employ themselves with, restaurants for example. You can't just start a street kitchen in Finland even if I'm sure the food would be great. None of that's is the fault of first generation of Somalis, or Iraqis, doesn't make them lesser people, but that's just how it is. If we had the same conditions and industries as say, U.S. in the 1950's they would be just fine because you need very little education to work in a factory. Some of them get past this, and that's why one in five are in fact employed. I have at least three Somali workmates and two Iraqis I know of. But they all came here as children, and were educated by the Finnish school system. However refugee status shouldn't be determined by how productive you are to the country you're in. If we took in refugees who had a guaranteed job here that would be few hundred people at best and I'd be stretching it. So it's not really relevant to the discussion about refugees either way. Starshark posted:Edit: The crux of Ligur's argument is that Finland can't take refugees because they'll be unemployed forever (never mind that Somalis and Iraqis are 15% unemployed compared to a 9% national unemployment rate. So it's not like none of them will get jobs - they're just overrepresented). I contend that with education they will be contributing members of society. Plus, their very presence will be useful for the economy because even refugees need goods and services. So feel free to explain to me what it is about refugees that they'll stay unemployed forever (the 15% of them that is) which isn't race. It's 15% (well 20 according to the latest statistics I can find) employed. More if you take just men but still way, way below the average. That's uhh a pretty basic fact you have to grasp to contribute to the discussion so maybe you shouldn't be so self-righteous. And I have already explained it to you. Twice now. The number is probably bigger if you take all the other explanations. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Starshark posted:We're talking decades and not every Somalian has PTSD. You're going to have to face the facts sooner or later and understand that the reason Somalians are over represented in Finnish unemployment figures is because of race. And the second Gulf War didn't level the entire country, people were able to get on with their lives, get educated, etc, it was just punctuated by bombing. Life didn't stop because of the war, especially not in places such as Baghdad. The Iraqi refugees I met were university educated, spoke English well, and were capable of holding down jobs. They still had trouble integrating because Australia LOL and every time they try to build a mosque there's mass protests, but there certainly wasn't any "I can't hold a job because I have PTSD" like you seem to think there is. Don't know about Finland but some of the reasons why Somalis are over represented in Norway are: Somalis haven't been in the country that long, it takes time to get integrated and get a job. Groups of people that has lived in Norway for seven years or more have higher employment numbers than those that have lived in Norway for four years or less. Those who arrived in the last few years has also lived the longest in a collapsed society which makes them even less likely to have an education. A lot of them are taking higher education instead of working because the education system in Somalia collapsed in 1991. Its also hard for Somali women to get a job when they also has to take care of seven or eight kids. Some Somalis also don't want to take low status work because they think its beneath them. Which to be fair is also the case for Norwegians. One fast food chain for example had to import youth from Sweden because Norwegians won't work for them. DarkCrawler posted:The relatively high degree of bureaucracy and standards that it takes to start a business in this country (we have a ministry for everything) makes it very hard for them to do things that poor immigrant groups usually employ themselves with, restaurants for example. You can't just start a street kitchen in Finland even if I'm sure the food would be great. Alhazred fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:According to all the available evidence I did. You've been given multiple posts with multiple paragraphs from actual people from this country, white AND black and you keep repeating the same mantra over and over again. The question remains: Are they going to be unemployed forever if they get educated? And if so, why?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Starshark posted:The question remains: Are they going to be unemployed forever if they get educated? And if so, why? Yes, many of them are going to remain unemployed for reasons such as: PTSD and other mental health issues refugees tend to have. Lack of language skills (finnish is one of the harder languages to learn). companies rather picking native workers (racism).
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Starshark posted:The question remains: Are they going to be unemployed forever if they get educated? And if so, why? No, they're not. But the problem is that it will take them a shitload of time to get educated to the degree that they can do anything beyond menial jobs. Your average Finn goes through 12 years of formal education and tests to get into an university and there is a pretty good chance they have learnt to read and write before they even enter first grade. Then add in the time one has to dealing with mental trauma and the stress of being in a completely alien country, the years it takes you to learn to read and write (especially if they want to do it for both Arabic and Finland) and the years it takes to learn the language to enough fluency to even start your basic education, much less high school or university education. That's if you're not a woman, who probably has a shitload of kids to take care of and whose culture generally isn't really big about women learning. Those who came here as children and those who were born here don't have the same issue. They're generally not unemployed as much as a result.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:No, they're not. But the problem is that it will take them a shitload of time to get educated to the degree that they can do anything beyond menial jobs. Your average Finn goes through 12 years of formal education and tests to get into an university and there is a pretty good chance they have learnt to read and write before they even enter first grade. Then add in the time one has to dealing with mental trauma, the years it takes you to learn to read and write (especially if they want to do it for both Arabic and Finland) and the years it takes to learn the language to enough fluency to even start your basic education, much less high school or university education. That's if you're not a woman, who probably has a shitload of kids to take care of and whose culture generally isn't really big about women learning. Do you really think that refugees will need 12 years of education before they're university-ready? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Starshark posted:Do you really think that refugees will need 12 years of education before they're university-ready? Those who can't even read and write before they get here, yes. You realize that is the requirement for regular Finns to be university ready? You realize every Finn, no matter if they go to uni or not have nine years of formal education?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Those who can't even read and write before they get here, yes. You realize that is the requirement for regular Finns to be university ready? You realize every Finn, no matter if they go to uni or not have nine years of formal education? It doesn't take 12 years to learn to read and write, I don't give a gently caress what country you're in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
freelancemoth posted:Taking into account the needs of Europeans and the migrants. Nonsense! It's an election year!
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Starshark posted:It doesn't take 12 years to learn to read and write, I don't give a gently caress what country you're in. You think someone who didn't know how to read and write is university ready after learning to do so? What exactly do you think Finnish universities are like...? Do you realize that I took twelve years of formal education before applying to universities and didn't get into many?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:You think someone who didn't know how to read and write is university ready after learning to do so? All right, fine, there's no way you can get into a university in Finland unless you do your twelve years. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Starshark posted:All right, fine, there's no way you can get into a university in Finland unless you do your twelve years. Yeah, you can't. It's actually a law. There are nine years of basic education, but if you go into university you have to take three more before applying. Are you really this thick?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Yeah, you can't. It's actually a law. There are nine years of basic education, but if you go into university you have to take three more before applying. Are you really this thick? Yes, I'm thick because I don't know Finnish bureaucracy inside and out. Which is all it is. You don't need to study twelve years solid to be university ready in any other country when you're an adult.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Starshark posted:Yes, I'm thick because I don't know Finnish bureaucracy inside and out. Which is all it is. You don't need to study twelve years solid to be university ready in any other country when you're an adult. No, you don't, if you have an equivalent education from somewhere else. Again, are you this thick that you don't know even this basic tenet of higher education in most first world countries?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
It's pretty drat easy to learn a language when you're immersed in it, and not all jobs require a degree. In Denver, basically every taxi driver was an immigrant from Eritrea for some reason, and while they had noticeable accents, talking with them, they were generally getting by and happy, having only been in the US a few years. You're exaggerating how difficult it is to assimilate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:No, you don't, if you have an equivalent education from somewhere else. Again, are you this thick that you don't know even this basic tenet of higher education in most first world countries? So are you saying people from Somalia are all empty vessels who haven't learned anything and don't have the education to streamline the process a little? They gotta do the whole twelve years? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Starshark posted:Yes, I'm thick because I don't know Finnish bureaucracy inside and out. Which is all it is. You don't need to study twelve years solid to be university ready in any other country when you're an adult. Finnish universities are built as continuum to the finnish school system before them, I see sometimes people in university chemistry courses who have not done full chemistry course load in high school and they generally have pretty bad time. Starshark posted:So are you saying people from Somalia are all empty vessels who haven't learned anything and don't have the education to streamline the process a little? They gotta do the whole twelve years? In 2009, 90% of Somalis coming here were illiterate. Very little of what they had learned so far is useful in modern society.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Starshark posted:All right, fine, there's no way you can get into a university in Finland unless you do your twelve years. Do you understand that he's talking about someone with little to no education at all coming to Finland, not someone with 3 years university under their belt coming to Finland and just needing to learn the language? People starting from scratch take time to prepare for a univiersity education, especially in a land with a completely foreign language (as in it share almost nothing with your native tongue). Edit: in addition to legal regulations, it seems. Interesting thing to learn, that. PaleIrishGuy fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:Finnish universities are built as continuum to the finnish school system before them, I see sometimes people in university chemistry courses who have not done full chemistry course load in high school and they generally have pretty bad time. Fine, but it's not impossible?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
PaleIrishGuy posted:Do you understand that he's talking about someone with little to no education at all coming to Finland, not someone with 3 years university under their belt coming to Finland and just needing to learn the language? People starting from scratch take time to prepare for a univiersity education, especially in a land with a completely foreign language (as in it share almost nothing with your native tongue). Even illiterate people have learned things in their life. It might even blow your mind to learn that there are illiterate people who can read a little. They're not starting out with nothing more than kindergarten knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Starshark posted:So are you saying people from Somalia are all empty vessels who haven't learned anything and don't have the education to streamline the process a little? They gotta do the whole twelve years? Do you think a country that has been in civil war since the 90's where a third of adults can read and write has standardized education for their citizens or something? What education would an illiterate goatherd or fisherman exactly have that would help them in Finnish university? Starshark posted:They're not starting out with nothing more than kindergarten knowledge. No, because they're loving adults, that doesn't mean that their knowledge is directly translatable to modern education. In turn, I would make a terrible loving goatherd despite years and years of modern education. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Debate & Discussion > Finnish Unemployment - a crisis of of relatively little international relevance
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Its pretty loving obvious that starshark isn't even reading your posts, he is trolling the gently caress out of y'all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Its pretty loving obvious that starshark isn't even reading your posts, he is trolling the gently caress out of y'all. Anglos talking seriously about continental Europe is indistinguishable from a parody of Anglos talking about continental Europe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Question. Let's take for granted that first generation African immigrants overwhelmingly can't adapt and will only be qualified for the most menial of tasks throughout the duration of their lives. What then? gently caress off we're full?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:It's pretty drat easy to learn a language when you're immersed in it, and not all jobs require a degree. In Denver, basically every taxi driver was an immigrant from Eritrea for some reason, and while they had noticeable accents, talking with them, they were generally getting by and happy, having only been in the US a few years. You're exaggerating how difficult it is to assimilate. Even the most inbred sheep loving yokel living in bönde will have had 12 years of teachers ramming civilization in his head and if he wasn't big on book learning, he went to vocational school. There are very few jobs that require absolutely no training and we have massive unemployment so even those will have overqualified people applying for. Also, Ligur touched this a bit, Finland has massive bureaucracy, if you want to drive a taxi, that's two thousand euros for driver's license, then the taxi driving training and 'local knowledge' requirement. You are literally not permitted to drive taxi if you can't pass the exam that tests your knowledge about local streets, tourist spots and whatnot. What chances you think a refugee who literally cannot read or write has passing the exams?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Question. Let's take for granted that first generation African immigrants overwhelmingly can't adapt and will only be qualified for the most menial of tasks throughout the duration of their lives. What then? gently caress off we're full? It's not all first generation African immigrants or even all Somalis, but no, because: DarkCrawler posted:refugee status shouldn't be determined by how productive you are to the country you're in Like that would instantly cut off say, babies, because they won't be productive until 2030's at the earliest. Refugee acceptance should have literally nothing to do with beyond being a human from a war-torn shithole or a slave state or an whatever equivalent humanitarian disaster zone in this globe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Starshark posted:Even illiterate people have learned things in their life. It might even blow your mind to learn that there are illiterate people who can read a little. They're not starting out with nothing more than kindergarten knowledge. You're correct that they have learned things in their lives. And you are also correct that there are people who can read or write a bit that are still considered illiterate because they lack functional fluency in that regard. None of that has any bearing on being prepared for a university education being taught to you in an entirely different tongue, at a speed meant for people already fluent in the tongue. Hell, I'm reasonably well educated, and would love to continue my education in Norway or Germany, but i don't speak either language anywhere near well enough to even begin to stuggle through that. If I were coming over there at 30 years old with an education comparable to a 4th or 5th grade German, i wouldn't have a hope in hell in a German university.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Starshark posted:Even illiterate people have learned things in their life. It might even blow your mind to learn that there are illiterate people who can read a little. They're not starting out with nothing more than kindergarten knowledge. Unfortunately, the one thing they don't have is a child's ability to learn faster than an adult. It takes much more effort for an adult to learn to read or write than a child, same goes for a new language. So a 25 year-old migrant from Somalia will have semi-useful skills like piracy, day labor, child soldier, etc, but very little of that helps with respect to verb conjugation in Finnish (or whatever language of their host country), rational functions, local history, and all the other stuff kids learn in 12 years of education. They lost an opportunity to readily absorb this, which is a tragedy, but it is also a tragedy to just hand-wave away this reality and say "they'll be fine, you're just racist." That's how you get the French ghettos full of immigrants who don't feel as though they are part of society and end up rioting or shooting up places. Integration of these kinds of migrants is not easy, and shouldn't be assumed to be. To answer Volkerball, the point is that given how difficult the problem of economic integration is (ignoring for now cultural integration), it is astoundingly irresponsible to tell countries that they should accept tens or hundreds of thousands of migrants and hand-wave away all questions of practicality simply because they'll "grow the economy." It is safe to say the problem is much more difficult than that, which is what some posters have been getting at. Instead, any mention of the difficulty is met with derision and comments about how anyone who raises the practicalities of this issue must be racist/xenophobic or wish that poor people should die or something. You say that they come to Europe to avoid the despair and having nothing to do while they sit in their refugee camp in Turkey/Jordan/wherever. I raise this point: given the Finnish example, what do you propose to prevent migrants from running into the problem of being unable to integrate economically and culturally, which leads to them still sitting around with nothing to do in Europe, slowly festering like in France? Also, how would you pay for the mass re-education of hundreds of thousands of people who don't even speak your language? Oh, by the way, you also need to reduce your deficit spending, because lest you forget, you're broke.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Griffen posted:To answer Volkerball, the point is that given how difficult the problem of economic integration is (ignoring for now cultural integration), it is astoundingly irresponsible to tell countries that they should accept tens or hundreds of thousands of migrants and hand-wave away all questions of practicality simply because they'll "grow the economy." It is safe to say the problem is much more difficult than that, which is what some posters have been getting at. Instead, any mention of the difficulty is met with derision and comments about how anyone who raises the practicalities of this issue must be racist/xenophobic or wish that poor people should die or something. You say that they come to Europe to avoid the despair and having nothing to do while they sit in their refugee camp in Turkey/Jordan/wherever. I raise this point: given the Finnish example, what do you propose to prevent migrants from running into the problem of being unable to integrate economically and culturally, which leads to them still sitting around with nothing to do in Europe, slowly festering like in France? Also, how would you pay for the mass re-education of hundreds of thousands of people who don't even speak your language? Oh, by the way, you also need to reduce your deficit spending, because lest you forget, you're broke. Again, the problem isn't that there are difficulties, the problem is that people are using these difficulties to say it shouldn't be done. Same with the difficulties in border control, same with difficulties with economic migrants mixing in, as long as Europe has one single problem with refugees or integration it is a sign that the whole effort is doomed. The economic or cultural problems Europe faces don't have jack and poo poo compared to the problems developing countries, who have been absorbing refugees for years and years and years and hold the vast majority of them to this day. We are 500 million people holding a fourth of the world's wealth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
quote:Unfortunately, the one thing they don't have is a child's ability to learn faster than an adult. It takes much more effort for an adult to learn to read or write than a child, same goes for a new language. So a 25 year-old migrant from Somalia will have semi-useful skills like piracy, day labor, child soldier, etc, but very little of that helps with respect to verb conjugation in Finnish (or whatever language of their host country), rational functions, local history, and all the other stuff kids learn in 12 years of education. They lost an opportunity to readily absorb this, which is a tragedy, but it is also a tragedy to just hand-wave away this reality and say "they'll be fine, you're just racist." That's how you get the French ghettos full of immigrants who don't feel as though they are part of society and end up rioting or shooting up places. Integration of these kinds of migrants is not easy, and shouldn't be assumed to be. The Banlieues are not the result of immigrants not being able to get educated sufficiently to integrate. They were largely imported from the colonies by the French after the war to rebuild, and as a reward they made to live in ghettos and treated like second class citizens. You get some of the idea in this article, but it doesn't tell the whole story. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2012/0501/In-France-s-suburban-ghettos-a-struggle-to-be-heard-amid-election-noise-video Just do a search for 'banlieue' and you will see that the problem isn't that they came over when they were too old to learn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Again, the problem isn't that there are difficulties, the problem is that people are using these difficulties to say it shouldn't be done. Same with the difficulties in border control, same with difficulties with economic migrants mixing in, as long as Europe has one single problem with refugees or integration it is a sign that the whole effort is doomed. What about jumping in to solve a problem using only a vague idea of the problems associated, with no long term plans, no contingencies, and no system-level unity on what should be done? That is a recipe for a disaster, and that is what is possible here. Europe at the moment is stumbling through this crisis with no sense of long-term consequences, and has been for some time (same thing with the Greek/debt crises). You can see this playing out, as one country reacts, the problem shifts into an unintended form. Examples: - Italians begins Operation Mare Nostrum, which leads to increased use of boats by migrants. Italy runs out of money for the program, and people start dying. - Europe says countries must stick to the Dublin accord, but this leads to migrants trying to go off the grid, potentially using dangerous means (refrigerator trucks) or trying to evade border controls - Countries say they will only take migrants from certain countries (Syria, Afghanistan), which leads to ineligible migrants tossing their documents and passports to claim being Syrian and/or use of fake Syrian passports as uncovered in Germany - Croatia says Hungary's policy is inhumane and opens borders to migrants. They get flooded within a day or so and close the border, shipping migrants to Slovenia and Hungary in buses. - Germany says they can take in millions over the next couple of years. You can wager that more people will now make the journey to Europe with this promise. I'm not saying "let the bastards die" but sometimes doing "something" with no plan is worse than maintaining the status quo. Migrants staying in Turkey meant they didn't drown in the Mediterranean. To add to it, winter is coming, and if things stay this half-assed, you're going to have people freezing to death in the Balkans, because they're not going to stop coming, and those countries are already reaching their limit to cope. At this stage, the cold hard facts on the ground suggest to me that practicality trumps idealism, and that preaching on the soapbox about Europe's "duty" to other nations' people means little when the mechanisms for Europe to handle this crisis is not in place, and at the rate things are going, will not be in place for some time. This is entirely in addition to the question of why is it a country's job to look after the citizens of another country before their own? Should you tell the 400,000 unemployed Finns and their European cohorts "eat poo poo son, we know this is your home and all, and that you need help, but don't you get it?! There's random strangers we need to help before you!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
I just thought about something. If Syrians call Merkel "Mama Merkel" and are super happy when they are accepted as refugees, Angie will get all the credit for it (undeserved as ever, since it's only her party that has held up more sensible immigration laws) and the refugees and their children will probably become lifelong CDU voters... So, fellow liberals, we better stop these refugees if we ever hope to unseat Merkel and her successor, Zombie-Merkel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Speaking of Merkel, she'll be speaking to the 70th UN session this weekend, as will the Pope, and the refugee crisis is bound to be a major subject. As will the future of Syria, as Putin and Obama will both be unveiling their new strategies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
I gotta admit, the trick people pulled where they pretended to believe race is immutable, and so Kenyan integration proves Somali lack of integration can't be due to discrimination, is a good one.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
The obvious solution is to settle the Syrian refugees as military colonists on the EU frontier, under their own local governments. They will be the Foederati from which the manpower of the new EU battlegroups are drawn, by defending Europe they will become Europeans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Griffen posted:What about jumping in to solve a problem using only a vague idea of the problems associated, with no long term plans, no contingencies, and no system-level unity on what should be done? That is a recipe for a disaster, and that is what is possible here. Europe at the moment is stumbling through this crisis with no sense of long-term consequences, and has been for some time (same thing with the Greek/debt crises). You can see this playing out, as one country reacts, the problem shifts into an unintended form. Nobody, loving nobody forced or forces European nations to be part of the 1951 Refugee Convention, 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, the Geneva Conventions, or a dozen other humanitarian laws relating to the treatment of refugees. Nobody. And since the greatest effort, the creation of the whole concept of refugee law was helping European refugees, the rest of the world pitched in to help Europe, out of their free will (United States, etc.) or not out of their free will (most of the developing world since they were colonies). Since then not only have tens of millions of Europeans migrated into the rest of the world to flee awful post-war conditions, actual war and poverty, but time and time again the rest of the world, Americas and Oceania in particular have pitched in to help needy European refugees, whether or not they number in the millions or in the hundreds of thousands. Not only that, but throughout the existence of the entire concept of refugee law other nations have been in accord with the law and taken in the great bulk of the worlds refugees, comparatively in numbers which few countries in Europe can stand against. Today this is just the same as before. And it happens closer then you think considering Russia has taken what, closer to 750,000 people from Ukraine? And not only that but Europe constantly, constantly preaches to other nations who break humanitarian laws, especially if they break humanitarian laws relating to refugees. loving all the time since they shed their last colony, Europe has been to human rights what United States is to misguided world policing, making it basically its no.1 issue in everything. It's like Rudy Giuliani with 9/11, you don't find a speech from an European diplomat that doesn't mention human rights one way or another. And now when they're expected to take in refugees, you want Europe to be all "No. No they're scary and different and we're only the world's most richest continent so we can't possibly take as much refugees as huge world powers like Lebanon or Jordan, sorry." and just scrap the concept of international refugee laws, leave UN and infuriate the rest of the world? Is that really a wise choice? Or worse, you want Europe to stay in the UN, continue to be part of the laws, and preach to the world that human rights need to be followed while a small fraction of the world's refugees, most from the worst conflict of present time, wish to go to Europe? Because that would make you pretty loving entitled. Most of the European countries recognize what absolute international suicides both courses would be, which is why they just voted 120,000 refugees to be relocated around the EU. Add that in to 20,000 Refugees UK will get even when they're not at our borders. And the 40,000 they agreed previously. It is also why they are focusing on trying to create more effective border mechanisms so that the economic migrants can be separated from genuine refugees. That's why they have increased Mediterranean patrolling. There are actual proposals and plans, free for everyone to read, and they look like pretty good ones to me. See, majority of EU is not at the side of the anti-refugees. Germany, France and Italy pushed hard for the relocation. UK just gave another 100 million pounds for refugee assistance. Even Denmark, who isn't part of the vote or the plan is taking a thousand more people, and Ireland is taking more then it's actually allocated with 4,000. I don't know about you but for a generation of people who have almost zero experience with this except ironically, the Balkan countries and their surroundings, that's a pretty hopeful start, especially when I wouldn't consider them even having begun to get their poo poo together in this. Germany is showing incredible leadership in this, and well, we're in the EU. Germany uber alles. And where exactly do you think Lebanon, Turkey and Syria are? Winter isn't new to any of them. It's been four long and cold winters of Syrian Civil War, and the fifth one is indeed, close, but I think most of these people are reasonably prepared for it.    And slavs are cold, but not "let's let half a million people starve inside our borders in the greatest humanitarian disaster of the 21st century" cold. They're not starving to death in Lebanon, Turkey or Jordan and they sure as gently caress won't be doing that on European soil. This is the problem with your side, the ridicolous hyperbole, almost apocalyptic predictions that have nothing to do with actual reality. Don't sign a deal if you're not going follow it. Don't pester others about following it if you're not going to follow it. Don't preach if you don't practice. I'm an European citizen who is A) Not a giant bitch hypocrite and B) is willing to welcome the refugees and yes, C) maybe suffer a comparatively minuscule bit on my living standards, and for now it looks like the countries that are standing against moving forward in this are a small, xenophobic, inward minority who only have any influence because nobody would join EU if the votes weren't equal. So umm, yes. Eat poo poo. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 21:43
|
|