The Refugee Crisis - a crisis of conscience - The Something Awful Forums

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Refugee Crisis - a crisis of conscience

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

chessmaster13 posted:

I learned that there are two kinds of people. And I guess that they don't live on the same planet.

Pragmatists and ideologists.

There is no way to convince an ideologist with reason, numbers or cold hard facts.
All you do is make yourself look like an cold unfeeling rear end in a top hat in his/her eyes.

But it's the same way the other way around:

An ideologist attempting to convince a pragmatist with feelings, ideology and
"it's the right thing to do" will be seen as an idiot in the pragmatists eyes.

I consider myself an pragmatist and came to accept that.

This is a false distinction, literally everyone who considers themselves a pragmatist is a person so under the sway of their own ideology that they just don't acknowledge it. In particular, facts are not by their nature cold or unfeeling, what is cold and unfeeling is blindly stating that some group of people will perpetually be undesirables because ~reasons~. Talking about realism is just a way for sociopaths to justify their own sociopathy, real debate and enlightenment starts with acknowledging the assumptions you start with (and you are always forced to start with some), then comparing them.

# ¿ Sep 11, 2015 11:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 01:26

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

More generally, the ideology behind 'pragmatism' is a deep desire to further one's own self interest, at the expense of others, and an extremely cynical view of other human beings and their motivations (necessary in order to minimize the guilt felt when pushing self interest). Other kinds of realisms can themselves have other assumptions behind them (race realism assumes racism is true, without justification), but that's the general trend.

The trick is that a lot of people confuse rationality with lack of empathy, when that's simply not the case. Rationality is just a tool, to be used for whatever end, it can be used for selfish or selfless purposes. Confirmation bias can sometimes undermine rationality, but that's no more true of empathy than any other emotion. It's totally a normal thing for people to be blinded by greed, and trick themselves. Or, and this is relevant to migrants, so motivated by fear that they don't see what they fear for what it really is, just this 'thing' that needs to go away (and not a person who is afraid and desperate).

# ¿ Sep 11, 2015 13:39

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Integration takes time and money, and you have to prevent ghettos forming. The EU doesn't have a good track record of that, though I'm not terribly sure why.

Best possible outcome: The EU works together, spreads the refugees across the countries in the EU, takes control of the situation and deports the people who are obviously faking. Crisis solved with minimal damage, the migrants become citizens and life goes on.

Most likely outcome: Each countries shoves the problem from one to another, until a crisis occurs for the refugees (riots, deaths, etc.) inside the EU. The blame for that crisis will itself be treated like the refugees (ignored/moved), with the most likely winners of this being the far-right, who'll just throw up barriers and shot anyone who crosses them.

OwlFancier posted:

$3 trillion is the amount of money America is perfectly willing to spend on things which do not benefit it materially, but which are beneficial to its politicians.

Refugees aren't that kind of problem. A one-world-communist-government (full communism now) would be able to solve this problem trivially, todays world cannot. In a choice between $3 trillion for a moral outcome and $1 million for a immoral outcome, the $1 million outcome will get picked every time.

rudatron fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Sep 19, 2015

# ¿ Sep 19, 2015 01:53

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

So, uh, to get away from this dumb poo poo, dan carlin released a podcast dealing with immigration, with the basic point being that its not historically unprecedented for this sort of thing to happen, and chucking a hissy fit over it isn't a good idea.

But hissy fits are being chucked, and you've got to wonder if the European self-image, as opposed to the American self-image, is going to push that. I would talk about how that might be because the US is a colonial nation and Europe isn't, but the same logic doesn't apply to Australia. Anyone here familiar with how Latin American countries deal with immigrant integration?

# ¿ Sep 28, 2015 12:06

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Oddly enough, the historical accounting of grievances and assigning collective guilt is a fun past-time of both conservative revanchists and self-hating liberals. Why? I don't think it's because they're similar, but the shared assumption is the inescapability of identity, and the implied responsibility that comes with that. Interesting to think about.

DarkCrawler posted:

Pretty much in the grand scale of things, yeah. I mean this is basically the nightmare scenario every anti-immigrant party has been warning about and...the world isn't ending. Europe is actually responding. Only few sad countries even stand against any of this. And the response from the nativists has been basically just ridiculed around the world. Droves of Europeans aren't flying into the arms of extremists. And every time one of these parties actually get into a position where they have to govern and cooperate, they crack. They can't possibly deliver all they want so their rabid supporters get mad. Governing is poison to populists.

Ahh, careful there: the crisis isn't over yet, and neither is the reaction to the crisis. Europe has yet to actually formally 'deal' with the problem, and if you're think there's not going to be some serious buck-passing happening, boy are you in for a show! I'm not so certain of any outcome, I think it's been a massive boost to the far-right and that's got some serious problems brewing, in particular because there's no far-left to speak out to act as a foil. I'd agree with your delivery-failure point, with the provision that this doesn't necessarily deescalate the situation.

The best thing about this crisis happening now though is the existence of the internet and social media, which seems a little superficial to say, but I still think it's true. Yugoslav war ethnic cleansing, god forbid we should ever get there, is going to get a massive coverage. That changes the political calculus, and I think if anything's going to foil the far-right, it'll be that.

rudatron fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Sep 28, 2015

# ¿ Sep 28, 2015 15:53

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Baudolino posted:

The solution is probably more liberalism. If there is no welfare state it can`t very well collapse now can it? It`ll also make integration easier since people will be forced to engage in general society to survive. Ghetto`s will still exist, but like in America they will fade away until a new ethnicity is forced on the run. A chanche to sink or swim no matter where in the world you come from. That`s really all these refugees want anyway.

This is unironically the solution according to libertarian types, but the mistaken belief is that immigrants necessarily strain the welfare system. They don't, they'll have an employment rate at about the same (and sometimes greater) than the natives. It's pure hogwash to suggest they just sit on welfare. The issue is more to do with the lack of demand for unskilled labor in developed countries, and the increase in the supply. But this is a failure of government economic policy and not really the fault of reffo. An 'employer of last resort' program would obviously help, really anything but austerity would be a good play.

# ¿ Sep 29, 2015 02:22

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Ligur posted:

The problem is that you're taking a perspective that's focused only on Europe. Go to the US and start talking about how immigrants are lazy, and you'll just get shut down. US Agribusiness wouldn't work today without the low wages that they're demanding, the entire industry is predicated on migrants not 'being lazy'. The US & Canada do not have the same disparities as Europe w.r.t migrant employment, and even within europe the extent of it depends on where you are.

But okay, let's talk policy. There are a couple of big things that can be done. Language acquisition is imperative. Punish those that refuse to learn the local language, but give everyone good access to resources to get them learning it (But let's be real here: English is the only real language anyone needs, and the sooner certain French-and-other-Eurotrash countries realize this, the better). Upskilling unskilled workers is generally a good idea, but with migrants you've got real cases of untapped potential, because they're not always going to be able to transfer their qualifications they may have had. I'm going to diverge from what others have said and say that bilingual schools are actually a trash idea, that you're better off getting them learning the local language, then shoving the kids into the normal school system.

Concerns of the particularities of Islamic immigrants are overblown when you compare the same rhetoric to old anti-catholic propaganda in the US. The biggest causes of radicalization are social, not cultural, and you'll find disenfranchised Buddhists can be just as dangerous as disenfranchised Muslims. The biggest thing to remember is that muslims, like most people, are normal, which means their concerns are, in order of importance: 1) getting food on their table 2) meeting with friends 3) the ending to game of thrones 4) maybe politics. Secret plans to overthrow the EU and establish the Eurabiastan caliphate isn't on that list, that's mostly the domain of shut-in paranoid retards, so basically the muslim versions of you, ligur.

# ¿ Sep 29, 2015 14:53

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

And here at last we come to the real reason behind the opposition to refugee immigration. Concerns of employment are, and always have been, smokescreens for this argument, the argument of cultural alienation. "They are different, they will always be different, they're bad", yawn, try again in the next 100 years, when you're using the same argument against whatever group of people are being targeted then.

Liberal_L33t posted:

Closing off immigration to Europe is also an argument I didn't make. But if that immigration is going to continue at the present pace, there needs to be more aggressive government efforts to encourage their assimilation and stamp out patriarchal cultural beliefs and practices.

The 'present pace' is set to expand the percent of muslims in the EU from a 5% to a whopping 6%. Regressive practices are a problem anywhere, but they can be dealt with, and they presence isn't relevant to the ostensible subject of this thread, that is, whether or not the refugees should be accepted at all. They don't deserve to die, and they especially should not be punished because the future EU may fail to integrate them - that's blaming them for policies out of their control. Good policy is how this crisis is going to get solved, if it ever get solved, and while you're doing it, maybe you can look at people who have done it successfully (the US).

steinrokkan posted:

Why is secularism not a requisite of countries which have secularism enshrined in their constitutional order?

Islam, by it's nature, does not 'reject' secularism, which was the specific accusation being made.

# ¿ Sep 29, 2015 21:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 01:26

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Reminder that the refugees are acutely aware of how difficult it will be for them to get medical care. They cannot afford to get food poisoning, their paranoia about food safety is entirely rational.

awesome-express posted:

*world's tiniest violin starts playing*

The poor, the oppressed, the rejected of the world, your suffering means nothing to me, poster awesome-express.

To be honest, I'm kind of speechless. If only such arrogant selfishness expressed itself visibly on the face, so that others could treat you with the same callousness you express. Until then, you're just a parasite.

# ¿ Oct 1, 2015 13:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Refugee Crisis - a crisis of conscience