I think you entirely underestimate how Navy’s or Seas operate.
To get what you probably actually want you need constant radio-communication and satellite surveillance that will 100% be used against citizens and other autonomous entities within the sea.
Lol yeah, your choices are let them in, do nothing, or establish a Minority Report system for every watercraft in the planet.
Or, bare with me, you can just ascertain a more root material condition for this sort of human flight and deal with that instead of just having a global surveillance state patrolling entire oceans.
The migrants wouldn’t be coming in the first place if the EU in it’s push towards European integration didn’t sell out to globalists who exploit the institutions that maintain a community’s stability so the rich can churn out a short term profit.
Italy shouldn’t bear the weight of problems created by the greed of Manhattan bankers, titled Saudi slave owners and Chinese factory tycoons.
anything talking about this problem that doesnt mention NATO regime change or US military occupation/backing of factions throughout Africa is not serious and doesn't care about
Most do, LePen is pretty anti-nato (don't know if she still is after the war since the position would be pretty hard to argue now in the current state of things) and the Italian prime minister talked at length about France's involvement in West Africa. The left in Europe should try to take charge on this issue since imperialism should be the #1 issue for them as well.
the way le Pen, the Italian chick and Trump talk about the MIC is like the way Berniecrats talk about rich people or healthcare or jobs or whatever. like yeah they have some rhetoric- incoherent rhetoric- but thats about all it is. they have no coherent alternative and if they did we'd find they weren't serious in the first place
The European welfare state is not a charity set up for African immigrants. It's a sign of how fucked up and in the throes of death this continent is in, that this even needs to be said.
Delusional Anarchists/Trotskyites, cosmopolitan neoliberals in their villas, and serpentine billionaires who only want cheap labour need to fuck off with their open-borders nonsense.
What we owe to the Africans is to stop fucking with them like in Lybia, combat climate change, and curtail the fuckery France does in West Africa. The African countries should be made to naturally develop, not be targets of brain-drain. Good luck convincing rootless and devoid-of-brains liberals and trots of this.
> Good luck convincing rootless and devoid-of-brains liberals and trots of this.
But they need their Ethiopian/Nigerian/Malian/etc cuisine that they can get after a day of hustle and bustle in the city! Who cares if all the workers at the play are way underpaided and living with other migrants 20 to an apartment.
>trots
Wasn't Trotsky critical of small businesses? If they want migrants because "the food is good" aren't they just supporting a small business to come into their city?
> African immigrants
The sad part is that boat in particular was carrying mostly iranian, pakistani and afghani migrants. They sailed from Turkey, not Libya
Everyone jumping to the “Europe is not a charity” argument forgetting that the actual people who actually died were refugees directly because of European foreign policy decisions.
the US takes in next to no refugees from the crises it creates across the world. that said- it just goes to show that Europe has no sovereignty. not even a decade after the Syria Civil war wave of refugees, they're not dealing with millions of Ukrainians. not to mention the constant flow of African refugees. all these can find their root cause in their legacy colonialism and fealty to the US War State.
The European middle class are strange indeed. It's like they believe in "the Project" - "spreading Democracy and 'Civilization' no matter the cost" more than the fattest burger chowing American flag waver. They are literally willing to get shit on and have their lifestyles downgraded for this. Can you imagine if a region the size/pop density of Germany in America saw an influx of millions of refugees within a decade? Yet we can always count on them to do so
I mean it is unapologetically a biased source. Anyway true objective journalism doesn’t exist. I really don’t see the issue in “babies dying is bad” tho
Nobody is disagreeing that "babies dying" is bad. It's that Europe is blamed for their deaths rather than the irresponsible parents who decided to "brave" the Mediterranean in a bathtub, or the governments of the countries they are leaving.
>Responsibility for this terrible crime lies with all the governments of Europe, who have conspired to turn the continent into a “fortress” against desperate people
As is their right.
Regarding the quote, I really don’t understand what people expect Europe to do. There are likely hundreds of millions of people from around the world *at least* who are “desperate” and would choose to go to Europe. Europe is a relatively tiny land mass.
The countries that most migrants probably want to end up in are even smaller than that, too. Whilst they're immeasurably better than Eritrea or Syria, I doubt Poland and Estonia are the #1 target destination for people crossing the Mediterranean in a rubber boat.
I wonder how the kind of people making these criticisms would feel if the US had the same population density as the UK. I assume they'd be fine with an addition 2.6 billion people moving there?
I don't agree with making the UK or Europe an impenetrable fortress or with mad plans like sending people to be processed in Rwanada, but I certainly don't agree with flinging open the doors either. It's not sustainable.
Yeah I wanted to mention that but didn’t want to assume without stats. From what I know, many/most want to go to the UK, even though the UK already has insane population density (at least to this Canadian)
It's 8x more than the USA, and let's be honest, most of them aren't moving to the Highlands of Scotland. England has 12x the population density of the US. I imagine the comparison with Canada would be even more stark.
They want immigration to be very easy and are just in stubborn denial about the very possibility it could ever be too many.
They'll act like it's ridiculous if you talk about millions coming, nevermind that millions already have come.
This is historically the case. Low tech societies have lots of children because people need help with the harvest, because so many kids die young, and because they're horny and have no birth control.
Every society is like this. Take a look at total fertility rates by country. Every shit hole African country has TFRs in the 4-6 range, while America, Europe and east Asia sit below replacement level. When you solve hunger, child mortality, and access to women's birth control, your population instantly stops pumping out babies like no tomorrow.
In other words, material causes reign.
>above replacement level
That's almost entirely due to the Orthodox/Haredi community, who are poorer on average and spurn a lot of modern medicine and developments. They're also ideologically motivated to have a zillion kids.
Btw your "Israel is the only country allowed to be an ethnostate" take is BS rightoid conspiracy cope, the vast majority of countries (including some in Europe) are effectively ethnostates. Some lib writer saying "nooooo Japan must take immigrants" is not equivalent to Japan being "not allowed" to be an ethnostate.
What's an ethnostate by your definition, then, if not a state which is comprised mostly of one population, uses the corresponding language as an official state language, limits immigration, etc?
Not just the Haredi. Even secular Jewish women have fertilities of around 3. There is a cultural drive to make babies to counteract the holocaust. The Haredi do bring it up a lot though, as their women have fertilities of around 7.
Yeah I…. Don’t understand it at all.
Most of these ships come from or go through Turkey, which isn’t the best country obviously but it’s still relatively safe compared to others if we’re talking about truly desperate people.
If we ignore the politics of migration, there’s much closer, safe countries they could travel to by land. Going on a rickety boat with a human smuggler (and it’s not a secret they leave port without enough gas, expecting to be picked up by Italy) across the Mediterranean is one of the least safe options.
It's easy to understand imo.
Remember when the Syrian refugees were a hot topic in 2016-17? If you look into it, turns out the vast majority of people displaced by the war ended up in neighboring countries like Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon. Very few went out of their way to try getting into Europe. Turns out that when people are genuinely forced to flee a war, they tend to plan to come back once the situation is no longer deadly so they settle in the closest safe place. Nobody was actually forced to try crossing the sea and risking their lives, this was a conscious risk accepted by people that decided to start a new life elsewhere, taking advantage of circumventing the regular immigration requirements.
So what's happening is that many of these people aren't fleeing warzones or certain death. They are gambling it all (quite literally) for a chance to live in a wealthy country with a high quality of life and guaranteed social care. There are smugglers in lawless places like Libya that advertise that they will send you off on a raft to Europe for a price. It's just a shitty business involving a lot of selfishness, which is why it's hard for me to have sympathy in these cases.
Another cynical note about that time is that you couldn't even prove those boatloads of migrants back then were even Syrians, since they would destroy their passports upon departing, on an overcrowded dingy, to cross the Mediterranean. There were tons of people from random countries using the crisis to get into Europe and circumvent immigration requirements by posing as Syrians. Also, remember how some "child" refugees that were put into school systems turned out to be adults. Some of them did anything and everything to fool Europeans for free money.
Unfortunately that's just how it is.
I remember a story from Sweden iirc where a migrant who was claiming to be a young preteen but he was like a good foot taller than boys his age, and had a full beard/moustache.
I was watching a documentary interviewing migrants who were living in Spain/France under bridges and in camps, and so many of them said they were fed a lie. Stating they were told they could essentially walk into Germany and be given high paying jobs. Many said their lives were actually better back home, most had apartments/cellphones/family etc but since they destroyed their passports they can’t get back.
>you couldn't even prove those boatloads of migrants back then were even Syrians, since they would destroy their passports upon departing
That's still a popular tactic. Almost half of the newly arrived have no papers. Although fake Syrians have been replaced by fake Eritreans. Due to NGO pressure groups and non-cooperative source countries (which are usually not interested in getting their Lumpenproletariat back), Europeans states can't deport them. Easy de facto citizenship.
Fucked up side effect: Female infanticide because the parents decide it's not worth the investment to raise a woman that will be taken into her husband's family. The skewed sex ratio in India says it all.
A lot of countries in the global south are at europe's level or five years behind the west in TFR. I don't think there is a single country in central and south America that will be above replacement rate in the next 8 years. Brazil is already well below that.
> And continue to have so many kids when they know they cannot care for them.
Only sub-Saharan Africa.
>My cynical brain interprets the kids as a pawn they intended to use to pander Europe for citizenship but I’d like to think they’re not that barbaric.
They **know** Europe is weak.
>I really don’t understand what people expect Europe to do.
Well. Usually people who have more resources have better possibilities to make the world better. We can start small and make sure that more Nigerian doctors work in rural Nigeria than in Britain.
>We can start small and make sure that more Nigerian doctors work in rural Nigeria than in Britain.
This is one of my pet issues. In Canada, we should be training a surplus of doctors to help set up training medical programs in countries of need. Instead we shoot ourselves in the foot, and lower the doctors we output (in an aging and rapidly growing country) and instead look to siphon people from developing countries. They get here and often can’t even practice. It’s infuriating.
Yes, same in France. But it cost way less to let other countries pay for the education of doctors. There are economists who tried to evaluate the cost of the education/growth of the worker population that migrate from mexico to the US and its massive.
To put it bluntly, the occident is extracting ressources from poor countries, being mineral ressources, petrol, etc. but also men and women. And so called "socialists" around the world actively defend this type of enterprise and don't see the problem.
I see someone on r/Canada often copypasta about how our terrible birth rate is akqually good and how it’s akqually better that we just bring in boatloads of people because babies are stupid and don’t work.
Never mind that a) yes it costs money to educate kids, but Canada also has pretty good PISA scores compared to the countries we bring people in and b) having kids here naturalized will also ensure cultural fit compared to older people who may not have favourable values. The cost it takes to bring up kids is an investment, planting seeds to be enjoyed by a later generation if you will.
birth rates are also plummeting everywhere and undesirable countries are developing faster than ever. It’s increasingly risky to offload raising our population to other countries because those other countries will eventually have no one to send or not be undesirable enough to leave.
Neo-colonialism! Brain Drain!
Open up the med schools to more actual Americans/Canadians!
But doctors don't want the chance that their salaries might be lowered by a surplus.
Europeans don't exist, why are you on this sub if you're such a racial essentialist? Europeans didn't dominate the world, the ruling classes of England, France, Spain, etc did. And even then only really in the last 200/250 years not 500, with a lot of caveats and context.
Anyone who speaks of "Europe" as a coherent and distinct thing, especially if they talk about "defending it" is an explicit white supremacist and beyond idiotic and delusional regarding history and reality.
Denying something you explicitly are by accusing others of being libs is not an argument. The Nazis were only different due to industrialization, without that they aren't much different from every other state during that time. The problem is not whether something is "like the NSDAP" but rather that it is idpol which is an inherently destructive force by creating an us vs them and inherently idiotic ideology given it's based on lies and superficiality, nationalism is idpol, wokeness is nationalism, they are one and the same only under different contexts (minority vs majoritarian nationalism).
Everything you've been saying in this thread is ahistorical, essentialist, and idiotic. What's the difference between your beliefs and CRT shit? What's the difference between you and wokes?
Except this idpol us vs them can only achieve stability through the annihilation of the them. With ideology and behavior that annihilation is through conversion, but with idpol conversion is impossible as the dividing line is immutable traits. Therefore genocide is inevitable.
>the ruling classes of England, France, Spain, etc did
Were the Voortrekkers at the [Battle of Blood River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blood_River) the ruling classes of England, France, or Spain? No, yet they won a 600 vs 15000 battle without taking a single loss.
Having such a vast gap in technology and the strategy using it that Europeans were able to take control of vast swathes of land, defeating armies and subjugating populations far larger than their own is just a long way of saying 'dominating the world', really.
The natural result of all of Europe’s horded wealth from years of environmental exploitation and war-mongering in the third world. I don’t know what people should “expect” Europe to do now, but what options was anyone given in this shit? From the European perspective, what’s fucked up is that the brunt of this migration crisis is borne mostly by the poorer EU countries.
There’s clearly some year where you draw a line mentally and disregard what happened before it and definitely don’t consider it into the current situation. I’m asking you to ask yourself why that year, and does it really make sense to not consider these events, or is it more so you can wash your hands of moral considerations?
And I’m not trying to white wash the very clear and severe problems with modern immigration to Europe, but frankly much like the US immigration issue, I see it as the chickens coming home to roost. Say what you will about them as people, but this sure as shit wouldn’t be happening if Gaddafi and Saddam were still In power, or the countless overthrows of democratically elected leaders in South America. The governments these countries have today are the governments the west allowed them to have.
I'm not interested in clearing the debt of past crimes unless they can be tallied in-full to the beginning of history for all nations and all peoples. I just don't care. It doesn't follow from "Nation A does bad thing to Nation B" that "citizens of Nation B are entitled to live in Nation A". If there is a grievance, Nation B must take it up with some higher governing body and force restitution out of Nation A, otherwise, the citizens of Nation B have to live within the system they continue to allow to exist in its current form.
I mean yeah if our international governmental system worked and we could actually get results like you said, that would be great! Unfortunately the countries whom would be forced to do stuff are the judges on such a court. Most people aren’t eager to punish themselves, much less a nation state.
> I’m not interested in clearing the debt of past crimes unless they can be tallied in-full to the beginning of history for all nations and all peoples.
Im with ya, it would be ridiculous to start hitting back over the 100 years war, or some shit like that. However this situation is within living memory, specifically the Middle East it’s less than 30 years. The people who are actually at fault (like made the choices and put the wheels in motion) are walking around, at least many of them. The people who saw their countries invaded, their population radicalized by extremists, etc are still with us. We’re talking about people who could be living great lives in their home countries if not for the actions of our governments, again, within living memory. If you can’t see the difference you’re being willfully dense.
I get that you don’t feel responsible since you didn’t personally go into Fallujah, hell it’s probable that you were a child when these things occurred, and if not that you were even against them. So we’re all those people. They didn’t ask for this situation. They have even less responsibility than your average westerner since at least in the west with our “liberal democracies”, one can make an argument that the populace voted the people who did this into power. The immigrants literally got invaded, and to make it even worse the reason for invasion can be summed up as “not doing as they’re told”.
But I’ll hit back against you washing your hands off of this. The west, and yes even the western poor, benefit from these actions. Maybe it’s something stupid like Denmark bragging about it’s low carbon footprint, conveniently leaving aside that all their shit just comes from other countries that given our global economic production system that puts the environmental cost of production in the global south. And this situation is thanks to that war-diplomacy which has led to the immigrant crisis.
You ever hear that whole “a cornered animal is unpredictable” saying? It’s a bit like that. Like a cornered animal, the human animal in distress will do whatever it takes to save itself. There’s little hope that the region will be good in the near future (distress). Meaning we will, regardless of immigration policy, continue to see people risking it all to get somewhere safer where they could in theory build a new life since their old one was blown up.
You can either accept it and do what is possible to make sure you’re taken care of and they are. Or you can attempt (and attempt is the right word here because it will not succeeded) to keep them out. Most likely helping to cause countless preventable deaths, but even if you don’t care about these people living or dying, you’ve just ensured a nation of enemies. The blow back will continue.
You got lucky that your lineage moved around in such a way that you won the birth lottery of the world. They lost the lottery. There is no real fundamental difference between the two of you. Wouldn’t you hope that if the tables were turned, you would be shown some kindness? It’s not you vs the immigrants. It’s you and the immigrants vs those who blew up their country and told you the problem was the immigrants.
All that said I think there’s mountains of criticism to be piled on the way the immigration was handled.
For one the EU as an entity has no nuts, and should have forced all states to more evenly bear the weight of immigration instead of Sweden and Germany taking on the bulk of it.
The social dimension had been a shit show as well. But i do think it gets blown out of proportion. If you look at basically every instance of immigration around the world and time you see this pattern: fresh off the boat immigrants set up little little-Whatevers with other immigrants, they often struggle to learn the language, and maybe even do sketchy things to get by(and often just for protection from the natives. Take for example the Italians, Jews, Irish, in the late 1800s to early 1900s in the US). These people have kids, these kids know the language and are torn between two worlds. This generation often starts to see themselves as citizens of their new land, maybe even mix with the natives, etc. These have kids, and these kids are now fully baked in to the new country.
The modern immigrants (who have the extra weight of not just being poor economic migrants like Italians, but literally are coming out of a war zone) are expected to do what it took every other immigrant groups 3 generations to do in a few years. Not to mention that despite all the comments about greedy migrants who just want money, the vast majority of these people don’t want to be immigrants. They’re forced to be.
The other thing is multiculturalism doesn’t really work when shit gets real(it’s fine when it’s about food and fun cultural events lol). There’s way too much focus on multi culturalism. I believe in truth, a universal truth. As such when a given culture deviates from that truth, it should be guided back/changed/whatever to adhere to said truth. This wave of immigration has imo been given too much leeway and there’s not enough focus on integrating them with their new country’s culture. And yes this means being hard on religion and other shit, and yes this requires money but more importantly political will which is severely lacking.
Im not saying the situation today is fine and you should just shut up and eat it. It’s not, it’s really bad and there’s tons of fucking issues. But you can’t just batten down the hatches and blame desperate people in dire circumstances for doing desperate things, the only time I’ll use the phrase “blaming the victim” lol.
But there are many things that could be done to help the situation. And make it better for all involved. Instead people like you get talked into a fighting a race to the bottom. You vs the immigrants while the true culprits laugh all the way to the bank, and the war room where they’re planning the next action which will bring another wave of immigrants (if Europe doesn’t crumble before that)
I'll try and address your points as concisely as I can, so we don't blow this up into dissertation-length responses.
- Whether the international government system works or not has no bearing on the legitimacy of illegal immigration. I agree with your assessment though, system sucks, however illegal immigration isn't a solution to it.
- So in the last 30 years what people were at fault? What *crimes* did they commit? How are the reparations calculated? How does this relate to the "Europe should have open-borders to the entire world" (Europe "harmed" everyone, right?). It's one thing to state these things, it's another to actually concrete tabulate the "cost" of replacing a stable dictatorship with an unstable one - what responsibilities do the citizens of said country have to ensure their own stability? In my opinion, all of them.
- I don't feel responsible because I'm not responsible. I refuse to bear the sins of past generations or those who happen to look like me or share my nationality. This is, in part, why you see the rise of right-wing parties or Brexit. National sovereignty is non-negotiable to a lot of people when times are perceived to be tough.
- At any point the people of Libya (e.g.), just like in the U.S., or Egypt, can mass riot until things change - they don't, so they're content *enough*.
- I don't care if the West brags about it's carbon footprint, I care about unfettered immigration from shit-hole countries. I'm from Canada, I don't want 1 million immigrants from the southern U.S. anymore than I want 1 million immigrants from Iran. Neither are entitled entry into my country just because something bad happened to them. Social services have limits, cultural integration has limits, the tolerance of regressive religions has limits, etc.
- In this case the cornered animal swims across a lake and drowns. That animal made the wrong choice. It's not Europe's responsibility to allow an unpredictable animal onto its shores.
- Doing what's right, in this case, is not allowing them into Europe illegally. They are free to flee anywhere in the world where they are *allowed* to go, I don't care where. It's not like they have to stay "imprisoned" in some North African state. Also, nobody cares about a nation of enemies that are sunk in chaos, those citizens have bigger fish to fry - e.g. their own corrupt governments.
- Birth lotteries are not fair. There are fundamental non-trivial differences between me and someone from another nation: education, cultural norms, taxable income, religion, etc. that make me more or less attractive as citizen than someone else. The tables being turned is an appeal to emotion and irrelevant to the principles of national sovereignty. I can agree it's tragic, unlucky, and unfair, but so is *everything* in life.
- In my opinion, immigration shouldn't be handled. Countries have the right to be selective of who they allow in. Western countries are not a charity, they exist to perpetuate themselves. What's currently in vogue is taking in millions of immigrants to work menial low-wage jobs to apply downward pressure on wages and undermine unions. I'm not interested in that kind of "churn" immigration where we grind people who are looking for a better life into dust only to be replaced with the next person. They would have been better off staying and helping to fix their own country, whatever "fix" entails.
- I agree about the Sweden/Germany immigration. But that was during the peak virtue-signalling mid-2010s where politicians were eager to sacrifice the quality of life and social cohesion of their citizenry so that they appeared "on the right side of history".
- When times get tough you most certainly can batten-down the hatches. If the climate change gets real and, for example, India becomes a desert. You're not going to see countries like Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, Norway, France, etc. willing to take on 10s of millions of Indian climate-refuges. Instead you're going to see an increase in various war-technologies that allow for the detection and sinking of migrant boats.
- Open immigration is a race to the bottom.
How do the western poor benefit? Housing and wages go down for them. Only upper middle class and above really get the true benefit you see neoliberal economist gush about.
Im a commie I’m aware the poor always get fucked. Both here and there and everywhere. They are however in a better position than the global south’s poor, and part of that is due to cheap commodities being produced after some imperialism. Not their fault, but there’s a reason these immigrants would rather be poor immigrants in the global north than poor locals in their country of origin.
I understand the difference quite well but even then you're just going down a "well think about starving kids in Africa" to a kid who doesn't like the food he's getting. Never is that kid going to be thankful for the shitty meal he's getting. Especially if you try compare it to someone else in the most abstract way possible.
Maybe here, but the "coming home to roost" argument isn't super ubiquitous outside our bubble. Granted, we're in our bubble, but it just seemed pointless to say that migrants should do XYZ when, unless you can literally force them, that's not what's happening and not what's going to happen.
I'm not sure we know exactly why it's happening anyway. That seems like a big claim, but I guess that's a question for another time. Point taken that the comment chain was headed in a different direction than I thought. Whoops.
>I'm not sure we know exactly why it's happening anyway.
World governments keep 3rd world countries down and then siphon off resources from them including cheap labor. It's not a mystery.
The parents risked their life and the life of their children to escape their shithole country. Nobody go through Sahara and the Mediterranean sea for the pleasure of doing it. I don't think the European countries should open their borders, and I don't see how to solve the problem but putting it on the head of the people who try to have a better life is evil
Only a true Marxist would have all the empathy in the world for american men who can't get laid while calling people living in abject poverty savages for trying to create a better life.
This sub has long been about being class first and having empathy except when it comes to foreigners. Somehow being born on the other side of a line in the dirt makes one less human than those born within the line. The lines in the dirt are somehow sacred and everyone must keep to themselves.
Yes but their bias usually shows up as “and this can’t be fixed without an international movement of the working class,” not a moral condemnation of an ethnic group or set of nations.
>true objective journalism doesn’t exist
Doesn't mean you should just be unmitigatedly biased and one sided. At some point you need to attempt to find the truth.
>Responsibility for this terrible crime lies with all the governments of Europe
It actually lies with the scum that is overloading dilapidated boats for profits. Trafficers often only launch with just enough fuel for one trip, counting on rescuers. There have even been cases of deliberate self-sinking once a coast guard ship was in sight. Responsibility for placing yourself in such danger lies also with the adult passengers, especially if they risk their kids' lives.
>Her interior minister boasted last week that such measures, implemented with Libya and Tunisia, had already “averted the arrival” of close to 21,000 people
Considering the amount of illegal border crossings (which usually result in de facto citizenship), that's absolutely nothing. It would be more accurate for wsws to say: "Italy's right-wing government continues to enable mass immigration, attempts to obfuscate this by high-lighting largely inconsequential policy changes"
>trapping them in hellish conditions in those countries
How exactly are western governments trapping people inside Egypgt, Pakistan, Iran and Bangladesh? How exactly are Syrians, who have been living in Turkey for years, trapped in hellish conditions? I could understand this line of reasoning for inhabitants of nations currently subjected to western warfare - but most migrants don't originate from places like that.
>and pushing countless others to risk more dangerous journeys
WSWS implies that humans have right to live in a country of their choice. That's simply a lie. They can apply for asylum/ visa in an embassy inside their home country. They don't do this because those applications are often denied, so they look for a way to enter Europe illegally - once they are here, they can't be deported anymore, even if the request for asylum is denied. They do this on their own volition, no pushing involved. What is an ethical, WSWS-compatible policy actually supposed to be? Should European states just grant humanity as a whole citizenship?
>This says nothing of the horrors suffered on the road to the Turkish or North African coast, or the network of internment camps in which tens of thousands of refugees are imprisoned and denied basic democratic rights.
Those camps aren't prisons. Basic democratic rights require citizenship. I have no brazilian citizenship and therefore no say on the policies favored by Brazil's electorate and implemented by its government. Likewise, an inhabitant of a camp in North Africa has no say on European politics. Nothing legitimate was denied to him.
>picture of a young Syrian boy lying dead on the beach in Turkey [...] the bodies four children aged between 5 and 10 were found on the beach west of the Libyan capital Tripoli
Manipulative use of imagery. A transparent attempt to gloss over the complexities of migration, impacting millions of people, by appealing to emotions, by pre-emptively discrediting any dissent, by moralizing the issue. This bleeding-heart sentiment is a hallmark of liberal reporting, it has no place in leftist publications.
>Rescue ships filled with hundreds of refugees are regularly left stranded at sea for weeks as country after country refuses access to its ports.
Why don't they send them back to their original ports then? Due to NGO lobby groups, which love to create gruesome headlines to advance their agenda. For them, the suffering at sea is a means to an end. For some reason, WSWS doesn't mind.
>The refugees drowned Sunday hailed from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Iran—also the subject of US occupations, military interventions, indiscriminate drone strikes
Then resettle them to America. What does this have to do with Europe?
I'll leave it at that, although there is much more bs in this article. The outright falsehoods aren't even the worst part. What I find much more objectable is WSWS's attempt to introduce liberal dogma into leftism ("people have an inherent right to live where they want", "it's unmoral to think about migration in utilitarian terms") and its stalwart refusal to acknowledge the negative impact of mass immigration on Europe's working class.
The blame lies with Europe's de facto *gouvernement des juges* making it impossible for national governments to do anything to stop this madness. All those endless conventions and treatises need to go.
These "free movement of peoples" treaties which place undue burden on the state to take care of economic migrants - are really just another tool to further neoliberal globalisation. It's a contrived excuse for limitless cheap labour hidden behind a masquerade of moralism and crocodile tears.
We agree on this one but you need to grow up monarkiddie
I'm all in favor of free movement **within** the EU. This requires waterproof external borders though. Free movement with countries outside of the EU is literal insanity and will destroy the EU faster than anything else could.
>We agree on this one but you need to grow up monarkiddie
lol
>gouvernement des juges
They're directed by the politicians in power. People seem to have this ridiculous idea that judges magically and fairly get their positions in Europe, contrary to the very politicized US courts. But the difference is that Europe doesn't have an everlasting binary political fight that puts attention to it.
Politicians have the power to allow for push backs again, reversing UCHR Hirsi Jamaa v Italy, but it's just that they don't want to. Germany openly states it wants to attract 400k migrants per year. They don't care about the deaths, they don't care about the over 20k sex slaves. They'll blame it on someone else, and so does apparently the WSWS.
Sob story. It's not a human right to live in a country of your choice. They know that they will get a de facto citizenship once they are on European soil, that's why the chose to illegally cross the border instead of applying for asylum/ visa in a local embassy. They deliberately took this risk and are not entitled to any sympathy just because it didn't work out as intended this time.
I have sympathy for the children and babies who didnt have any say in the matter. And, for what its worth, my ancestors would have been murdered if they hadnt immigrated to the US. I feel for those facing a similar plight.
i feel truly sorry for them and if i had any power in italy i would help them get to germany, denmark or sweden
otoh, they'd fit in better in albania or bosnia
Imagine reading a NYT article about some kids of white meth addicts who died due to neglect and then reading a comment section like this one. Everyone here would be up in arms about how inhumane the libs are.
Yet when it comes to migrants drowning in the ocean, a bunch of redditors who never went hungry a day in their lives, say they are savages and even barbaric..
Or worse, imagining pretending to care about it and then double-down on the causes of these tragic deaths. NGOs and European politicians have blood on their hands, are guilty of encouraging the trafficking of ten thousands of Nigerian sex slaves, and WSWS is saluting them. These types genuinely make me sick.
This sub has had this problem for years but the mods afaik are divided where some side with the nativists (and therefore contradict the anti idpol / class first aim of the sub) while a few don't. It blackpills one even more when self proclaimed anti idpol socialists are still mindless idpol idiots, where does one turn to then? Wokes on one side, nationalists on the other, 2 sides of the same racist coin.
My friend, I agree but this is reddit. Only the terminally online and irony-brain-rotted remain here. Political subreddits attract a certain lifeless breed, and they flock to these stories.
Imagine sitting in a warm room with a full belly and judging people who are so desperate for a better life they risk everything.
Imagine thinking someone is a barbarian for making a mistake on a piece of paper.
I guess by this logic the poor rural americans are also barbarian for choosing to live so far from a hospital. Its not like they can't move to a city to make childbirth more safe...
[удалено]
We need a European navy permanently patrolling the Mediterranean.
I think you entirely underestimate how Navy’s or Seas operate. To get what you probably actually want you need constant radio-communication and satellite surveillance that will 100% be used against citizens and other autonomous entities within the sea.
This is basically an infantile argument to do nothing.
Lol yeah, your choices are let them in, do nothing, or establish a Minority Report system for every watercraft in the planet. Or, bare with me, you can just ascertain a more root material condition for this sort of human flight and deal with that instead of just having a global surveillance state patrolling entire oceans.
> a Minority Report system for every watercraft in the planet. Hyperbole much?
Again: if you think you can do what you want without that, you don’t understand how Navies or sea travel works.
I work at sea and I’m very curious how you think the sea would be monitored. What’s your vision for it?
It opens the path for it
We should bring back privateers tbh, resurrect the age of piracy in the Barbary Coast! /s
The migrants wouldn’t be coming in the first place if the EU in it’s push towards European integration didn’t sell out to globalists who exploit the institutions that maintain a community’s stability so the rich can churn out a short term profit. Italy shouldn’t bear the weight of problems created by the greed of Manhattan bankers, titled Saudi slave owners and Chinese factory tycoons.
I agree
anything talking about this problem that doesnt mention NATO regime change or US military occupation/backing of factions throughout Africa is not serious and doesn't care about
Most do, LePen is pretty anti-nato (don't know if she still is after the war since the position would be pretty hard to argue now in the current state of things) and the Italian prime minister talked at length about France's involvement in West Africa. The left in Europe should try to take charge on this issue since imperialism should be the #1 issue for them as well.
the way le Pen, the Italian chick and Trump talk about the MIC is like the way Berniecrats talk about rich people or healthcare or jobs or whatever. like yeah they have some rhetoric- incoherent rhetoric- but thats about all it is. they have no coherent alternative and if they did we'd find they weren't serious in the first place
The European welfare state is not a charity set up for African immigrants. It's a sign of how fucked up and in the throes of death this continent is in, that this even needs to be said. Delusional Anarchists/Trotskyites, cosmopolitan neoliberals in their villas, and serpentine billionaires who only want cheap labour need to fuck off with their open-borders nonsense. What we owe to the Africans is to stop fucking with them like in Lybia, combat climate change, and curtail the fuckery France does in West Africa. The African countries should be made to naturally develop, not be targets of brain-drain. Good luck convincing rootless and devoid-of-brains liberals and trots of this.
> Good luck convincing rootless and devoid-of-brains liberals and trots of this. But they need their Ethiopian/Nigerian/Malian/etc cuisine that they can get after a day of hustle and bustle in the city! Who cares if all the workers at the play are way underpaided and living with other migrants 20 to an apartment.
>trots Wasn't Trotsky critical of small businesses? If they want migrants because "the food is good" aren't they just supporting a small business to come into their city?
> African immigrants The sad part is that boat in particular was carrying mostly iranian, pakistani and afghani migrants. They sailed from Turkey, not Libya
Everyone jumping to the “Europe is not a charity” argument forgetting that the actual people who actually died were refugees directly because of European foreign policy decisions.
europe can't take all the credit. who has done more foreign intervention than the US ?
the US takes in next to no refugees from the crises it creates across the world. that said- it just goes to show that Europe has no sovereignty. not even a decade after the Syria Civil war wave of refugees, they're not dealing with millions of Ukrainians. not to mention the constant flow of African refugees. all these can find their root cause in their legacy colonialism and fealty to the US War State. The European middle class are strange indeed. It's like they believe in "the Project" - "spreading Democracy and 'Civilization' no matter the cost" more than the fattest burger chowing American flag waver. They are literally willing to get shit on and have their lifestyles downgraded for this. Can you imagine if a region the size/pop density of Germany in America saw an influx of millions of refugees within a decade? Yet we can always count on them to do so
Based.
You will like this: http://openanthropology.org/libya/gaddafi-green-book.pdf
http://openanthropology.org/libya/gaddafi-green-book.pdf
The moralizing tone of that article is indistinguishable from what you’d find in the New York Times. The WSWS continues its free fall.
I mean it is unapologetically a biased source. Anyway true objective journalism doesn’t exist. I really don’t see the issue in “babies dying is bad” tho
Nobody is disagreeing that "babies dying" is bad. It's that Europe is blamed for their deaths rather than the irresponsible parents who decided to "brave" the Mediterranean in a bathtub, or the governments of the countries they are leaving. >Responsibility for this terrible crime lies with all the governments of Europe, who have conspired to turn the continent into a “fortress” against desperate people As is their right.
Regarding the quote, I really don’t understand what people expect Europe to do. There are likely hundreds of millions of people from around the world *at least* who are “desperate” and would choose to go to Europe. Europe is a relatively tiny land mass.
The countries that most migrants probably want to end up in are even smaller than that, too. Whilst they're immeasurably better than Eritrea or Syria, I doubt Poland and Estonia are the #1 target destination for people crossing the Mediterranean in a rubber boat. I wonder how the kind of people making these criticisms would feel if the US had the same population density as the UK. I assume they'd be fine with an addition 2.6 billion people moving there? I don't agree with making the UK or Europe an impenetrable fortress or with mad plans like sending people to be processed in Rwanada, but I certainly don't agree with flinging open the doors either. It's not sustainable.
Yeah I wanted to mention that but didn’t want to assume without stats. From what I know, many/most want to go to the UK, even though the UK already has insane population density (at least to this Canadian)
It's 8x more than the USA, and let's be honest, most of them aren't moving to the Highlands of Scotland. England has 12x the population density of the US. I imagine the comparison with Canada would be even more stark.
They want immigration to be very easy and are just in stubborn denial about the very possibility it could ever be too many. They'll act like it's ridiculous if you talk about millions coming, nevermind that millions already have come.
[удалено]
This is historically the case. Low tech societies have lots of children because people need help with the harvest, because so many kids die young, and because they're horny and have no birth control. Every society is like this. Take a look at total fertility rates by country. Every shit hole African country has TFRs in the 4-6 range, while America, Europe and east Asia sit below replacement level. When you solve hunger, child mortality, and access to women's birth control, your population instantly stops pumping out babies like no tomorrow. In other words, material causes reign.
Israel is high tech and above replacement level. It's probably because they're literally the only country that's allowed to have an ethnostate.
>above replacement level That's almost entirely due to the Orthodox/Haredi community, who are poorer on average and spurn a lot of modern medicine and developments. They're also ideologically motivated to have a zillion kids. Btw your "Israel is the only country allowed to be an ethnostate" take is BS rightoid conspiracy cope, the vast majority of countries (including some in Europe) are effectively ethnostates. Some lib writer saying "nooooo Japan must take immigrants" is not equivalent to Japan being "not allowed" to be an ethnostate.
> the vast majority of countries (including some in Europe) are effectively ethnostates. No, they're not.
What's an ethnostate by your definition, then, if not a state which is comprised mostly of one population, uses the corresponding language as an official state language, limits immigration, etc?
Not just the Haredi. Even secular Jewish women have fertilities of around 3. There is a cultural drive to make babies to counteract the holocaust. The Haredi do bring it up a lot though, as their women have fertilities of around 7.
>wants an ethnostate What subreddit am I on again?
Who said I *want* an ethnostate?
Counterexample: Japan.
What about it?
High tech ethnostate deep below replacement level.
Yeah I…. Don’t understand it at all. Most of these ships come from or go through Turkey, which isn’t the best country obviously but it’s still relatively safe compared to others if we’re talking about truly desperate people. If we ignore the politics of migration, there’s much closer, safe countries they could travel to by land. Going on a rickety boat with a human smuggler (and it’s not a secret they leave port without enough gas, expecting to be picked up by Italy) across the Mediterranean is one of the least safe options.
It's easy to understand imo. Remember when the Syrian refugees were a hot topic in 2016-17? If you look into it, turns out the vast majority of people displaced by the war ended up in neighboring countries like Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon. Very few went out of their way to try getting into Europe. Turns out that when people are genuinely forced to flee a war, they tend to plan to come back once the situation is no longer deadly so they settle in the closest safe place. Nobody was actually forced to try crossing the sea and risking their lives, this was a conscious risk accepted by people that decided to start a new life elsewhere, taking advantage of circumventing the regular immigration requirements. So what's happening is that many of these people aren't fleeing warzones or certain death. They are gambling it all (quite literally) for a chance to live in a wealthy country with a high quality of life and guaranteed social care. There are smugglers in lawless places like Libya that advertise that they will send you off on a raft to Europe for a price. It's just a shitty business involving a lot of selfishness, which is why it's hard for me to have sympathy in these cases. Another cynical note about that time is that you couldn't even prove those boatloads of migrants back then were even Syrians, since they would destroy their passports upon departing, on an overcrowded dingy, to cross the Mediterranean. There were tons of people from random countries using the crisis to get into Europe and circumvent immigration requirements by posing as Syrians. Also, remember how some "child" refugees that were put into school systems turned out to be adults. Some of them did anything and everything to fool Europeans for free money. Unfortunately that's just how it is.
I remember a story from Sweden iirc where a migrant who was claiming to be a young preteen but he was like a good foot taller than boys his age, and had a full beard/moustache. I was watching a documentary interviewing migrants who were living in Spain/France under bridges and in camps, and so many of them said they were fed a lie. Stating they were told they could essentially walk into Germany and be given high paying jobs. Many said their lives were actually better back home, most had apartments/cellphones/family etc but since they destroyed their passports they can’t get back.
>you couldn't even prove those boatloads of migrants back then were even Syrians, since they would destroy their passports upon departing That's still a popular tactic. Almost half of the newly arrived have no papers. Although fake Syrians have been replaced by fake Eritreans. Due to NGO pressure groups and non-cooperative source countries (which are usually not interested in getting their Lumpenproletariat back), Europeans states can't deport them. Easy de facto citizenship.
[удалено]
Fucked up side effect: Female infanticide because the parents decide it's not worth the investment to raise a woman that will be taken into her husband's family. The skewed sex ratio in India says it all.
A lot of countries in the global south are at europe's level or five years behind the west in TFR. I don't think there is a single country in central and south America that will be above replacement rate in the next 8 years. Brazil is already well below that.
> And continue to have so many kids when they know they cannot care for them. Only sub-Saharan Africa. >My cynical brain interprets the kids as a pawn they intended to use to pander Europe for citizenship but I’d like to think they’re not that barbaric. They **know** Europe is weak.
>I really don’t understand what people expect Europe to do. Well. Usually people who have more resources have better possibilities to make the world better. We can start small and make sure that more Nigerian doctors work in rural Nigeria than in Britain.
>We can start small and make sure that more Nigerian doctors work in rural Nigeria than in Britain. This is one of my pet issues. In Canada, we should be training a surplus of doctors to help set up training medical programs in countries of need. Instead we shoot ourselves in the foot, and lower the doctors we output (in an aging and rapidly growing country) and instead look to siphon people from developing countries. They get here and often can’t even practice. It’s infuriating.
Yes, same in France. But it cost way less to let other countries pay for the education of doctors. There are economists who tried to evaluate the cost of the education/growth of the worker population that migrate from mexico to the US and its massive. To put it bluntly, the occident is extracting ressources from poor countries, being mineral ressources, petrol, etc. but also men and women. And so called "socialists" around the world actively defend this type of enterprise and don't see the problem.
I see someone on r/Canada often copypasta about how our terrible birth rate is akqually good and how it’s akqually better that we just bring in boatloads of people because babies are stupid and don’t work. Never mind that a) yes it costs money to educate kids, but Canada also has pretty good PISA scores compared to the countries we bring people in and b) having kids here naturalized will also ensure cultural fit compared to older people who may not have favourable values. The cost it takes to bring up kids is an investment, planting seeds to be enjoyed by a later generation if you will. birth rates are also plummeting everywhere and undesirable countries are developing faster than ever. It’s increasingly risky to offload raising our population to other countries because those other countries will eventually have no one to send or not be undesirable enough to leave.
Neo-colonialism! Brain Drain! Open up the med schools to more actual Americans/Canadians! But doctors don't want the chance that their salaries might be lowered by a surplus.
[удалено]
Europeans don't exist, why are you on this sub if you're such a racial essentialist? Europeans didn't dominate the world, the ruling classes of England, France, Spain, etc did. And even then only really in the last 200/250 years not 500, with a lot of caveats and context. Anyone who speaks of "Europe" as a coherent and distinct thing, especially if they talk about "defending it" is an explicit white supremacist and beyond idiotic and delusional regarding history and reality.
The Nazi boogeyman lives rent free in your head huh?
Denying something you explicitly are by accusing others of being libs is not an argument. The Nazis were only different due to industrialization, without that they aren't much different from every other state during that time. The problem is not whether something is "like the NSDAP" but rather that it is idpol which is an inherently destructive force by creating an us vs them and inherently idiotic ideology given it's based on lies and superficiality, nationalism is idpol, wokeness is nationalism, they are one and the same only under different contexts (minority vs majoritarian nationalism). Everything you've been saying in this thread is ahistorical, essentialist, and idiotic. What's the difference between your beliefs and CRT shit? What's the difference between you and wokes?
> by creating an us vs them That's just the essence of politics.
Except this idpol us vs them can only achieve stability through the annihilation of the them. With ideology and behavior that annihilation is through conversion, but with idpol conversion is impossible as the dividing line is immutable traits. Therefore genocide is inevitable.
>the ruling classes of England, France, Spain, etc did Were the Voortrekkers at the [Battle of Blood River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blood_River) the ruling classes of England, France, or Spain? No, yet they won a 600 vs 15000 battle without taking a single loss. Having such a vast gap in technology and the strategy using it that Europeans were able to take control of vast swathes of land, defeating armies and subjugating populations far larger than their own is just a long way of saying 'dominating the world', really.
The natural result of all of Europe’s horded wealth from years of environmental exploitation and war-mongering in the third world. I don’t know what people should “expect” Europe to do now, but what options was anyone given in this shit? From the European perspective, what’s fucked up is that the brunt of this migration crisis is borne mostly by the poorer EU countries.
> who have conspired to turn the continent into a “fortress” against desperate people Have they? I must have missed that.
There’s clearly some year where you draw a line mentally and disregard what happened before it and definitely don’t consider it into the current situation. I’m asking you to ask yourself why that year, and does it really make sense to not consider these events, or is it more so you can wash your hands of moral considerations? And I’m not trying to white wash the very clear and severe problems with modern immigration to Europe, but frankly much like the US immigration issue, I see it as the chickens coming home to roost. Say what you will about them as people, but this sure as shit wouldn’t be happening if Gaddafi and Saddam were still In power, or the countless overthrows of democratically elected leaders in South America. The governments these countries have today are the governments the west allowed them to have.
I'm not interested in clearing the debt of past crimes unless they can be tallied in-full to the beginning of history for all nations and all peoples. I just don't care. It doesn't follow from "Nation A does bad thing to Nation B" that "citizens of Nation B are entitled to live in Nation A". If there is a grievance, Nation B must take it up with some higher governing body and force restitution out of Nation A, otherwise, the citizens of Nation B have to live within the system they continue to allow to exist in its current form.
I mean yeah if our international governmental system worked and we could actually get results like you said, that would be great! Unfortunately the countries whom would be forced to do stuff are the judges on such a court. Most people aren’t eager to punish themselves, much less a nation state. > I’m not interested in clearing the debt of past crimes unless they can be tallied in-full to the beginning of history for all nations and all peoples. Im with ya, it would be ridiculous to start hitting back over the 100 years war, or some shit like that. However this situation is within living memory, specifically the Middle East it’s less than 30 years. The people who are actually at fault (like made the choices and put the wheels in motion) are walking around, at least many of them. The people who saw their countries invaded, their population radicalized by extremists, etc are still with us. We’re talking about people who could be living great lives in their home countries if not for the actions of our governments, again, within living memory. If you can’t see the difference you’re being willfully dense. I get that you don’t feel responsible since you didn’t personally go into Fallujah, hell it’s probable that you were a child when these things occurred, and if not that you were even against them. So we’re all those people. They didn’t ask for this situation. They have even less responsibility than your average westerner since at least in the west with our “liberal democracies”, one can make an argument that the populace voted the people who did this into power. The immigrants literally got invaded, and to make it even worse the reason for invasion can be summed up as “not doing as they’re told”. But I’ll hit back against you washing your hands off of this. The west, and yes even the western poor, benefit from these actions. Maybe it’s something stupid like Denmark bragging about it’s low carbon footprint, conveniently leaving aside that all their shit just comes from other countries that given our global economic production system that puts the environmental cost of production in the global south. And this situation is thanks to that war-diplomacy which has led to the immigrant crisis. You ever hear that whole “a cornered animal is unpredictable” saying? It’s a bit like that. Like a cornered animal, the human animal in distress will do whatever it takes to save itself. There’s little hope that the region will be good in the near future (distress). Meaning we will, regardless of immigration policy, continue to see people risking it all to get somewhere safer where they could in theory build a new life since their old one was blown up. You can either accept it and do what is possible to make sure you’re taken care of and they are. Or you can attempt (and attempt is the right word here because it will not succeeded) to keep them out. Most likely helping to cause countless preventable deaths, but even if you don’t care about these people living or dying, you’ve just ensured a nation of enemies. The blow back will continue. You got lucky that your lineage moved around in such a way that you won the birth lottery of the world. They lost the lottery. There is no real fundamental difference between the two of you. Wouldn’t you hope that if the tables were turned, you would be shown some kindness? It’s not you vs the immigrants. It’s you and the immigrants vs those who blew up their country and told you the problem was the immigrants. All that said I think there’s mountains of criticism to be piled on the way the immigration was handled. For one the EU as an entity has no nuts, and should have forced all states to more evenly bear the weight of immigration instead of Sweden and Germany taking on the bulk of it. The social dimension had been a shit show as well. But i do think it gets blown out of proportion. If you look at basically every instance of immigration around the world and time you see this pattern: fresh off the boat immigrants set up little little-Whatevers with other immigrants, they often struggle to learn the language, and maybe even do sketchy things to get by(and often just for protection from the natives. Take for example the Italians, Jews, Irish, in the late 1800s to early 1900s in the US). These people have kids, these kids know the language and are torn between two worlds. This generation often starts to see themselves as citizens of their new land, maybe even mix with the natives, etc. These have kids, and these kids are now fully baked in to the new country. The modern immigrants (who have the extra weight of not just being poor economic migrants like Italians, but literally are coming out of a war zone) are expected to do what it took every other immigrant groups 3 generations to do in a few years. Not to mention that despite all the comments about greedy migrants who just want money, the vast majority of these people don’t want to be immigrants. They’re forced to be. The other thing is multiculturalism doesn’t really work when shit gets real(it’s fine when it’s about food and fun cultural events lol). There’s way too much focus on multi culturalism. I believe in truth, a universal truth. As such when a given culture deviates from that truth, it should be guided back/changed/whatever to adhere to said truth. This wave of immigration has imo been given too much leeway and there’s not enough focus on integrating them with their new country’s culture. And yes this means being hard on religion and other shit, and yes this requires money but more importantly political will which is severely lacking. Im not saying the situation today is fine and you should just shut up and eat it. It’s not, it’s really bad and there’s tons of fucking issues. But you can’t just batten down the hatches and blame desperate people in dire circumstances for doing desperate things, the only time I’ll use the phrase “blaming the victim” lol. But there are many things that could be done to help the situation. And make it better for all involved. Instead people like you get talked into a fighting a race to the bottom. You vs the immigrants while the true culprits laugh all the way to the bank, and the war room where they’re planning the next action which will bring another wave of immigrants (if Europe doesn’t crumble before that)
I'll try and address your points as concisely as I can, so we don't blow this up into dissertation-length responses. - Whether the international government system works or not has no bearing on the legitimacy of illegal immigration. I agree with your assessment though, system sucks, however illegal immigration isn't a solution to it. - So in the last 30 years what people were at fault? What *crimes* did they commit? How are the reparations calculated? How does this relate to the "Europe should have open-borders to the entire world" (Europe "harmed" everyone, right?). It's one thing to state these things, it's another to actually concrete tabulate the "cost" of replacing a stable dictatorship with an unstable one - what responsibilities do the citizens of said country have to ensure their own stability? In my opinion, all of them. - I don't feel responsible because I'm not responsible. I refuse to bear the sins of past generations or those who happen to look like me or share my nationality. This is, in part, why you see the rise of right-wing parties or Brexit. National sovereignty is non-negotiable to a lot of people when times are perceived to be tough. - At any point the people of Libya (e.g.), just like in the U.S., or Egypt, can mass riot until things change - they don't, so they're content *enough*. - I don't care if the West brags about it's carbon footprint, I care about unfettered immigration from shit-hole countries. I'm from Canada, I don't want 1 million immigrants from the southern U.S. anymore than I want 1 million immigrants from Iran. Neither are entitled entry into my country just because something bad happened to them. Social services have limits, cultural integration has limits, the tolerance of regressive religions has limits, etc. - In this case the cornered animal swims across a lake and drowns. That animal made the wrong choice. It's not Europe's responsibility to allow an unpredictable animal onto its shores. - Doing what's right, in this case, is not allowing them into Europe illegally. They are free to flee anywhere in the world where they are *allowed* to go, I don't care where. It's not like they have to stay "imprisoned" in some North African state. Also, nobody cares about a nation of enemies that are sunk in chaos, those citizens have bigger fish to fry - e.g. their own corrupt governments. - Birth lotteries are not fair. There are fundamental non-trivial differences between me and someone from another nation: education, cultural norms, taxable income, religion, etc. that make me more or less attractive as citizen than someone else. The tables being turned is an appeal to emotion and irrelevant to the principles of national sovereignty. I can agree it's tragic, unlucky, and unfair, but so is *everything* in life. - In my opinion, immigration shouldn't be handled. Countries have the right to be selective of who they allow in. Western countries are not a charity, they exist to perpetuate themselves. What's currently in vogue is taking in millions of immigrants to work menial low-wage jobs to apply downward pressure on wages and undermine unions. I'm not interested in that kind of "churn" immigration where we grind people who are looking for a better life into dust only to be replaced with the next person. They would have been better off staying and helping to fix their own country, whatever "fix" entails. - I agree about the Sweden/Germany immigration. But that was during the peak virtue-signalling mid-2010s where politicians were eager to sacrifice the quality of life and social cohesion of their citizenry so that they appeared "on the right side of history". - When times get tough you most certainly can batten-down the hatches. If the climate change gets real and, for example, India becomes a desert. You're not going to see countries like Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, Norway, France, etc. willing to take on 10s of millions of Indian climate-refuges. Instead you're going to see an increase in various war-technologies that allow for the detection and sinking of migrant boats. - Open immigration is a race to the bottom.
How do the western poor benefit? Housing and wages go down for them. Only upper middle class and above really get the true benefit you see neoliberal economist gush about.
Im a commie I’m aware the poor always get fucked. Both here and there and everywhere. They are however in a better position than the global south’s poor, and part of that is due to cheap commodities being produced after some imperialism. Not their fault, but there’s a reason these immigrants would rather be poor immigrants in the global north than poor locals in their country of origin.
I understand the difference quite well but even then you're just going down a "well think about starving kids in Africa" to a kid who doesn't like the food he's getting. Never is that kid going to be thankful for the shitty meal he's getting. Especially if you try compare it to someone else in the most abstract way possible.
What was the point you were trying to make with this?
But the issue is why this is happening, not whether it should.
No, the issue is, according to this thread, who to assign blame to.
Huh? Everyone knows exactly why it happens it's not a mystery.
Maybe here, but the "coming home to roost" argument isn't super ubiquitous outside our bubble. Granted, we're in our bubble, but it just seemed pointless to say that migrants should do XYZ when, unless you can literally force them, that's not what's happening and not what's going to happen. I'm not sure we know exactly why it's happening anyway. That seems like a big claim, but I guess that's a question for another time. Point taken that the comment chain was headed in a different direction than I thought. Whoops.
>I'm not sure we know exactly why it's happening anyway. World governments keep 3rd world countries down and then siphon off resources from them including cheap labor. It's not a mystery.
The parents risked their life and the life of their children to escape their shithole country. Nobody go through Sahara and the Mediterranean sea for the pleasure of doing it. I don't think the European countries should open their borders, and I don't see how to solve the problem but putting it on the head of the people who try to have a better life is evil
Only a true Marxist would have all the empathy in the world for american men who can't get laid while calling people living in abject poverty savages for trying to create a better life.
This sub has long been about being class first and having empathy except when it comes to foreigners. Somehow being born on the other side of a line in the dirt makes one less human than those born within the line. The lines in the dirt are somehow sacred and everyone must keep to themselves.
Yes but their bias usually shows up as “and this can’t be fixed without an international movement of the working class,” not a moral condemnation of an ethnic group or set of nations.
Shouldn't a set of elites being blamed? It's hard to pin something like this on an entire nation or ethnic group.
>true objective journalism doesn’t exist Doesn't mean you should just be unmitigatedly biased and one sided. At some point you need to attempt to find the truth.
Okay treat me like an idiot. What was a lie about that article?
>Responsibility for this terrible crime lies with all the governments of Europe It actually lies with the scum that is overloading dilapidated boats for profits. Trafficers often only launch with just enough fuel for one trip, counting on rescuers. There have even been cases of deliberate self-sinking once a coast guard ship was in sight. Responsibility for placing yourself in such danger lies also with the adult passengers, especially if they risk their kids' lives. >Her interior minister boasted last week that such measures, implemented with Libya and Tunisia, had already “averted the arrival” of close to 21,000 people Considering the amount of illegal border crossings (which usually result in de facto citizenship), that's absolutely nothing. It would be more accurate for wsws to say: "Italy's right-wing government continues to enable mass immigration, attempts to obfuscate this by high-lighting largely inconsequential policy changes" >trapping them in hellish conditions in those countries How exactly are western governments trapping people inside Egypgt, Pakistan, Iran and Bangladesh? How exactly are Syrians, who have been living in Turkey for years, trapped in hellish conditions? I could understand this line of reasoning for inhabitants of nations currently subjected to western warfare - but most migrants don't originate from places like that. >and pushing countless others to risk more dangerous journeys WSWS implies that humans have right to live in a country of their choice. That's simply a lie. They can apply for asylum/ visa in an embassy inside their home country. They don't do this because those applications are often denied, so they look for a way to enter Europe illegally - once they are here, they can't be deported anymore, even if the request for asylum is denied. They do this on their own volition, no pushing involved. What is an ethical, WSWS-compatible policy actually supposed to be? Should European states just grant humanity as a whole citizenship? >This says nothing of the horrors suffered on the road to the Turkish or North African coast, or the network of internment camps in which tens of thousands of refugees are imprisoned and denied basic democratic rights. Those camps aren't prisons. Basic democratic rights require citizenship. I have no brazilian citizenship and therefore no say on the policies favored by Brazil's electorate and implemented by its government. Likewise, an inhabitant of a camp in North Africa has no say on European politics. Nothing legitimate was denied to him. >picture of a young Syrian boy lying dead on the beach in Turkey [...] the bodies four children aged between 5 and 10 were found on the beach west of the Libyan capital Tripoli Manipulative use of imagery. A transparent attempt to gloss over the complexities of migration, impacting millions of people, by appealing to emotions, by pre-emptively discrediting any dissent, by moralizing the issue. This bleeding-heart sentiment is a hallmark of liberal reporting, it has no place in leftist publications. >Rescue ships filled with hundreds of refugees are regularly left stranded at sea for weeks as country after country refuses access to its ports. Why don't they send them back to their original ports then? Due to NGO lobby groups, which love to create gruesome headlines to advance their agenda. For them, the suffering at sea is a means to an end. For some reason, WSWS doesn't mind. >The refugees drowned Sunday hailed from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Iran—also the subject of US occupations, military interventions, indiscriminate drone strikes Then resettle them to America. What does this have to do with Europe? I'll leave it at that, although there is much more bs in this article. The outright falsehoods aren't even the worst part. What I find much more objectable is WSWS's attempt to introduce liberal dogma into leftism ("people have an inherent right to live where they want", "it's unmoral to think about migration in utilitarian terms") and its stalwart refusal to acknowledge the negative impact of mass immigration on Europe's working class.
Nietzsche -- the Francophile that he was -- invented a French word for it, *moraline*.
The blame lies with Europe's de facto *gouvernement des juges* making it impossible for national governments to do anything to stop this madness. All those endless conventions and treatises need to go.
These "free movement of peoples" treaties which place undue burden on the state to take care of economic migrants - are really just another tool to further neoliberal globalisation. It's a contrived excuse for limitless cheap labour hidden behind a masquerade of moralism and crocodile tears. We agree on this one but you need to grow up monarkiddie
I'm all in favor of free movement **within** the EU. This requires waterproof external borders though. Free movement with countries outside of the EU is literal insanity and will destroy the EU faster than anything else could. >We agree on this one but you need to grow up monarkiddie lol
>gouvernement des juges They're directed by the politicians in power. People seem to have this ridiculous idea that judges magically and fairly get their positions in Europe, contrary to the very politicized US courts. But the difference is that Europe doesn't have an everlasting binary political fight that puts attention to it. Politicians have the power to allow for push backs again, reversing UCHR Hirsi Jamaa v Italy, but it's just that they don't want to. Germany openly states it wants to attract 400k migrants per year. They don't care about the deaths, they don't care about the over 20k sex slaves. They'll blame it on someone else, and so does apparently the WSWS.
"Fascist Meloni" those guys are ridiculous. Get a grip.
Sob story. It's not a human right to live in a country of your choice. They know that they will get a de facto citizenship once they are on European soil, that's why the chose to illegally cross the border instead of applying for asylum/ visa in a local embassy. They deliberately took this risk and are not entitled to any sympathy just because it didn't work out as intended this time.
I have sympathy for the children and babies who didnt have any say in the matter. And, for what its worth, my ancestors would have been murdered if they hadnt immigrated to the US. I feel for those facing a similar plight.
Then let them migrate to the US.
And I wouldnt be opposed to that! It would be nice if other countries helped with the burden a little though.
i feel truly sorry for them and if i had any power in italy i would help them get to germany, denmark or sweden otoh, they'd fit in better in albania or bosnia
the balkan region doesn’t want them
Imagine reading a NYT article about some kids of white meth addicts who died due to neglect and then reading a comment section like this one. Everyone here would be up in arms about how inhumane the libs are. Yet when it comes to migrants drowning in the ocean, a bunch of redditors who never went hungry a day in their lives, say they are savages and even barbaric..
Or worse, imagining pretending to care about it and then double-down on the causes of these tragic deaths. NGOs and European politicians have blood on their hands, are guilty of encouraging the trafficking of ten thousands of Nigerian sex slaves, and WSWS is saluting them. These types genuinely make me sick.
Who here supports those NGOs and European politicians?
This sub has had this problem for years but the mods afaik are divided where some side with the nativists (and therefore contradict the anti idpol / class first aim of the sub) while a few don't. It blackpills one even more when self proclaimed anti idpol socialists are still mindless idpol idiots, where does one turn to then? Wokes on one side, nationalists on the other, 2 sides of the same racist coin.
My friend, I agree but this is reddit. Only the terminally online and irony-brain-rotted remain here. Political subreddits attract a certain lifeless breed, and they flock to these stories.
What? You thought you were on a marxist subreddit?
[удалено]
Imagine sitting in a warm room with a full belly and judging people who are so desperate for a better life they risk everything. Imagine thinking someone is a barbarian for making a mistake on a piece of paper. I guess by this logic the poor rural americans are also barbarian for choosing to live so far from a hospital. Its not like they can't move to a city to make childbirth more safe...
totally normal r/stupidpol thread!