IMMIGRATION thread

[AE Bravo]

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

Ouch.

[Greyblades]

Got anything for those of us who cant speak german or arabic?

[Husar]

Got anything for those of us who cant speak german or arabic?

He complains that the Saudis and the Gulf states do nothing for the Syrians even though they are supposed to be fellow Muslims. Then he says they are not really Muslims (the governments at least) and that he would like to kiss all Germans for giving refuge to Muslims even though the Germans aren't Muslims (kuffar). He also mentions that the Muslim world doesn't/shouldn't really have borders and stuff and generally has a very religious world view apparently. I appreciate the kisses though.

[Gilrandir]

Tensions were getting too high for the Backroom and we needed to ease the tension. It is just a temporary measure until things cool off. End of story.

It applies to new topics, you can discuss and keep immigration in this thread. If you couldn't, we would have locked this thread.

If two moderators can't agree on the fate of a thread how can you expect Europe to adopt a common standpoint on the subject the thread discusses?

[Tuuvi]

Here's a relevant American political cartoon from 1903:

http://imgur.com/4GGibUO

It's been 110 years and the US has not turned into some sort of Southern European hell-hole. I'm not arguing for un-restricted immigration but I don't think Middle Eastern and African migrants are going to destroy Europe either.

[wooly_mammoth]

I'm not arguing for un-restricted immigration but I don't think Middle Eastern and African migrants are going to destroy Europe either.

Their refusal to identify themselves and follow legal procedures, as well as the prowess in urban combat they have shown at the borders of Hungary and Croatia (20 police officers injured in Hungary and one or two children that were probably used as projectiles lol) make me doubt that.

[Beskar]

If two moderators can't agree on the fate of a thread how can you expect Europe to adopt a common standpoint on the subject the thread discusses?

We don't disagree. I simply said a clarification to the exception of this thread.

[Viking]

Here's a relevant American political cartoon from 1903:

http://imgur.com/4GGibUO

It's been 110 years and the US has not turned into some sort of Southern European hell-hole. I'm not arguing for un-restricted immigration but I don't think Middle Eastern and African migrants are going to destroy Europe either.

Just as one might object to a comparison to last days of the Roman empire, one might object to a comparison to the US.

The most obvious difference is that the US is nation of immigrants. With the exception of 'native' Americans, most Americans can say that their ancestors came from this or that European or African country at that or that time. That means new immigrants don't look that out of place in the US. In comparison, my own ancestors (minus some Danish ones) might have come to this area ~ 10 000 years ago. Most of the population in Europe have a connection to the countries they occupy through thousands of years. This creates a schism between new arrivals and ancient arrivals, unless there is assimilation.

Some other things:

- Europe is filling up - both literally and non-literally. Some places really are getting crowded, but there are also national parks (and more rural areas not legally recognised) that people want to preserve, necessary farmland, opposition to further urbanisation and areas that are simply inhospitable. I imagine things looked rather different in the US over a 100 years ago; both physically and in terms of attitudes.
- there is still a significant split in the US population between the original natives, the population of European origin and the population of African origin
- the cultures where the immigrants came from were typically not too different from the cultures that the current Americans themselves came from

That latter point seems especially relevant. I am not aware of Europeans not integrating properly in other European countries being a common problem (international criminals are a problem, but that's largely a separate topic - they take advantage of the open borders), despite there being significant migration internally in Europe.

[Papewaio]

If two moderators can't agree on the fate of a thread how can you expect Europe to adopt a common standpoint on the subject the thread discusses?

A) democracy is not about lockstep agreement
B) everyone should self moderate themselves in the Backroom
C) having said that, whilst the two help moderate others, they are not both moderators.

[Gilrandir]

We don't disagree. I simply said a clarification to the exception of this thread.

Oh really? At 17.39 moderator X said the thread was closed until the things have cooled down. At 18.23 of the same day moderator Y thought things have already cooled down and re-opened the thread. Perhaps the spirit of the work ethic would have required to let the first call stay and let those who wish to continue discussion open new thread(s) if they liked. Concerted decisions as far as the immigrants are concerned seem to pose a problem for Europeans.

A) democracy is not about lockstep agreement
B) everyone should self moderate themselves in the Backroom
C) having said that, whilst the two help moderate others, they are not both moderators.

I'm afraid European powers-that-be follow this pattern in dealing with immigration issue which is why the EU is having a hard time.

[Husar]

Daily reminder that these young able bodied men abandoned their homes and their families for comfort.

Who wouldn't?

Or to ask from a different angle, would you rather see them commit lots of war crimes for the evil dictator or one of the evil islamist factions?

[Fragony]

Who wouldn't?

Or to ask from a different angle, would you rather see them commit lots of war crimes for the evil dictator or one of the evil islamist factions?

Most aren't refugees, only a small percentage is

[Husar]

Most aren't refugees, only a small percentage is

According to my country, around 40-50%, wouldn't call that a small percentage. And that's counting all asylum seekers, I was referring to Syrians mostly in my last reply.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

According to my country, around 40-50%, wouldn't call that a small percentage. And that's counting all asylum seekers, I was referring to Syrians mostly in my last reply.

So 40-50 are asylum seekers, how many of those will be granted asylum?

Look - we have thousands of people who are basically beating up the locals and demanding access to Europe's gooey centre - I doubt it's because they prefer German to Greek weather.

Anyway, the real problem here is the same as the Euro - common institutions without common governance.

Like the EUro this is something the UK managed to remain apart from.

[AE Bravo]

Daily reminder that these young able bodied men abandoned their homes and their families for comfort.

Bruh you'd either be burning crosses or in Mexico if your place got Mad Max'd too.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Bruh you'd either be burning crosses or in Mexico if your place got Mad Max'd too.

Pfft.

You new-worlders don't understand.

[Husar]

So 40-50 are asylum seekers, how many of those will be granted asylum?

I think there is a misunderstanding, I meant to say that 40-50% of asylum seekers are accepted as valid asylum seekers after relatively thorough considerations. The entire process doesn't take months because we are careless in checking their applications. Although they do want to speed it up now since it keeps the people in limbo for too long.

Look - we have thousands of people who are basically beating up the locals and demanding access to Europe's gooey centre - I doubt it's because they prefer German to Greek weather.

Anyway, the real problem here is the same as the Euro - common institutions without common governance.

Like the EUro this is something the UK managed to remain apart from.

If you have nothing to loose, why settle for another bad place? It's common sense.
As for the lack of EU integration, people clearly wanted that in the referendums, no?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So, on average, 45% of the 500,000 people who have come to Europe this year are deemed to have valid claims by Germany? Or just the Syrians?

Just so I fully understand.

If those are the sort of numbers we're talking about then I'm genuinely inclined to say we should just ramp up military production and take over you everyone's sake

As to the lack of integration - the problem is integration proceeded WITHOUT Referenda, leading to the democratic deficit and the current paralysis because the leaders of various EU nations know that doing the best thing for the EU won't get them re-elected.

[Beskar]

Oh really? At 17.39 moderator X said the thread was closed until the things have cooled down. At 18.23 of the same day moderator Y thought things have already cooled down and re-opened the thread.

There was no closing or opening of this thread. You are either completely misreading or you are imagining things.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I feel oppressed, more please!

*Strips*

[Husar]

So, on average, 45% of the 500,000 people who have come to Europe this year are deemed to have valid claims by Germany? Or just the Syrians?

Just so I fully understand.

No, that was 2014 or so. If you want the numbers for this year, you have to ask your local seer. I don't think 500000 have even arrived yet.
It is possible that of the Syrians, more will be accepted, but that would just debunk the claim that only a minority are valid refugees even more. Unless you want to claim that the immigration agencies are completely unable to do their jobs and the judges in courts are all stupid.

If those are the sort of numbers we're talking about then I'm genuinely inclined to say we should just ramp up military production and take over you everyone's sake

Not quite sure what you are saying or why.

As to the lack of integration - the problem is integration proceeded WITHOUT Referenda, leading to the democratic deficit and the current paralysis because the leaders of various EU nations know that doing the best thing for the EU won't get them re-elected.

If I'm not mistaken the integration is not quite the one that was wanted, no?

[Gilrandir]

There was no closing or opening of this thread. You are either completely misreading or you are imagining things.

I may be mistaken, but when I read Hooahguy's message in green I saw no reply options at the bottom of the posts and the phrase "end of the story" used in it was quite unequivocal.

[Husar]

Something that has been on my mind for a long time now, is that while we keep discussing cultural matters for the most part, there is also the "they just want our money"-angle, where even the counter-argument often goes to "overall, immigrants pay more taxes than they get, and we all profit from them monetarily".

But I find this angle very interesting from other perspectives, for example the one where they are blamed for wanting to have a better life with more money or better job opportunities.
On the one hand this argument that they will take something away from us if they come seems to counter the typical capitalist argument that one person gaining wealth does not mean the wealth of another decreases. Even if you argue that they will get government money from our taxes, they WILL spend it on consumerist stuff that makes our companies earn more money and provide more jobs, no? I am aware that it's more complicated than that, but I'm trying to get at the basic assumption, is wealth relative or can we all get wealthier or is capitalism a lie after all? What do you believe?
On the other hand it seems as though people are in this sense just blaming them for having the same greed we do, if you say they just come here for the good jobs, are you saying that wanting a good job is a bad thing? I mean the argument usually implies that they have a bad character because they want to be wealthier. Who here does not want to be wealthier? Have you ever felt bad about getting job over another candidate? Are you content if you get a C at school while everybody else gets As and Bs? I can see this as some sort of realpolitik argument that if we can get ahead by locking them out, we should, but then the implication that they have bad character for opposing this attempt is hypocrisy because they just do the same thing we do, they just have a far less wealthy starting position at the beginning of the game. Which also seems a typical capitalist tactic, to blame all the problems on the poor, which is a good way to make the middle class accept that the rich slowly strip them of their money as well.

And a linky for reference: http://www.theguardian.com/business/...it-switzerland

It's "funny" how the poor are blamed for taking all the things away from the middle class when the rich get more and more of all our stuff every day.
And I think the Middle Class is complicit in this, it does not criticize the rich because its members hope to be rich themselves one day, it would be like criticizing their idols. So they/we pick on the poor instead because we don't want to be like them anyway and they are convenient targets. As we say in Germany "wenn zwei sich streiten, freut sich der dritte", roughly translated: "when two people fight, the third is happy".

[Hooahguy]

I may be mistaken, but when I read Hooahguy's message in green I saw no reply options at the bottom of the posts and the phrase "end of the story" used in it was quite unequivocal.

Well I didnt close the thread. Or maybe I accidentally did. Im pretty new at this whole thing. Until now my job as a moderator only consisted of deleting spam threads and pretending that I was a necessary part of running the Rome 2 section.

[Beskar]

Well I didnt close the thread. Or maybe I accidentally did. Im pretty new at this whole thing. Until now my job as a moderator only consisted of deleting spam threads and pretending that I was a necessary part of running the Rome 2 section.

Considering I didn't reopen it either nor close it, it must be gremlins.

[Viking]

On the other hand it seems as though people are in this sense just blaming them for having the same greed we do, if you say they just come here for the good jobs, are you saying that wanting a good job is a bad thing?

Context is key. If they claim to be refugees, but wanting a good job is the real reason for migrating, then that's a status they shouldn't have.

[Montmorency]

Context is key. If they claim to be refugees, but wanting a good job is the real reason for migrating, then that's a status they shouldn't have.

It is simply a fact that virtually-all refugees to the First World are also economic migrants.

This shouldn't be difficult to grasp: 'Well, my home country is screwed and I cannot tolerate staying here any longer - I might even get killed! Where can I go to that is both safe and will provide good opportunities for myself and my children/family?'

Whether or not you think that makes the situation more acceptable is irrelevant, as that is the basic logic motivating all refugees traveling long distances to prosperous European countries.

[a completely inoffensive name]

US announced we will take another 30,000 refugees over two years. And another 100,000 in 2017, if I remember correctly.

[Papewaio]

Context is key. If they claim to be refugees, but wanting a good job is the real reason for migrating, then that's a status they shouldn't have.

So you'd prefer refugees who don't want to work then?

[Husar]