I want to hear your points about refugee policy.
My country (Germany) has welcomed lots of refugees in the past year and continues to do so. Im not sure what to think about this. I get that these people are fleeing from dangerous situations in their homeland, but otherwise someone has to try to improve these situations, and I believe that this should be done primarily by the citizens themselves and not by other countries.
Have there been similar situations in history, what was the best method to deal with refugee problems back then, and most importantly, can we use these for the current problem?
The closest thing is USA in the late 19th - early 20th century, before that time there was no infrastructure for such mass migrations on long distances. As you may know, it turn out quite well for USA.
> Have there been similar situations in history
Yea, when some faggot country decided to invade Poland. There wasn't a "best way" to deal with it, you just took in as many as possible for people to be able to escape the horrors.
>Im not sure what to think about this.
Rejoice, fellow Aryan. Tomorrow will belong to us.
>Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers -already, you see, the world had already fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing Christianity! -then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism [Islam], that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so.
>For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere
Or simply: fuck off
it is a uniquely modern thing for 2 reasons
1: ease of transporting millions of people from one side of the world to the other and supporting them
2: no tyrannical regimes or populations living in desperate poverty that would think nothing of mistreating the newcomers
the only historical examples are mass migrations and colonies
I've actually worked with my church to help get 2 refugee families here. After getting to do this, it's changed my opinion. These are some of the most grateful humans I've ever met in my entire life. We've taken in around 10 000 or so refugees, largely Christians [tons of Armenians, actually].
>Have there been similar situations in history, what was the best method to deal with refugee problems back then, and most importantly, can we use these for the current problem?
2 generations later, they get naturalized and blend in. I'd be crazy to think the Irish refugees that came here had anything to do with the British or French settlers. Same with the Italians. It all worked out pretty well, I guess.
thanks for not telling me to go to the /pol/ cesspool.
I generally sympathize with taking refugees, but if I think about it in the long run, will their nations not go completely to shit since instead of having to fight for their country (as it was the case prior to globalization) it is now much easier to just leave?
In Poland when we had situations where people would migrate to our country en masse, like germans during protestant reformation, tatars who wanted to serve under king, scotts who wuld trade with us and settle down after serving as mercenaries, georgians etc and they would be often conscripted to military or in some cases live in small communities that would polonize themselves after some time.
Since military conscription is obviously out of question for Germany... i dont know.
You invited people who are locked in morals by book that was written some 1400 years ago, i dont think anyone knows how to integrate such people.
Take them in. Throughout history prosperity lowers crime rates and things like that. These people are actually refugees, they are fleeing a horrible situation. They don't have the means to help themselves. There are no "citizens" to improve the situation. They are sitting ducks getting murdered by a dictator or revolutionary armies.
I've worked with refugees. They naturalize because of how grateful they are of the situaton. You have growing pains of course, but its nowhere near as bad as people are acting. Many rapes and murders occur all over the world that don't get reported as much because its more fun to paint refugees as them.
Germany has a negative population growth anyway. This will be good for their economy in the long run.
Balkan immigrant living in Germany here. I am a student, before all the hate starts.
The biggest problem that Germany has, in my opinion, is the fact that here everybody is overly tolerating everything. From homosexuals to refugees. It's clear that we are all different and there is no problem being a homosexual, or lesbian, or being black or whatevercollour utc. But the thing is that at least in Germany i can't feel any limit to it all. I just can't understand how can it be teached in schools that homosexuality is normal, while spreading this thing. I can't understand why the normal german can't rise his voice about the refugees, which (as a balkan i know it surely) actually aren't refugees but economic migrants like me, to be tolerated to this point that they can feel themselves untoucheble and do things like they did in Cologne.
I mean, Germany has to clearly set the borders to everything. Refugee? Okay, but learn german and intagrate yourself in 1-2 years, otherwise you will go back. Homosexual? Of course, no problem, just don't stick your genitals in front of my kid in school. Muslim? No problem, just stop the fucking thing that the world owes you something and don't go cihad.
That is it all. But we (in every land) lack the true leaders to set the things up. Otherwise it wouldn't be that scary to live in those silly times.
>Germany has a negative population growth anyway. This will be good for their economy in the long run.
no-go zones ghettos with shariah law sound like a terrible asset to economy
muslims arent compadible with european culture, if you think that this one million will be possible to integrate you're gravely mistaken.
And no, im not some kind of nazi, i dont believe in jewish propaganda and im not without moral spine. The thing is, you would be scared to see how "moderate" muslims perceive the world. If they had power, they would abolish every european law and install shariah. Just go and some read forums for ex-muslim people.
> But what about their culture and people future survival?
⸮Fair point, I for one remember how Ali and his friends banned Christmas and other things making sure I couldn't practice my culture. I for one can't recall any historical instances when refugees destroyed a nations culture. You would have to do some heavy mental gymnastics to claim it happen to the Romans.
>And what about those who are not fleeing from anything at all and are just illegal immigrants?
One would assume the same as today; they get sent home. But illegal immigrants aren't the topic, it's about the historicism of refugees.
I personally think this a good opportunity for Europe if they play their cards right, but it isn't going to be simple and will take time. One of the big problems in Western Europe is the low birth rate, which could be disastrous for European global influence as they have to compete with the huge populations of Asia and Latin America joining the modern world. The refugees could possibly be their saving grace, as they could boost European population to levels that may allow them to compete with the rising economies coming into the global stage. Of course, it won't be easy to get them in properly and assimilate them, the latter of which may take years to happen but will, despite what /pol/ thinks. If they are filtered out well and taught western customs and ideas, I think that while it won't be easy by a few generations the refugees will become well adjusted members of European society.
A similar example could be US immigration; many people were wary of Catholics, Asians, Jews and such joining the US populace but just by looking at basic US history you can see that while it did take a bit of time all the defendants of the immigrants today are regular parts of American life and haven't been a problem for decades. The Muslims are different, of course, as the situations causing them to leave are completly different. But if they are filtered out properly, given some sort to help to start a new life, and get western education for themselves and their children in a more rigid and less bureaucratic , "PC" process, after a few years the refugees could easily become a well adjusted minority group that could help Europe keep its global influence while also saving them and their families from fighting they never wanted to be a part in
I assume that by moderate Muslims people mean secular Muslims that are similar to how Jews treat their religion as more of a culture and less of a belief system. And while Muslim refugees may not currently be comparable with European ideas, after more than a few months in Europe and with a more rigid western education program the refugees, or at least their children, will be much more open and accepting of western ideas. It isn't going to happen overnight and that's something that most of the right wing doesn't understand. The same shit happened in the US years ago and while it wasn't perfect at first, almost every single immigrant group that entered Ellis island has come out as successful and an accepted part of US culture. It took time, of course, but the millions that entered have all pretty much been Americanized, even those with completly different cultures like the Chinese. Considering that Europeans are still and will be the majority of the population of the continent even if millions more refugees enter, it's impossible the Muslims will take over the governments in Europe and remove all western civilization like the right wing fear mongers claim. Worst comes to worst, they'll be sent back. It is just for them to become the dominant demographic in all reasonable scenarios.
It's not a problem. Why should we give a fuck what happens to people half a world away? And we should care even less if all they do when they get here is rape and brutalise people.
The solution is send these people back, and shut the borders to any more of them.
>Worst comes to worst, they'll be sent back. It is just for them to become the dominant demographic in all reasonable scenarios.
No they wont. You cant deport people back into war zones, its against human rights. And those who didn't came from Syria? They will burn their own passports and you wont deport those either.