Migrant crisis

[rob in cal]

   An intriguing idea from Hungary that likely won't go anywhere but worthy of an honest discussion.  I added the subsidy for poor countries idea.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

It's somewhat reasonable. A bit *arbitrary* - surely it would be easier to integrate people in areas where there are established communities? And also, it's worth noting that poor countries disproportionately receive refugees anyway. But yes, there should be some sort of a better system for the crises we are seeing not just in the Balkans and Mediteranian; but the chaos in SE Asia (which stains every government in the area), Central Africa, Afghanistan etc.

[politicus]

It's somewhat reasonable. A bit *arbitrary* - surely it would be easier to integrate people in areas where there are established communities?

That depend on how those communities are perceived locally, sometimes already established minorities makes it harder for newcomers to successfully integrate if there is a conflict between the established minority and the host population/majority population. This is the case with refugees from Arabic countries in most of Europe, which means fx Syrians or Iraqis would probably be easier to integrate in fx. Latin American countries.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ideally people should be able to move wherever they want. But worldwide quotas based on GDP (and excluding countries from which migrants and refugees are leaving) would be a huge step forward.

[dead0man]

I don't know why you think the refugees would happily go to Bolivia.  If they ain't happy in Austria or Sweden because they'd rather be in Germany or Finland, I"m guessing they're going to be very unhappy in Lima or Montevideo.

[politicus]

I don't know why you think the refugees would happily go to Bolivia.  If they ain't happy in Austria or Sweden because they'd rather be in Germany or Finland, I"m guessing they're going to be very unhappy in Lima or Montevideo.

I doubt the idea was a purely voluntary distribution. More a UN regulated system, which distributed refugees globally. Such a system would have the added positive side effect of discouraging economic migrants from (ab)using the asylum system.

[dead0man]

They riot when one safe nation stops them at the border of another safe nation, what do you think it's going to look like trying to get them on a slow boat to Caracas?

[politicus]

They riot when one safe nation stops them at the border of another safe nation, what do you think it's going to look like trying to get them on a slow boat to Caracas?

Well, this is a Hungarian proposal and we already know the Hungarian approach to this crisis, so I suppose whoever came up with it intends to get tough and simply force people to go. But sure, there will be ugly scenes and the media will revel in it. It might still be the best option, though. The alternative could be a total collapse of the international refugee system, with countries starting to simply opt out.

Also, there are of course many refugees who simply wants protection, this likely applies to most of them, just not the ones who have paid a trafficker a fortune to get to the West. We know very little about what the average refugee thinks (not exactly a group that gets polled often..) and our ideas are based on a small subsample consisting of the more abrasive of those who manage to enter "Fort Europe", "Fort Oz" etc. Even among refugees in the West most simply lay low. The ones prominent in the media coverage are likely quite unrepresentative (in various ways).

[ag]

Of course, something like this should be implemented. It would take the burden off such countries as Turkey and Lebanon, as well as accommodate millions of internally displaced Syrians and Iraqis. It would get out of their limbo the numerous Rohingya, as well as refugees from the African civil wars. In Europe, hundreds of thousands of refugees from Donetsk and Luhansk could be resettled. And it would establish procedures for dealing with the much more massive refugee waive I expect out of Russia in the coming years. I would wholeheartedly advocate a major refugee reception program in Mexico. For the moment the discussion here is about receiving 10,000 people, which I find woefully inadequate: we should be taking hundreds of thousands.

There are millions of people in need of refuge at any given moment. A program that would actually make governments provide sanctuary to those in need would be invaluable. As it is, Europeans and Americans hide behind the natural and artificial barriers, admitting only a tiny proportion of those in need.  There are, probably, ten times as many people in urgent need of sanctuary then are currently capable of applying for refuge. Sharing the burden properly across the world would make it possible so many more lives!

The only problem: proper sharing would, of course, require rich countries to accept many more refugees. Would they agree to do this?

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I don't know why you think the refugees would happily go to Bolivia.  If they ain't happy in Austria or Sweden because they'd rather be in Germany or Finland, I"m guessing they're going to be very unhappy in Lima or Montevideo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_immigration_to_Mexico

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_Colombian

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_diaspora_in_Colombia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Argentine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Uruguayan

look, i understand that white americans think that latin america is a depraved continent filled with low iq indios, pestilence and violence but it's actually a very attractive place for migrants from the middle east.

[dead0man]

You read ALL that into my post(s)?  I'm aware that lots of Arabs and Muslims have migrated voluntarily to S.America.  Just like lots of them have voluntarily migrated to Austria or any of the other countries others are fighting to get out of right now.  If they're goal is Sweden, and they are pissed because they are stuck in Serbia, do you think they're going to happily get on a boat to Rio?  Ok, Rio is probably a bad example, everybody wants on a boat to Rio.  Do you think they'd happily get on a boat to Honduras?  I'm not saying Honduras is worse than Serbia, I'm saying if X is your goal, and you're not happy with Y, Z ain't going to be any better.

[politicus]

You read ALL that into my post(s)?  I'm aware that lots of Arabs and Muslims have migrated voluntarily to S.America.  Just like lots of them have voluntarily migrated to Austria or any of the other countries others are fighting to get out of right now.  If they're goal is Sweden, and they are pissed because they are stuck in Serbia, do you think they're going to happily get on a boat to Rio?  Ok, Rio is probably a bad example, everybody wants on a boat to Rio.  Do you think they'd happily get on a boat to Honduras?  I'm not saying Honduras is worse than Serbia, I'm saying if X is your goal, and you're not happy with Y, Z ain't going to be any better.

All this presupposes you give refugees a choice, which isn't what this proposal is about (as I said, its a Hungarian proposal..).

You can always discuss whether its morally right to distribute people against their will, but it can of course be done - if you are prepared to use the necessary means.

[politicus]

No. People shouldn't have to take "refugees" in. They are economic migrants looking for benefits, not actual war refugees.

Some are, some aren't, and many are both. It's a complex situation filled with contradictions and dilemmas.