Salvini vs. Rocket

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Whatever you think about the issue of refugees/migrants, it's a clear case of rescue on high seas, and if the government would rather let those people die at sea, then we need NGO rescuers. It's a simple moral question.

Anybody who would rather see them drown or die of hunger or thirst is a deplorable piece of s**t, whatever their public rationalization would be. You can figure out what to do with them after they're rescued, because rescuing people should be a no-brainer.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

If she indeed was about to bring down "our" world of national and ethnic purity and walling itself off in paranoia, then I'm all for this, such abomination should be brought down.

Having strong feelings about limiting the influx of the outside population is one thing. That, however, are pretty much the same arguments, sometimes word by word, used by generations of antisemites brainwashing the people about how Jews are destroying European civilization, or by defenders of the Apartheid and Jim Crow. Sure, you can point out differences between modern refugee crisis and those developments, but the rhetoric remains the same and it never ended well.

Also, the argument about people stopping to try to get over if there would be no NGO rescuers does not hold. We're not talking about the people sitting comfortably on their asses who just thought "hey, I think it may be cooler in Europe!". We're talking about thousands fleeing wars, hunger and unimaginable poverty and that's enough to determine them to risk their lives by crossing over.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Rackete has been released and will be „deported“ to Germany.

That’s an OK decision IMO, but she should definitely not try again. If she’s caught again smuggling people to Italy via Libya, then LOCK HER UP !

OK, I'm a little confused. Was she going to Libya to load people on to bring them to Italy, or was it about those rescued at seas. Because if it's the latter than "smuggling people" is a bit hyperbolic.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

If she indeed was about to bring down "our" world of national and ethnic purity and walling itself off in paranoia, then I'm all for this, such abomination should be brought down.

Strawman.

Merely responding in kind to your rather outlandish talk about some great conspiracy to bring down the European civilization.

Anyway, we seem to have a fundamental ideological difference regarding coming of the outside population. Peoples of diffrent (sometimes very diffrent) cultures have coexisted and interacted throughout the history and said interaction played a great role in forming what we now know as the "European civilization". I for one can't imagine the Polish history and culture without contributions of the generations of Jews that came to live here (many fleeing other European countries due to prevailing intolerance and persecution). While I'm not trying to make a direct comparison with what we see now (there are always many factor that makes such direct comparisons sketchy), I'm bringing this up because Jews were long seen by many as fundamentally alien to what people then considered as "European culture", and there still are people in Europe who believes that. So it produced a lot of tensions too. I'd be careful with using that particular argument to limit the access, since it's essentially giving up to the xenophobes.

I don't see a problem with having a African/Middle Eastern population in Europe. It adds a healthy dose of diversity and, as Velasco pointed out, Europe needs the additional workforce for strictly economical reasons. The real problem is with the scale. Though I'm convinced it would take dozens of millions to actually alter the European "civilization", I can contend an uncontrolled influx is a big problem. It should be reasonably controlled.

Unfortunately, the problem can't be solved with simply walling Europe off. I'm reminded of a saying from the 1930s: "a bomber will always get throught", just on a bigger scale here. I think you're seriously underestimating the sheer determination of these people to escape what they're facing. Even with the NGO rescuers, a journey through the sea is extremely risky already and yet they're willing to take said risk nonetheless. I just can't buy your argument it would dissuade most of them. You can limit it to some degree, but border control won't solve the issue, it's just ineffectual dealing with symptoms. We need a consistent international effort to either make their native lands safe from war, illness and poverty, or at the very least to provide them with safe refugee facilities in neighbouring countries. Unfortunately there is no such meaningful effort, even though it's in Europe's interest. Pretending it would go away with half-measures won't do much good.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

If she indeed was about to bring down "our" world of national and ethnic purity and walling itself off in paranoia, then I'm all for this, such abomination should be brought down.

Strawman.

Merely responding in kind to your rather outlandish talk about some great conspiracy to bring down the European civilization.

Anyway, we seem to have a fundamental ideological difference regarding coming of the outside population. Peoples of diffrent (sometimes very diffrent) cultures have coexisted and interacted throughout the history and said interaction played a great role in forming what we now know as the "European civilization". I for one can't imagine the Polish history and culture without contributions of the generations of Jews that came to live here (many fleeing other European countries due to prevailing intolerance and persecution). While I'm not trying to make a direct comparison with what we see now (there are always many factor that makes such direct comparisons sketchy), I'm bringing this up because Jews were long seen by many as fundamentally alien to what people then considered as "European culture", and there still are people in Europe who believes that. So it produced a lot of tensions too. I'd be careful with using that particular argument to limit the access, since it's essentially giving up to the xenophobes.

I don't see a problem with having a African/Middle Eastern population in Europe. It adds a healthy dose of diversity and, as Velasco pointed out, Europe needs the additional workforce for strictly economical reasons. The real problem is with the scale. Though I'm convinced it would take dozens of millions to actually alter the European "civilization", I can contend an uncontrolled influx is a big problem. It should be reasonably controlled.

Unfortunately, the problem can't be solved with simply walling Europe off. I'm reminded of a saying from the 1930s: "a bomber will always get throught", just on a bigger scale here. I think you're seriously underestimating the sheer determination of these people to escape what they're facing. Even with the NGO rescuers, a journey through the sea is extremely risky already and yet they're willing to take said risk nonetheless. I just can't buy your argument it would dissuade most of them. You can limit it to some degree, but border control won't solve the issue, it's just ineffectual dealing with symptoms. We need a consistent international effort to either make their native lands safe from war, illness and poverty, or at the very least to provide them with safe refugee facilities in neighbouring countries. Unfortunately there is no such meaningful effort, even though it's in Europe's interest. Pretending it would go away with half-measures won't do much good.

Demographics matter.  Jews were always a small persecuted minority throughout Europe and in Poland after 400 years their population share peaked at just under 10% on the eve of World War 2.  They are most akin to Christians or Yazidis or Druze within the context of the modern Middle East. 

The source population for the current migration wave on the other hand encompasses the majority population from the areas around and including Pakistan to North Africa to Sub-Sharan Africa.  Well over 1.5 billion people and expanding rapidly.  A continuous large scale flow from that huge catchment area will make Italians, for instance, a small minority in Italy by the end of the century.  Especially given the low fertility of Italians and other Europeans.

If you want a Muslim and African Italy (geographic expression only) that cares nothing for the Italian culture and history as it’s evolved for the past 1000 years than I suppose the pre-Salvini course was optimal for you (of course I’m not saying Salvini will succeed in changing that course long term).

I've said I'm not in favor of an uncontrollable flow, because there's a certain number Europe wouldn't be able to take and sustain. As of the former I've also said I'm not seeking to make a straight comparision between the history of European Jews and the present refugee crisis, in part due to the sheer scale, just pointed out similar arguments used back then regarding Jews status as the alien element, incompatible with the European culture (though claiming that Muslims are automatically and inherently incapable of assimilation is hyperbolic too). And those 10% percent of Jews in the Second Polish Republic were enough for the nationalist to cry about the Jewish dominance coming.

You're also operating under the assumption that Africans/Middle Easterns in Europe would always breed at the same rate as back home. That is something that can't be proven.