Philosophical Vegan Forum

Ok this is a topi I am abit touchy on due tom the stupidity I hear with it daily (people refusing to listen to reason at all)
When the topic is immigrants her in america often its "don't let them in they want to destroy the nation" most common recenty about the syrian reffugees just because there are extremist does not mean we should close off everyone "Well there are Isis members in syria and they may try to sneak some in" They are already here its a worldwide organization they even have bases in the U.S. not just Syria not jut Iran not just Iraq but just about every country and aren't they suppose to do extremely thorough checks at these checkpoints heck I heard they even had x-rays you are suppose to go through (could be false not sure) I mean just have these people do their damn jobs also to you people that are all high an mighty talking about protecting life most of these reffugees will die if they go back to where they came from

But enough on the Syria part what about people coming just for a better life like mexicans "they're taking jobs from americans " this may be true in some organizations that will hire illegals for cheaper pay then you but I m talking about legal immigrants most of these jobs they take are jobs americans won''t do anyway if you guys and noone you even know would do this job anyway why complain about it ? I mean really people use your damn phones for something other then snapchat an freaking look up what's going on And yeah I understand the frustrations of dealing with the ones not understanding english as its the dominant language ere in america but hey I know first hand its difficult to learn a secon language and english more so as we have more exceptions to grammer an pronunciation then any other language from what I read but if they are at least trying to learn the language if they are actually trying to have a life here as long as they come through legally let them stay

but enough on my little rant what are your thoughts? also I am not sure if I should make a vid on this due to the subject if you think I should/shouldn't do tell me and why or why not

Most of those immigrants aren't actually Syrians, but economic migrants from other places

But anyways, we shouldn't just help anybody regardless of the consequences. So the question is if the cons outweigh the pros. That is a difficult question to answer becacuse there are so many moving parts. However, at this point in time I don't think anyone should be faulted for being very skeptical of immigration from Islamic countries. We have enough statistics and polling data to prove that Muslims tend to bring a lot of insane and dangerous ideologial baggage with them, and that this is very harmful to society-

Here in Europe we have a much bigger Muslim population than in the US (5-10 times larger), and we have mostly left them alone to live however they want to, and the result has been a disaster: Sharia courts, terrorism, rape epidemics, no-go zones, Jews fleeing etc... Just a few blocks from where I live there's a mosque that has recruited over 100 people to go fight for ISIS.

The only way I'd agree to having more Islamic immigration is if we get a system in place that guarantees Muslims are browbeaten into understanding and embracing secular values. As is we've just been commiting cultural suicide for the last 30+ years under the guise of "tolerance".

knot wrote:Here in Europe we have a much bigger Muslim population than in the US (5-10 times larger), and we have mostly left them alone to live however they want to, and the result has been a disaster: Sharia courts, terrorism, rape epidemics, no-go zones, Jews fleeing etc... Just a few blocks from where I live there's a mosque that has recruited over 100 people to go fight for ISIS.

This feels like I'm reading the Daily Mail. Where do you live?

Of course simply inviting more refugees to come, but not making any effort to integrate them in society, is counterproductive. And it stems from a superficial understanding of the principle of tolerance.
But making an 'us' vs. 'them' distinction in the question of what moral consideration we should grant human beings is also counterproductive.

inator wrote:

knot wrote:Here in Europe we have a much bigger Muslim population than in the US (5-10 times larger), and we have mostly left them alone to live however they want to, and the result has been a disaster: Sharia courts, terrorism, rape epidemics, no-go zones, Jews fleeing etc... Just a few blocks from where I live there's a mosque that has recruited over 100 people to go fight for ISIS.

This feels like I'm reading the Daily Mail. Where do you live?

Which part of it sounds like the Daily Mail? It's the same pattern we see across all countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime
A Dutch PhD student recently wrote her thesis on the Sharia courts in the UK.. I think were are around 50

But making an 'us' vs. 'them' distinction in what moral consideration we should grant human beings is also counterproductive.

Until we have mind reading technology I don't see any other practical way than to use broader statistics and personal data to determine these things.

knot wrote:Most of those immigrants aren't actually Syrians, but economic migrants from other places.

Note that:
1) Syria is still the largest country of origin and
2) not Syrian =/= economic

From Wikipedia, based on eurostat data:


I'll grant that the migrants from the balkans are economic. But those from Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea and Pakistan cannot simply be labeled as economic migrants. Perhaps some of them are, perhaps most, but I've seen no research at all to indicate this. It seems to me like it's just one more unsupported claim the far right made up.

I don't think the current trend of importing Muslims is any good for society in the long run. They don't integrate and they go to a mosque with an imam from Saudi Arabia preaching the same shit they'd hear back in the backwards country they came from.

Sadly, Muslims have been given the status of race by the regressive left so you can't hope to demonstrate against the influx without being accused of racism. You might get off with the label of 'islamophobe' if you lucky. A fake word created to shut down criticism of the ideology.

I get being skeptical and being suspicious for security sake but if we closed out everyone we were suspicious of were would we be? answer: nowhere we wuld have closed off our trades closed off immigration (witch is what the U.S is built on btw) Meaning the country (and this applies to other countries to) would have nearly nothing as countries rely on each other I do agree we should do more thorough and strict checks but we shouldn't close people out because the are a certain race or religion or come from a certain place Think about if it was reversed and you wer closed out like these immigrants

thetruemasterofgames wrote:I get being skeptical and being suspicious for security sake but if we closed out everyone we were suspicious of were would we be? answer: nowhere we wuld have closed off our trades closed off immigration (witch is what the U.S is built on btw) Meaning the country (and this applies to other countries to)

I don't think immigration and trade have much to do with each other. Look at Japan for example. 3rd largest trading nation and they take in virtually zero immigrants

would have nearly nothing as countries rely on each other I do agree we should do more thorough and strict checks but we shouldn't close people out because the are a certain race or religion or come from a certain place

Sure, at the very least the vetting process should be extremely thorough. As things are now, the European countries really have no clue what kind of people they are letting in

Think about if it was reversed and you wer closed out like these immigrants

I would be sad, but I wouldn't understand that that country doesn't owe me anything, and I should probably have gone to a country where my beliefs and values are more in line with the rest of the population

knot wrote: Which part of it sounds like the Daily Mail? A Dutch PhD student recently wrote her thesis on the Sharia courts in the UK.. I think were are around 50

It's a cultural problem as much as anything. The people arriving don't necessarily share the same European values, and that can create ghettos of intolerance. At the same time it can invoke a reaction of intolerance among local populations. Norway's intelligence service even went so far as to say the biggest risk posed by the influx of migrants was a violent reaction from far-right groups rather than Islamists infiltrating the country.

Now that's all bad and it needs managing, but the way these problems are depicted is often out of proportion and it risks painting everyone with the same brush. Which in turn perpetuates this distinction between 'us' and 'them' in order to exclude migrants from our sphere of moral consideration.

knot wrote:I would be sad, but I wouldn't understand that that country doesn't owe me anything, and I should probably have gone to a country where my beliefs and values are more in line with the rest of the population

Helping Syrians is a clear moral duty, not charity. They meet any standard for recognition as refugees with a “well-founded fear of persecution”, under the terms of the UN convention on refugees.

Arrivals in Europe have rocketed this year not so much because the civil war is worse than ever - though it is - as because the situation in the countries neighbouring their homeland has grown desperate.

knot wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime

It's a correlation, yes.
Newcomers need housing, schools and health care. There is some evidence that they depress wages for the low-paid, though barely. Where labour markets are rigid, migrants can become an underclass (and resort to crime), as is the case now in many countries.

Migrant workers tend to be disproportionally represented in the bottom segments of the national earnings distribution in most Western European countries. Unemployment rates are also higher among migrants. And these disadvantages are particularly pronounced among non-European immigrants.



Yet this strengthens the case not for fortress countries, but for good public policy - especially more flexible labour markets. How easily Europe can absorb more migrants depends largely on how the absorbing is done.

miniboes wrote:I'll grant that the migrants from the balkans are economic. But those from Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea and Pakistan cannot simply be labeled as economic migrants.

Do you think migration should be restricted depending on the different motives that people have to migrate?

inator wrote:

miniboes wrote:I'll grant that the migrants from the balkans are economic. But those from Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea and Pakistan cannot simply be labeled as economic migrants.

Do you think migration should be restricted depending on the different motives that people have to migrate?

It's a complicated issue. I think it's definitely wrong to say we should not allow economic migrants in at all. I think in the long run, economic migrants can have very positive effects on a western economy. (A good read: http://business.time.com/2013/01/30/the ... s-and-why/). I think economic migrants in the Netherlands are filling jobs that Dutch citizens are largely unwilling to do. I feel like the Polish, Morrocan and Turkish immigrants are not stealing our jobs as much as filling the holes we leave.

Ethically, I think clearly political and geographical migrants (those who have to flee because of unsafe situations) are a no-brainer; they have to be cared for. However, as we give them a place to stay we also need to figure out what the root causes of the migrant flows are and address them. We also need to make sure the people coming in are vetted properly so we know they do not increase the threat of terrorism. I think the current American vetting process, where it may take over a year to get in, is a bit on the tough side. The German vetting process might be too soft. We can also decide as a nation that we accept the slight threat of an incease in the likelyhood of a terroristic act in favour of helping people in need. I would be okay with that decision, but we cannot have the far-right winning because people are afraid of terrorism. A referendum would be necessary to ensure the support is there.