3 ms·

I think this is a great idea. It's easy to hate the concept of immigration and, by extension, the thought of millions of immigrants pouring into your home coun

I think this is a great idea. It's easy to hate the concept of immigration and, by extension, the thought of millions of immigrants pouring into your home country. In fact, we're hardwired to have an aversion to this idea. Humans have always formed small units such as families or tribes in order to compete with other humans for limited resources. Immigrants are easily lumped together into a menacing tribe of competitors. But when you host someone, they stop being "just another immigrant" and you can start to see them for what they were the whole time: a real person with a voice, a smile, sorrow, joy, tastes, quirks, humor, goals, and dreams. Empathy is crucial. It's not going to solve the larger problem of the millions of immigrants displaced by war or corrupt governance, but it probably will have a positive impact on thousands of lives, which is an awesome outcome for a small group of people looking to make a change through technology.

d9h549f34w6 11y ago
If humans are hardwired to be averse to "millions of immigrants pouring into your home country," why is that? Presumably you're referring to that aversion being chosen by natural selection. That suggests that we're less likely to have been descended from those who were more open to displacement by outside populations, and more likely to come from those who guarded their borders. Societies that don't keep barriers are less likely to pass on their genes or memes to the future. I'm assuming that the main difference between then and now is that an increase in resources means we can share freely with more "outsiders." Presumably resources aren't infinite, so what's the upper bound? How would we know?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
Kalium 11y ago
One thing to remember: there is a significant difference between feeling empathy for a person and being willing to devote resources to them I felt empathy for a beggar on the streets of San Francisco this morning. Yet my money stayed in my pocket. I have other uses for it.
- roymurdock 11y ago
  Just as you're not being (directly) forced to allocate resources to the homeless, the hosts aren't being forced to take in immigrants, and they are being paid rent. So it really just comes down to how open-minded you want to be about potentially having a stranger in need as a tenant. If this sounds rewarding to you, then Refugees Welcome provides that opportunity. If not, you're free to rent to whomever you'd like.

d9h549f34w6 11y ago

If humans are hardwired to be averse to "millions of immigrants pouring into your home country," why is that? Presumably you're referring to that aversion being chosen by natural selection. That suggests that we're less likely to have been descended from those who were more open to displacement by outside populations, and more likely to come from those who guarded their borders. Societies that don't keep barriers are less likely to pass on their genes or memes to the future. I'm assuming that the main difference between then and now is that an increase in resources means we can share freely with more "outsiders." Presumably resources aren't infinite, so what's the upper bound? How would we know?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Kalium 11y ago

One thing to remember: there is a significant difference between feeling empathy for a person and being willing to devote resources to them I felt empathy for a beggar on the streets of San Francisco this morning. Yet my money stayed in my pocket. I have other uses for it.

roymurdock 11y ago
Just as you're not being (directly) forced to allocate resources to the homeless, the hosts aren't being forced to take in immigrants, and they are being paid rent. So it really just comes down to how open-minded you want to be about potentially having a stranger in need as a tenant. If this sounds rewarding to you, then Refugees Welcome provides that opportunity. If not, you're free to rent to whomever you'd like.