7 ms·

The EU has to protect its borders, there's no other option. Not doing so is a political suicide. People here don't want to share their wealth with immigrants an

The EU has to protect its borders, there's no other option. Not doing so is a political suicide. People here don't want to share their wealth with immigrants and they don't want their mostly homogenous societies being changed by an influx of people with different behavior, culture, religion, language, etc. But I think there will be an interesting twist - aging of the population. This feels like an abstract problem, but it will become very real.

rebuilder 5y ago
The problem is the scale. How many people can you realistically lock up in camps, especially considering those camps are leverage for the dictators you’re making deals with to operate them? Either the root causes get fixed or things start breaking, badly.
- RivieraKid 5y ago
  I don't think it's a problem. On land, you can use drones, walls and fences. On the sea, don't allow boats get into your territory. In addition, there are many "soft" measures. Cooperation with countries like Lybia and Turkey. Help to alleviate the problems they are running from. Announce that anyone who crosses illegaly will not receive an asylum. Etc.
- dmix 5y ago
  At the same time if you do nothing then you turn a sprinkle into a roaring river which is equally as hard and expensive to deal with.
- native_samples 5y ago
  The sheer number of people who keep moving after reaching France, Germany etc to try and get the UK, purely because they like the UK more, shows that choice and relatively small differences in final living conditions can have a dramatic effect.
enriquto 5y ago
> The EU has to protect its borders, there's no other option. As an European, I agree. At the very least, I think that we have the right to protect our borders. However, this is not an isolated thing that can be morally decided independently of the rest of our foreign policy. We have provoked and participated in many wars in neighboring countries to defend our "economic interests". We are supporting authoritarian dictatorships in Africa so that European enterprises exploiting their natural resources have an easier job. Heck, when a neighboring country (Libya) threatened a bit our cheap oil supply (that is, our supply of their oil) we got all angry and violent and provoked a war there to change the regime. Most of the immigrants in question come from countries that we have messed with. We certainly have the right to close our borders to them, but to do so we must first stop destroying and exploiting their countries.
- the_lego 5y ago
  > We have provoked and participated in many wars in neighboring countries to defend our "economic interests". "We"? How many of those wars were started by popular demand, with protests on the streets demanding our leaders take military action? "We" are being blamed for the actions of oil and weapons lobbyists (whose wars are paid by our taxes), and then asked to face the consequences of the actions due to their subversion of democracy. We pay for the wars we don't want, we get the blame, we get to deal with the immigrants, and in the end, we still have to pay for the oil - the oil companies that benefit (always unnamed) don't hand it out for free!
  - f6v 5y ago
    > We pay for the wars we don't want Simple solution: don’t vote for people who start wars? The EU claims to be one of the most democratic entities. Why do people complain they’re being screwed by some minority group?
    - dsnr 5y ago
      I don’t think elections are being won by being honest about your military intentions.
raverbashing 5y ago
If you need, you don't need to bring people from the most orthogonal cultures. (Though that's only half the problem, and when you get xenophobia even against French in Quebec you see it's complicated)
f6v 5y ago
> People here don't want to share their wealth with immigrants and they don't want their mostly homogenous societies being changed by an influx of people with different behavior, culture, religion, language, etc. That ship has sailed for many countries.

rebuilder 5y ago

The problem is the scale. How many people can you realistically lock up in camps, especially considering those camps are leverage for the dictators you’re making deals with to operate them? Either the root causes get fixed or things start breaking, badly.

RivieraKid 5y ago
I don't think it's a problem. On land, you can use drones, walls and fences. On the sea, don't allow boats get into your territory. In addition, there are many "soft" measures. Cooperation with countries like Lybia and Turkey. Help to alleviate the problems they are running from. Announce that anyone who crosses illegaly will not receive an asylum. Etc.
dmix 5y ago
At the same time if you do nothing then you turn a sprinkle into a roaring river which is equally as hard and expensive to deal with.
native_samples 5y ago
The sheer number of people who keep moving after reaching France, Germany etc to try and get the UK, purely because they like the UK more, shows that choice and relatively small differences in final living conditions can have a dramatic effect.

enriquto 5y ago

> The EU has to protect its borders, there's no other option. As an European, I agree. At the very least, I think that we have the right to protect our borders. However, this is not an isolated thing that can be morally decided independently of the rest of our foreign policy. We have provoked and participated in many wars in neighboring countries to defend our "economic interests". We are supporting authoritarian dictatorships in Africa so that European enterprises exploiting their natural resources have an easier job. Heck, when a neighboring country (Libya) threatened a bit our cheap oil supply (that is, our supply of their oil) we got all angry and violent and provoked a war there to change the regime. Most of the immigrants in question come from countries that we have messed with. We certainly have the right to close our borders to them, but to do so we must first stop destroying and exploiting their countries.

the_lego 5y ago
> We have provoked and participated in many wars in neighboring countries to defend our "economic interests". "We"? How many of those wars were started by popular demand, with protests on the streets demanding our leaders take military action? "We" are being blamed for the actions of oil and weapons lobbyists (whose wars are paid by our taxes), and then asked to face the consequences of the actions due to their subversion of democracy. We pay for the wars we don't want, we get the blame, we get to deal with the immigrants, and in the end, we still have to pay for the oil - the oil companies that benefit (always unnamed) don't hand it out for free!
- f6v 5y ago
  > We pay for the wars we don't want Simple solution: don’t vote for people who start wars? The EU claims to be one of the most democratic entities. Why do people complain they’re being screwed by some minority group?
  - dsnr 5y ago
    I don’t think elections are being won by being honest about your military intentions.

raverbashing 5y ago

If you need, you don't need to bring people from the most orthogonal cultures. (Though that's only half the problem, and when you get xenophobia even against French in Quebec you see it's complicated)

f6v 5y ago

> People here don't want to share their wealth with immigrants and they don't want their mostly homogenous societies being changed by an influx of people with different behavior, culture, religion, language, etc. That ship has sailed for many countries.