3 ms·

Refugees die in the Mediteranian in large numbers for more than 30 years [0]. With ample media coverage for decades and no policy changes. So I stand with my p

Refugees die in the Mediteranian in large numbers for more than 30 years [0]. With ample media coverage for decades and no policy changes. So I stand with my previous argument of "People don't change their life or opinion because of either of them." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_migrant_vessel_incidents_on_the_Mediterranean_Sea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_migrant_vessel_inciden...

hutzlibu 3y ago
But why do you think, nobody changed their opinion because of it? On the one hand we have people who fear they will come and increasingly vote right wing and succesfully pressured sea rescue organisations in not operating in the mediterran sea anymore and on the other hand we have people donating lots of money to private sea rescue organisations that do operate there and also rescue refugees.
- KingOfCoders 3y ago
  "But why do you think, nobody changed their opinion because of it?" Not in the direction the poster thought they would/should change.
nickserv 3y ago
There have been policy changes, and it's now more difficult to get into Europe. It seems like these policies are also making the crossing more dangerous, leading to more deaths. I would argue voters are aware of what's going on, and approve of the situation. In at least some of the countries directly involved (UK, France, Italy), the majority is calling for more restrictive immigration policies.
- runarberg 3y ago
  A lot of the media coverage around refugees is actually negative. This includes overblown threats of terrorism, strain on the social system, crime, effects on the job market, etc. (See one of my earlier post’s sibling as an example of what general population believes about refugees as a result of the biased media coverage https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36443172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36443172). Note that most (almost all) of this negative media coverage has no basis in reality. The only connection between refugees and terrorism is the fact that many of them are fleeing real terrorist threats, there is no correlation between crime and refugees which cannot be explained better by poverty, increased immigration has been shown to have positive effects on the job market, etc. Despite this, the media keeps churning out the negative coverage, and the policy choices by European leaders reflect that. The lack of media coverage of the human tragedy of the Andriana is therefor pretty consistent. In the media refugees are a burden, not humans lives which deserve empathy. The coverage reflects this, so does public opinion, and ultimately, so does policy. This is overall a really sad situation in Europe.
- KingOfCoders 3y ago
  Yes but the argument of the poster was that the media coverage would bring pressure and exactly the opposite changes "These leaders have the power to prevents disasters like these"
  - runarberg 3y ago
    I think you might be misunderstanding. The complaint is that the media isn’t covering this like they should, and my realization is that it is precisely this lack of coverage which our policy reflects. Like if the media coverage was empathetic to the lives lost in this tragedy, and if it had been so in the past, the public opinion towards refugees and the policy made by our leaders would perhaps be different, and this whole disaster would have been avoided. But that’s not the world we live in. European border and refugee policy reflects the media’s attitude of billionaires dying in a submarine disaster is worth the coverage, but not potentially the top 50 worst maritime disaster in history.
  - xp84 3y ago
    How do you propose that those certain leaders would prevent any refugees from ever dying in the Mediterranean? By opening all borders and flying in anyone who’s interested in immigrating to Europe for free, no questions asked? Remember that if you even exclude convicted criminals and human traffickers and trafficees from eligibility, they would still attempt unsafe crossings so it needs to be indiscriminate. Anyhow, I seriously don’t mean to build a straw man, I just cannot see some simple pushbutton policy fix for “nations that are a bad place to live will generate a flow of refugees to better places exceeding the capacity those nations will have to absorb them.” Good luck though, if you come up with a grand solution that provably works, which you can convince a democratic majority to support, I’ll be happy for you.
    - runarberg 3y ago
      There are people who study immigration policy which are probably more qualified in creating such policy than your parent. And also one does not need to be such an expert to deduce there is something wrong with the current policy. However I’ll attempt a simple change which would at the very least strip human trafficers of their most numerous customer base. Create a legal avenue for applying for asylum. Yes, I believe this simple policy change would have prevented this disaster, and so many more tragedies. It could be as simple as having a request form present at the border crossing, where asylum seekers are than directed to a temporary facility. I believe we are in this mess because refugees are literally forced to illegally cross into a potential host country before applying for asylum. This policy is nuts. And as we know thousands of people still do this. Seeking asylum is not illegal, but there are no legal ways to do it, which results in thousands of people attempting illegal border crossing and a blooming business for human smugglers.

hutzlibu 3y ago

But why do you think, nobody changed their opinion because of it? On the one hand we have people who fear they will come and increasingly vote right wing and succesfully pressured sea rescue organisations in not operating in the mediterran sea anymore and on the other hand we have people donating lots of money to private sea rescue organisations that do operate there and also rescue refugees.

KingOfCoders 3y ago
"But why do you think, nobody changed their opinion because of it?" Not in the direction the poster thought they would/should change.

nickserv 3y ago

There have been policy changes, and it's now more difficult to get into Europe. It seems like these policies are also making the crossing more dangerous, leading to more deaths. I would argue voters are aware of what's going on, and approve of the situation. In at least some of the countries directly involved (UK, France, Italy), the majority is calling for more restrictive immigration policies.

runarberg 3y ago
A lot of the media coverage around refugees is actually negative. This includes overblown threats of terrorism, strain on the social system, crime, effects on the job market, etc. (See one of my earlier post’s sibling as an example of what general population believes about refugees as a result of the biased media coverage https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36443172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36443172). Note that most (almost all) of this negative media coverage has no basis in reality. The only connection between refugees and terrorism is the fact that many of them are fleeing real terrorist threats, there is no correlation between crime and refugees which cannot be explained better by poverty, increased immigration has been shown to have positive effects on the job market, etc. Despite this, the media keeps churning out the negative coverage, and the policy choices by European leaders reflect that. The lack of media coverage of the human tragedy of the Andriana is therefor pretty consistent. In the media refugees are a burden, not humans lives which deserve empathy. The coverage reflects this, so does public opinion, and ultimately, so does policy. This is overall a really sad situation in Europe.
KingOfCoders 3y ago
Yes but the argument of the poster was that the media coverage would bring pressure and exactly the opposite changes "These leaders have the power to prevents disasters like these"
- runarberg 3y ago
  I think you might be misunderstanding. The complaint is that the media isn’t covering this like they should, and my realization is that it is precisely this lack of coverage which our policy reflects. Like if the media coverage was empathetic to the lives lost in this tragedy, and if it had been so in the past, the public opinion towards refugees and the policy made by our leaders would perhaps be different, and this whole disaster would have been avoided. But that’s not the world we live in. European border and refugee policy reflects the media’s attitude of billionaires dying in a submarine disaster is worth the coverage, but not potentially the top 50 worst maritime disaster in history.
- xp84 3y ago
  How do you propose that those certain leaders would prevent any refugees from ever dying in the Mediterranean? By opening all borders and flying in anyone who’s interested in immigrating to Europe for free, no questions asked? Remember that if you even exclude convicted criminals and human traffickers and trafficees from eligibility, they would still attempt unsafe crossings so it needs to be indiscriminate. Anyhow, I seriously don’t mean to build a straw man, I just cannot see some simple pushbutton policy fix for “nations that are a bad place to live will generate a flow of refugees to better places exceeding the capacity those nations will have to absorb them.” Good luck though, if you come up with a grand solution that provably works, which you can convince a democratic majority to support, I’ll be happy for you.
  - runarberg 3y ago
    There are people who study immigration policy which are probably more qualified in creating such policy than your parent. And also one does not need to be such an expert to deduce there is something wrong with the current policy. However I’ll attempt a simple change which would at the very least strip human trafficers of their most numerous customer base. Create a legal avenue for applying for asylum. Yes, I believe this simple policy change would have prevented this disaster, and so many more tragedies. It could be as simple as having a request form present at the border crossing, where asylum seekers are than directed to a temporary facility. I believe we are in this mess because refugees are literally forced to illegally cross into a potential host country before applying for asylum. This policy is nuts. And as we know thousands of people still do this. Seeking asylum is not illegal, but there are no legal ways to do it, which results in thousands of people attempting illegal border crossing and a blooming business for human smugglers.