6 ms·

The entire point of being a refugee is that you can't go home. It sounds like a trick question. "Haha, if you could go home then you're not really a refugee, so

The entire point of being a refugee is that you can't go home. It sounds like a trick question. "Haha, if you could go home then you're not really a refugee, so we're deporting you instead." Perhaps that explains why almost nobody applied and only one got it last year. Many would love to go home. They just can't.

ImJamal 2y ago
You are assuming they are refugees rather than regular migrants.
n1b0m 2y ago
A Catch-22 situation
jjallen 2y ago
Wars do end though. It’s not like there are no exceptions to this. Lots of refugees want better economic circumstances too. It’s not always a threat of violence back home.
- kamikazeturtles 2y ago
  Unless your side won, the war ending doesn't have any affect on whether it's safe for you to return or not. In the case of Syria, the Caesar sanctions will probably cripple Syria's reconstruction. So there probably won't be much to return to for the foreseeable future.
  - wkat4242 2y ago
    Was there really 'sides' in terms of people? Most people in Syria just fled the onslaught but were not part of either side (the Assad regime and the various rebel groups). And obviously we're not going to grant refugee status to some of these groups like Isis rebels. But yeah it's in Europe's interests to quickly rebuild there
    - aaomidi 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - wkat4242 2y ago
        I agree in part. We supported many proxy wars of the US and some that were based on total lies (2nd Iraq war, Afghanistan where we really had no business and accomplished nothing). Iran, I don't know.. I feel like their beef is with the US and we're just not really a party in this whole mess. We don't owe them anything and they don't consider us friends either. As for Gaza you probably know that this is a hugely contentious issue even in Europe. A lot of us are really strongly against these weapon supplies. In the Netherlands citizens even managed to get a court order for the state to supply F-35 parts to Israel: https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/dutch-court-orders-halt-export-f-35-jet-parts-israel-2024-02-12/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/dutch-cou... Some countries like Germany are too pro-Israel due to some shame from actions in the past but I agree they should open their eyes to what is happening now. I don't condone what Hamas has done and is doing but both sides are bad. We shouldn't support either but bring them to the negotiating table. > You don't get to complain about those people wanting to pursue happiness just like literally any of your country people. This is a different issue from refugeeism IMO, although some economic migrants are claiming refugee status (and thus taking resources from those who are real refugees). It takes a long time to reject them because they often destroy their documentation. These are much more of a problem than real refugees. And they are giving the real refugees a bad name. I'm very left-wing but I do think we need to limit immigration from outside EU. We can't open the gates without limit to anyone who wants to move here because it would destroy us too. The political polarisation is already so strong (a bit like the US in fact). The Netherlands has grown by several million inhabitants by immigration alone and in some cities migrants with a non-western heritage are now in the majority. This is a problem because of pretty seriously different social norms (e.g. stances on LGBTIQ+ topics, freedom of opinion etc). And this polarisation is fueling the extreme-right parties which we already see happening in Europe. In the Netherlands the extreme-right party became the biggest one in parliament in the last election. I don't agree with their points but this polarisation is tearing the country apart, and we see the same in the rest of Europe (France only recently dodged a bullet there). The issues that are being blamed on the refugees and migrants are squarely to blame on our previous neoliberal governments who completely neglected affordable housing programs and environmental issues (nitrogen, natural gas dependencies) so we're now in a severely limited situation. But knowing that makes no real difference to the situation. And I don't think the middle east was really destroyed by us. In fact they have a lot more money than us. Africa yes but that's been much longer ago. And even countries that are free are shooting themselves in the foot with corruption. This is not our fault.
  - jjallen 2y ago
    My wife was a refugee in a war-torn country. The war ended and her family lives there peacefully for decades. It is possible. Not saying it always happens, I'm saying this is a reasonable thing for some people to do.
Saturnial22 2y ago
[flagged]
Gualdrapo 2y ago
Is there a difference between a refugee and a migrant? I'd suppose a migrant can take the money and go home and afford themself a better life, whereas for a refugee it will take much more than economic resources. The title says it's going to be for migrants.
- stbenjam 2y ago
  All refugees are migrants but not all migrants are refugees.
- ben_w 2y ago
  I'm a migrant because I moved from the UK to Germany. I'm *not* a refugee because I'm not seeking "refuge" AKA sanctuary* — Brexit wasn't that bad. * at least that's how the words split in English, I don't know if the Swedish language divides up reality in the same way
  - tourmalinetaco 2y ago
    By definition there’s a difference, but realistically most refugees are lying migrants, claiming refugee status when in fact they are not in real danger and just want the economic benefits.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      The economic benefits of… having a couple of months of mandatory unemployment while the asylum application is processed? Followed by the same stuff you'd have to do if you hadn't done that?
      - foogazi 2y ago
        The economic benefits of doing all of that under much better circumstances HN crowd should understand the value of positioning your self in a better scenario
        2y ago
vintermann 2y ago
Well, assuming progress in the place they fled from, there are bound to be periods in between "You'll die if you go back now" and "It's perfectly fine to go back now". For instance, when the invaders have gone, but there are too few homes due to the destruction and winter is approaching.
mc32 2y ago
Some large percentage of those “refugees” go to their original countries for vacations[1]… so apparently it’s not so much being a refugee (as in being persecuted), but rather economic and welfare opportunists who refuse to integrate. Now, true, western economic migrants don’t always integrate, however, they typically have set stays and plan going back to their home counties and aren’t a drain to the host countries. [1]https://www.quora.com/A-recent-poll-conducted-in-Sweden-found-that-almost-four-in-five-refugees-have-vacationed-in-their-home-country-since-fleeing-to-Europe-Does-this-mean-the-refugees-were-lying-and-were-not-real-refugees-in-danger https://www.quora.com/A-recent-poll-conducted-in-Sweden-foun...
- kiba 2y ago
  There seems to be so much distinction between immigrants and citizens. Citizens can be 'smoochers' too, but you don't see anyone exiling them from their home countries. As for integration, I don't see why people who are judgemental. There are tons of immigrants to the US who don't speak good English. Are you going to tell them to get the hell out of this country? What if they're parents of children who learn to speak English better than their native languages? That happened a lot. People should be able to improves their lives. Sometime that means moving to a different country. Sometime that means struggling hard where they are.
  - mc32 2y ago
    Of course there are native moochers and if we could offload them to another country that wants to take responsibility for them great. Since there aren’t any that I know of, outside of western countries wanting to take responsibility for non-western countries’ social and economic shortcomings, it’s not viable. Do you see rich middle eastern countries taking in any refugees from anywhere in any significant numbers? Many of those countries are in better economic standing than European counties. In the meantime, we can take care of our own and they can take care of their own, if that’s their culture; which may not be the case and it’s up to them to shape their own society how they want. We had to shed blood to get where we are with wars of independence as well as a civil war. Time for them to man up and shape their own societies to their own customs and liking. We don’t need to be the Nannie’s of the world. We need to take care of our own problems, of which there are many, including homelessness, drug addiction, depreciated wages often exacerbated by cheap labor. No, I’m with the Bernie of the early nineties.
bitcharmer 2y ago
[flagged]
mrighele 2y ago
The article says "migrants", not "refugees".
- xyzzy123 2y ago
  It looks like 250k is the number of refugees and they have been running a similar rate for a while: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/SWE/sweden/refugee-statistics https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/SWE/swe... EDIT: THIS IS WRONG AND I AM AN IDIOT WHO DIDN'T LOOK AT THE NUMBERS CAREFULLY.
  - kaffekaka 2y ago
    According to SCB, Statistics Sweden (https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befolkning/befolkningsframskrivningar/befolkningsframskrivningar/pong/tabell-och-diagram/invandring-och-utvandring-efter-kon-och-fodelseland-samt-framskrivning/ https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befo...) in 2023, 94 514 people migrated to Sweden and about 70 000 emigrated, these numbers include refugees. So net migration of about 25 000 people in 2023, not a quarter millon. EDIT: According to the World Bank, the number 250 000 refers to the total refugee population in Sweden, not the number of refugees coming annually.
    - xyzzy123 2y ago
      Thank you, you are correct. I'll leave the comment to remind me to look more critically. In fact it looks like Sweden only resettled 5000 last year, a decrease on previous years.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
dmitrygr 2y ago
People lie. 80% of “refugees” vacation back in their source country. If they were truly afraid for their lives they wouldn’t be doing that. They just want a better life. Can’t blame them. Who wouldn’t? https://rmx.news/article/four-in-five-refugees-living-in-sweden-have-vacationed-in-the-country-they-fled-from/ https://rmx.news/article/four-in-five-refugees-living-in-swe... The downvotes are hilarious. No counter argument. Just “I don’t like it”. Well, I don’t either. But that’s how it is.
- klingoff 2y ago
  I've known people to go back on vacations who probably shouldn't, but an outsider, weakly under the protection of a foreign country, who doesn't seem like they are going to get back into their old life is usually not a political priority.
wkat4242 2y ago
It's a legal offer, they can't just turn their back on it. Though it could have consequences if the person wants to come back and claim refugee status again I guess. But of course a lot of refugees are not really in danger but just try the refugee way for better economic opportunities. This amount is high enough to perhaps appeal to those. I think the main reason it wasn't popular is that the amount was negligible. I think overall it's a good thing, it's voluntary and they free up spaces for refugees that are really in danger.

ImJamal 2y ago

You are assuming they are refugees rather than regular migrants.

n1b0m 2y ago

A Catch-22 situation

jjallen 2y ago

Wars do end though. It’s not like there are no exceptions to this. Lots of refugees want better economic circumstances too. It’s not always a threat of violence back home.

kamikazeturtles 2y ago
Unless your side won, the war ending doesn't have any affect on whether it's safe for you to return or not. In the case of Syria, the Caesar sanctions will probably cripple Syria's reconstruction. So there probably won't be much to return to for the foreseeable future.
- wkat4242 2y ago
  Was there really 'sides' in terms of people? Most people in Syria just fled the onslaught but were not part of either side (the Assad regime and the various rebel groups). And obviously we're not going to grant refugee status to some of these groups like Isis rebels. But yeah it's in Europe's interests to quickly rebuild there
  - aaomidi 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - wkat4242 2y ago
      I agree in part. We supported many proxy wars of the US and some that were based on total lies (2nd Iraq war, Afghanistan where we really had no business and accomplished nothing). Iran, I don't know.. I feel like their beef is with the US and we're just not really a party in this whole mess. We don't owe them anything and they don't consider us friends either. As for Gaza you probably know that this is a hugely contentious issue even in Europe. A lot of us are really strongly against these weapon supplies. In the Netherlands citizens even managed to get a court order for the state to supply F-35 parts to Israel: https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/dutch-court-orders-halt-export-f-35-jet-parts-israel-2024-02-12/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/dutch-cou... Some countries like Germany are too pro-Israel due to some shame from actions in the past but I agree they should open their eyes to what is happening now. I don't condone what Hamas has done and is doing but both sides are bad. We shouldn't support either but bring them to the negotiating table. > You don't get to complain about those people wanting to pursue happiness just like literally any of your country people. This is a different issue from refugeeism IMO, although some economic migrants are claiming refugee status (and thus taking resources from those who are real refugees). It takes a long time to reject them because they often destroy their documentation. These are much more of a problem than real refugees. And they are giving the real refugees a bad name. I'm very left-wing but I do think we need to limit immigration from outside EU. We can't open the gates without limit to anyone who wants to move here because it would destroy us too. The political polarisation is already so strong (a bit like the US in fact). The Netherlands has grown by several million inhabitants by immigration alone and in some cities migrants with a non-western heritage are now in the majority. This is a problem because of pretty seriously different social norms (e.g. stances on LGBTIQ+ topics, freedom of opinion etc). And this polarisation is fueling the extreme-right parties which we already see happening in Europe. In the Netherlands the extreme-right party became the biggest one in parliament in the last election. I don't agree with their points but this polarisation is tearing the country apart, and we see the same in the rest of Europe (France only recently dodged a bullet there). The issues that are being blamed on the refugees and migrants are squarely to blame on our previous neoliberal governments who completely neglected affordable housing programs and environmental issues (nitrogen, natural gas dependencies) so we're now in a severely limited situation. But knowing that makes no real difference to the situation. And I don't think the middle east was really destroyed by us. In fact they have a lot more money than us. Africa yes but that's been much longer ago. And even countries that are free are shooting themselves in the foot with corruption. This is not our fault.
- jjallen 2y ago
  My wife was a refugee in a war-torn country. The war ended and her family lives there peacefully for decades. It is possible. Not saying it always happens, I'm saying this is a reasonable thing for some people to do.

Saturnial22 2y ago

[flagged]

Gualdrapo 2y ago

Is there a difference between a refugee and a migrant? I'd suppose a migrant can take the money and go home and afford themself a better life, whereas for a refugee it will take much more than economic resources. The title says it's going to be for migrants.

stbenjam 2y ago
All refugees are migrants but not all migrants are refugees.
ben_w 2y ago
I'm a migrant because I moved from the UK to Germany. I'm *not* a refugee because I'm not seeking "refuge" AKA sanctuary* — Brexit wasn't that bad. * at least that's how the words split in English, I don't know if the Swedish language divides up reality in the same way
- tourmalinetaco 2y ago
  By definition there’s a difference, but realistically most refugees are lying migrants, claiming refugee status when in fact they are not in real danger and just want the economic benefits.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    The economic benefits of… having a couple of months of mandatory unemployment while the asylum application is processed? Followed by the same stuff you'd have to do if you hadn't done that?
    - foogazi 2y ago
      The economic benefits of doing all of that under much better circumstances HN crowd should understand the value of positioning your self in a better scenario
      - 2y ago

vintermann 2y ago

Well, assuming progress in the place they fled from, there are bound to be periods in between "You'll die if you go back now" and "It's perfectly fine to go back now". For instance, when the invaders have gone, but there are too few homes due to the destruction and winter is approaching.

mc32 2y ago

Some large percentage of those “refugees” go to their original countries for vacations[1]… so apparently it’s not so much being a refugee (as in being persecuted), but rather economic and welfare opportunists who refuse to integrate. Now, true, western economic migrants don’t always integrate, however, they typically have set stays and plan going back to their home counties and aren’t a drain to the host countries. [1]https://www.quora.com/A-recent-poll-conducted-in-Sweden-found-that-almost-four-in-five-refugees-have-vacationed-in-their-home-country-since-fleeing-to-Europe-Does-this-mean-the-refugees-were-lying-and-were-not-real-refugees-in-danger https://www.quora.com/A-recent-poll-conducted-in-Sweden-foun...

kiba 2y ago
There seems to be so much distinction between immigrants and citizens. Citizens can be 'smoochers' too, but you don't see anyone exiling them from their home countries. As for integration, I don't see why people who are judgemental. There are tons of immigrants to the US who don't speak good English. Are you going to tell them to get the hell out of this country? What if they're parents of children who learn to speak English better than their native languages? That happened a lot. People should be able to improves their lives. Sometime that means moving to a different country. Sometime that means struggling hard where they are.
- mc32 2y ago
  Of course there are native moochers and if we could offload them to another country that wants to take responsibility for them great. Since there aren’t any that I know of, outside of western countries wanting to take responsibility for non-western countries’ social and economic shortcomings, it’s not viable. Do you see rich middle eastern countries taking in any refugees from anywhere in any significant numbers? Many of those countries are in better economic standing than European counties. In the meantime, we can take care of our own and they can take care of their own, if that’s their culture; which may not be the case and it’s up to them to shape their own society how they want. We had to shed blood to get where we are with wars of independence as well as a civil war. Time for them to man up and shape their own societies to their own customs and liking. We don’t need to be the Nannie’s of the world. We need to take care of our own problems, of which there are many, including homelessness, drug addiction, depreciated wages often exacerbated by cheap labor. No, I’m with the Bernie of the early nineties.

bitcharmer 2y ago

[flagged]

mrighele 2y ago

The article says "migrants", not "refugees".

xyzzy123 2y ago
It looks like 250k is the number of refugees and they have been running a similar rate for a while: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/SWE/sweden/refugee-statistics https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/SWE/swe... EDIT: THIS IS WRONG AND I AM AN IDIOT WHO DIDN'T LOOK AT THE NUMBERS CAREFULLY.
- kaffekaka 2y ago
  According to SCB, Statistics Sweden (https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befolkning/befolkningsframskrivningar/befolkningsframskrivningar/pong/tabell-och-diagram/invandring-och-utvandring-efter-kon-och-fodelseland-samt-framskrivning/ https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befo...) in 2023, 94 514 people migrated to Sweden and about 70 000 emigrated, these numbers include refugees. So net migration of about 25 000 people in 2023, not a quarter millon. EDIT: According to the World Bank, the number 250 000 refers to the total refugee population in Sweden, not the number of refugees coming annually.
  - xyzzy123 2y ago
    Thank you, you are correct. I'll leave the comment to remind me to look more critically. In fact it looks like Sweden only resettled 5000 last year, a decrease on previous years.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

dmitrygr 2y ago

People lie. 80% of “refugees” vacation back in their source country. If they were truly afraid for their lives they wouldn’t be doing that. They just want a better life. Can’t blame them. Who wouldn’t? https://rmx.news/article/four-in-five-refugees-living-in-sweden-have-vacationed-in-the-country-they-fled-from/ https://rmx.news/article/four-in-five-refugees-living-in-swe... The downvotes are hilarious. No counter argument. Just “I don’t like it”. Well, I don’t either. But that’s how it is.

klingoff 2y ago
I've known people to go back on vacations who probably shouldn't, but an outsider, weakly under the protection of a foreign country, who doesn't seem like they are going to get back into their old life is usually not a political priority.

wkat4242 2y ago

It's a legal offer, they can't just turn their back on it. Though it could have consequences if the person wants to come back and claim refugee status again I guess. But of course a lot of refugees are not really in danger but just try the refugee way for better economic opportunities. This amount is high enough to perhaps appeal to those. I think the main reason it wasn't popular is that the amount was negligible. I think overall it's a good thing, it's voluntary and they free up spaces for refugees that are really in danger.