European migrant crisis [Megathread]

[Slant]

People use this and that is not a human right as justification for their ideas or actions. I merely pointed out that he´s wrong by saying that, not that countries have to follow, do follow or will follow human rights. Still there are cases where the article we were talking about was upheld in court, but as i already said, there is more to it than just "wrong and right".

Meh, there is no such thing as "human rights". Human rights depend on the country and what it considers a human right. We talk about human rights this and human rights that, but mostly in these discussions we're talking about the "big ones", like the right to life, religion, work, free speech and such. Those are not disputed. Migration? That's at the fringe of "human rights" and as far as I know only appears in the UDHR. It's not a universally accepted human right.

Might as well make my own declaration in which I include the right to computer gaming. It's written down right here, every human has a right to free computer gaming. Would that make it a human right? Nope. It would just mean I wrote something down that sounds like a good idea but will get ignored by virtually every country on the planet.

[Deleted]

People use this and that is not a human right as justification for their ideas or actions. I merely pointed out that he´s wrong by saying that, not that countries have to follow, do follow or will follow human rights. Still there are cases where the article we were talking about was upheld in court, but as i already said, there is more to it than just "wrong and right".

- - - Updated - - -



The same old argument, don´t you people get bored of it?

Just because and argument is old, doesn t make it less true.

A refugee in austria gets, once they recieve official refugee status, like at least 800 euros per month + german (or whatever language) corses that cost like another 1000 a month, plus free top health care and different other free things. All in all a refugee costs at least 2k euro a month for our country. While all that is going on over here, people in the refugee camps have to starve because those camps can only afford to give food worth a few cents per day to this people.

If you would invest all that money that we give to refugees in austria into refugee camps in lebanon and so on, you could not only provide all of them proper food supply, but also some basic education and healthcare. I d rather provide the basic needs to all of this poor people, than have a hand full of them get everything and 95% get almost nothing. Thats common sense, but giving a plush toy to a refugee kid in your hometown, just feels so much better for this people than helping 100 people from starvation thousand miles away.

[Deleted]

That's a lie. Racial or ethnical diversity is no different than a homogeneous population. There aren no benefits to having a homogeneous racial or ethnical population and there are no negatives to racial or ethnical diversity.

yeah that's just not true.
The 'best' states are nation states - The 'worst' states, are not.
Hate to burst the equalitarian bubble.

[grimniruk]

That's a lie. Racial or ethnical diversity is no different than a homogeneous population. There aren no benefits to having a homogeneous racial or ethnical population and there are no negatives to racial or ethnical diversity.

The current situation in Europe begs to differ. Multiculturalism is a lie when we obviously promote protecting some cultures over others to the detriment of all.

[Nitro Fun]

yeah that's just not true.
The 'best' states are nation states - The 'worst' states, are not.
Hate to burst the equalitarian bubble.

Nation states still have considerable ethnic diversity in present time. There are close to no homogeneous states any more. Homogeneity in and of itself does not guarantee success either, look at North Korea as an example of that.

- - - Updated - - -

The current situation in Europe begs to differ. Multiculturalism is a lie when we obviously promote protecting some cultures over others to the detriment of all.

I don't know where you got multiculturalism from in my post.

[grimniruk]

I don't know where you got multiculturalism from in my post.

You said there are no negatives to racial or ethnical diversity. You are wrong.

[Nitro Fun]

You said there are no negatives to racial or ethnical diversity. You are wrong.

There are no negatives though.

[Sodia]

It´s a human right that´s mostly ignored because it rarely comes up, it´s still a human right. I doubt there´s even one country that doesn´t 'break' at least one human right.

The natives have also a human right to hold to there land , the land of there ancestors and not share it with people that want to cut your head of coz you dont believe in there mambo jumbo backwards shit . Right now we have regularly at last 1 terrorist attack a week with with migrant background in it in Europe .

[Mayhem]

Just because and argument is old, doesn t make it less true.

I meant the bolded part.

It´s not a feel good and pat yourself on the shoulder thing, it´s they are here now, we have to do what´s necessary. We also should do what you´re proposing to help them in the camps.

[Forogil]

How am i supposed to provide evidence for something that never happened?

Again, back to the liechtenstein example, you can´t leave liechtenstein without traveling through switzerland or austria, if both countries deny you entering their territory they are denying you the right to leave your country.

Thanks for the first link, the quote provided by the author links to another author who writes the following:

International Migration and Global Justice by Satvinder Juss

Which doesn't claim that the right to enter another country exists. It only states that the right to leave cannot be fully exercised without such a right - nothing more in that quote.

The sentence you quoted is basically a quote without a context, which does not show that UDHR gives people the right to enter countries.

With context (starting at the page/paragraph) it clearly contradicts you:
"Yet, it is plain that the UDHR's statement of principle of free movement is not practically useful. In normative terms, the right to leave a country cannot be fully exercised without a corresponding right to enter another country."
(and then more discussion about it, including possible extensions of the rights - possible limitations, etc).

Or in other words, you are still wrong and: UDHR does not imply the right to enter any other country. I haven't read the full book so I don't know if the author wants to extend the UDHR in that way - or restrict the right to leave countries, or just want to discuss the topic without having a firm opinion.

- - - Updated - - -

There are no negatives though.

Well, civil wars such as the one in Rwanda can split a country along racial/ethnical lines (even if completely arbitrary) - I find genocides to be negative. To say that racial and ethnical diversity is unproblematic if people are different, but don't care about the difference is sort of a circular definition that doesn't help.
That doesn't say there are only negatives.

[Deleted]

There are no negatives though.

Pretty sure white homogene western countries do better than non-homogene

[Kuntantee]

@Slant
Human rights is declared and signed and the document has been dependence to many international judicial organizations and conventions. Perhaps the best example is European Court of Human Rights, which exploits that document quite throughly. Turkey, a country which regularly violates human rights, has fined by ECHR many times. The declaration is working as intended. There is no relativism involved on that department, you better cut that relativism crap.

- - - Updated - - -

yeah that's just not true.
The 'best' states are nation states - The 'worst' states, are not.
Hate to burst the equalitarian bubble.

The definition of "nation" depends on the state. Turkish or American national identities are not defined by an ethnic definition, but rather lingo-cultural definition. Turkey is a "nation state", while USA is not (best to my knowledge). A good portion of Turks are ethnic Europeans. I do not have access to that article. How do they define "nation states"?

[Deleted]

Nation states still have considerable ethnic diversity in present time. There are close to no homogeneous states any more. Homogeneity in and of itself does not guarantee success either, look at North Korea as an example of that.

They have increasing diversity - Not increasing 'gains' -
True, North Korea is a problem - You should have a look at South Korea though.

I don't know where you got multiculturalism from in my post.

"there are no negatives to racial or ethnical diversity."

- - - Updated - - -

The definition of "nation" depends on the state. Turkish or American national identities are not defined by an ethnic definition, but rather lingo-cultural definition. Turkey is a "nation state", while USA is not (best to my knowledge). A good portion of Turks are ethnic Europeans. I do not have access to that article. How do they define "nation states"?

Nation state correlate with ethnicity, but does not require it.
All that is required is the joint common belief that you are one 'folk'.
You can assimilate new people into this folk if you want - But that means Assimilate.

[Kuntantee]

Nation state correlate with ethnicity, but does not require it.
All that is required is the joint common belief that you are one 'folk'.
You can assimilate new people into this folk if you want - But that means Assimilate.

How do you define ethnicity on a genetic level? To call some people "assimilates", you need to make a genetic classification. And most importantly how do you apply this ethnicity definition on genetic-level to nation-states in Europe?

[Forogil]

Is this still about countries not letting you expatriate? What's the point of this sub-discussion?

That countries can close their borders, since entering a country is neither part of UDHR nor some inalienable right.

That is also what is happening - and it gives the expected result (the problem is kept away from EU: closed "west Balkan route", Island-camps in Greece, and combined with the threat of being returned to Turkey). (Syrian civil war is continuing, Afghanistan isn't doing that great, and number of forcibly displaced was 65 millions at the start of this year, compared to 60 million a year earlier.)

[Renyo]

Pretty sure white homogene western countries do better than non-homogene

What are "western countries"? Europe, Northern America and Australia? Which of them are only white? Maybe some Eastern European Countries... their economy is usually worse, but there are other reasons for that than 'whiteness'.

[Runenwächter]

Well yes and no, mostly no though. ^^

I think he pretty much means the difference between de jure and de facto.

- - - Updated - - -

That there is a right to migration.

Oh for gods sake there is not. Do you think the people who drafted and signed the UDHR were stupid or had a lacking comprehension of the english language as to not know what limits their phrasing set? Either get the singing members or their current representatives together and add imigration as a right or fuck right off.

Just because you cant leave in various scenarious without entering, does not mean that the right to leave entails the right to enter. I feel retarded even arguing that point, please stop. You arent interpreting something that is there, you are adding something by pretending it was already there just invisible.

And here I thought Saudi Arabia and friends are taking liberties when it comes to the interpretation of what the rights granted by the UDHR actually mean. I had seen nothing yet.

- - - Updated - - -

What are "western countries"? Europe, Northern America and Australia? Which of them are only white? Maybe some Eastern European Countries... their economy is usually worse, but there are other reasons for that than 'whiteness'.

The makeup of the native population of germany was white as white goes until 50 years ago.


---

Btw. There seems to be a study done by the bertelsmann stiftung regarding successful models for integration and training the migrants to become work of the workforce. They analyzed around 100 different models, in Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlans for example. Although some havent been around long enough to yield definitive results, they have had zero success so far. No model yields anything that even remotely resembles success.

[nextormento]

How do you define ethnicity on a genetic level? To call some people "assimilates", you need to make a genetic classification. And most importantly how do you apply this ethnicity definition on genetic-level to nation-states in Europe?

People are born into an ethnicity, but belonging is not exclusively genetic.
What you labeled "lingo-cultural definition" is an ethnicity, an ethno-linguistic identity. They're one folk.
But I'm not sure what Goblin considers a non nation state. I'm guessing multinational states like Belgium, Bolivia or Spain where local interests are fought over common goals.

[Kuntantee]

People are born into an ethnicity, but belonging is not exclusively genetic.
What you labeled "lingo-cultural definition" is an ethnicity, an ethno-linguistic identity. They're one folk.
But I'm not sure what Goblin considers a non nation state. I'm guessing multinational states like Belgium, Bolivia or Spain where local interests are fought over common goals.

That's linguistic definition of an ethnicity. I think @GoblinP is implying a genetic-level ethnicity definition, and I am interested to hear it. For the record, ethnicities of Europe are defined by language, and not genetics. This is probably same for entire world.

- - - Updated - - -

Btw. There seems to be a study done by the bertelsmann stiftung regarding successful models for integration and training the migrants to become work of the workforce. They analyzed around 100 different models, in Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlans for example. Although some havent been around long enough to yield definitive results, they have had zero success so far. No model yields anything that even remotely resembles success.

How do they define "success"?

[Runenwächter]

That's linguistic definition of an ethnicity. @GoblinP is implying a genetic-level ethnicity definition, and I am interested to hear it. For the record, ethnicities of Europe are defined by language, and not genetics. This is probably same for entire world.

I am fairly confident that both definitions can and do exist at the same place and time without much contradiction.