The Syrian refugee crisis: Is history repeating itself?

[Khadgar]

Permit me to paraphrase a song lyric from Prince:

Americans who want to slam the door on Syrian refugees are partying like it's 1939.

What we're hearing right now, especially from Republican governors, is the marketable fear that ISIS agents will slip into America amidst the flow. How eerily familiar that argument is. In the late '30s and early '40s, State Department officials in FDR's administration slammed the door on Jewish refugees - essentially condemning many of them to death - out of fear (baseless, by the way) that Nazi agents would slip into America amidst the flow.

In the late '30s, a national poll sponsored by Fortune magazine found that 61 percent of Americans wanted to slam the door on 10,000 Jewish child refugees. Another poll found that 69 percent supported slamming the door on Jewish adult refugees. Such was the prevailing mood of that era, when anti-Semitism was rampant in America. And it was mirrored at the State Department, where refugee point man Breckinridge Long repeatedly barred entry.

Long's main argument (which cloaked the anti-Semitism) was that the refugees were a national security risk, that Nazis would infiltrate the ranks. When the British government pleaded with America to take more refugees, Long pushed back. He boasted in his diary that the British had attempted "a plain effort to embarrass us by dumping the international aspects of the (refugee issue) plumb in our lap. I picked up the ball, and by our reply put the baby very uncomfortably back on their laps."

The "security" fear was baseless because a slew of American agencies and refugee-aid groups rigorously vetted the refugees while they were still overseas. Which is why, when FDR's Advisory Committee on Political Refugees probed the claim that Nazi agents would infiltrate the ranks, it found that the actual number of infiltrators was quite small:

One.

But those who oppose the entry of Syrian refugees will surely dismiss this history lesson, by insisting that 2015 is not 1939 and ISIS is not the Nazis. The mantra right now, most notably from Republicans, is that we should "pause" (Paul Ryan's word) until we at least know how these refugees will be vetted.

Um. We already know how they will be vetted. Because the procedure has been in place for a long time. America takes in roughly 70,000 refugees every year - even during the George W. Bush era, yet I don't recall Republicans being up in arms about al Qaeda infiltrators.

And remember how those Nazi infiltration fears turned out to be baseless? Here's a contemporary stat, from the Migration Policy Institute think tank: Since 9/11, America has taken in roughly 745,000 refugees. And the number of people in those ranks who have been arrested on terrorism charges is:

Four.

So while Chris Christie is busy targeting five-year-olds, and Republicans in Congress are weighing the idea of shutting down the government unless we first agree to bar refugees, I'll remember the Jews we turned away - and the famous words of essayist George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

[Deleted]

Hey, I would've loved to bar refugees to my own country. But fear of terrorists is the smallest of the reasons why.

[Deleted]

*snipped*
watch them till the end and see how absurd your thread is

Infracted- Contribute to the thread, video responses are not allowed

[Stop Pretending]

I'm sorry, show me in your history books where Jewish people were committing acts of terrorism?

Nice try on your though, better luck next time.

[Dextroden]

I got it. Since we don't have time travel to satisfy people's wet dream of going back and killing Hitler, people are aggresively likening this to the build up to WW2 so they can pretend they are stopping Hitler. When all they are doing is causing a divide for actual Fascism to develop.

[Independent voter]

There are 1.8 million refugees living in the US.

[Dezerte]

- - - Updated - - -

watch them till the end and see how absurd your thread is

I don't know, that first video is very absurd too. I'll be fair and call it a tie.

[Tyranitar]

A gathering of thousand violent, raping jews happened in 1939 in america?

[TirielWoW]

I’ve seen a lot online lately about whether or not we should accept Syrian refugees into the United States based on the possibility that some of them may be terrorists… Usually, someone posts a picture of grapes or M&Ms, asking “if you were told that 1-2 of these [grapes or candy] are poisoned, would you feed them to your family.” I can’t seem to explain that this argument is flawed to anyone who posts this question – you simply can’t compare human lives… human souls… to a food product. I cannot do so.

So, here you go.

One of these babies may grow up to be a horrible human, capable of unthinkable acts… another is destined to be a brilliant surgeon. Yet another is destined to be the engineer that will design a space travel system capable of helping us colonize Mars. Two of them will be phenomenal teachers who help future generations foster a love of learning and citizenship.

Your choice is simple – you can blow up this airplane to kill every child on it, or you can do everything in your power to welcome all of them, which may negate the one possible bad child, as s/he may grow into a productive member of society given the right guidance. Do you truly think each of these children deserves to die to save yourself from a hypothetical problem? You do understand that turning away heavily screened refugees not only means death to the children, but a growing resentment towards our nation abroad, too, right?

Humans are not grapes. They are not candy. They are not for consumption. I will not compare them as such.

*This photo was purportedly of Vietnamese orphans being airlifted to the United States in the 1970s, and used only to humanize the current situation for people who have tried reducing refugees to the status of poisoned food.

Just thought I'd share what came across my Facebook feed.

[Spectral]

For me, talking about terrorism is mostly a distraction from the more core problem that a significant minority of Middle-Eastern born Muslims hold values that are inimical to the Western world. My concern isn't that someone's going to blow me up or shoot me, it's that people would like to import a few hundred thousand people that are unlikely to be positive contributors to society.

[Dextroden]

Just thought I'd share what came across my Facebook feed.

Yawn. If the M&M comparison is bs, then so is this.

Equality.

[Rennadrel]

I'm sorry, show me in your history books where Jewish people were committing acts of terrorism?

Nice try on your though, better luck next time.

Also, the number of Jews seeking asylum out of Germany at that time was significantly smaller than the number of people who have fled Syria in the last year or so. I think that is the bigger difference, not to mention the ease of communication of sleeper agents from terrorist organizations within these kinds of numbers is bound to be significantly higher than it was in the 1930's.

[TirielWoW]

Yawn. If the M&M comparison is bs, then so is this.

Equality.

Except it's not. People are not candy. They are not for consumption. To even pretend that they are is heinous.

[Dextroden]

Except it's not. People are not candy. They are not for consumption. To even pretend that they are is heinous.

And to pretend that every single person in there is a saint is garbage.

Or were Jewish refugees harassing/assaulting each other in camps, burning down camps and throwing other refugees off of boats?

[Vanyali]

And to pretend that every single person in there is a saint is garbage.

Or were Jewish refugees harassing/assaulting each other in camps, burning down camps and throwing other refugees off of boats?

Actually, the point of the post is that most are just average people.

Not candy, not genocidal murderers, not saints.

[Dextroden]

Actually, the point of the post is that most are just average people.

Not candy, not genocidal murderers, not saints.

Which is why the literal flip side of the argument, "you have to let them all in because one might develop the cure for cancer", is garbage.

[Sir Andy]

I got it. Since we don't have time travel to satisfy people's wet dream of going back and killing Hitler, people are aggresively likening this to the build up to WW2 so they can pretend they are stopping Hitler. When all they are doing is causing a divide for actual Fascism to develop.

Spot on. +1

[cant cook clean or iron]

- - - Updated - - -




watch them till the end and see how absurd your thread is

First video is pretty much bullshit. Second one is Stefan Molyneux, a cult leader who tells people to desert their friends and families if they don't agree with his opinions.


Refugees pose no security threat to the US, as they have to go through ridiculously many layers of security checks, which have recently only been tightened. Of the ~1million refugees accepted in the US during the last decade, only a couple have been convicted of terrorism. This is much lower than the native terrorist rate. Muslims do economically better than non-Muslims Americans, too.

[Vanyali]

Which is why the literal flip side of the argument, "you have to let them all in because one might develop the cure for cancer", is garbage.

That would be hte literal flip of "don't let them in because terrorist might be there!".

Which isn't the argument.

[Dextroden]

No, that is not the point of the argument.
Better luck next try!

One of these babies may grow up to be a horrible human, capable of unthinkable acts… another is destined to be a brilliant surgeon. Yet another is destined to be the engineer that will design a space travel system capable of helping us colonize Mars. Two of them will be phenomenal teachers who help future generations foster a love of learning and citizenship.

And nothing happened in Cologne.