A Measure of Xenophobia

[fantome profane]

One thing: They focus more on merit.
I like that.

This is true. But it is balanced by a more open acceptance of refugee claimants. You need to look at the complete picture before you judge.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is true. But it is balanced by a more open acceptance of refugee claimants. You need to look at the complete picture before you judge.

I judged that single aspect.
I'm OK with a good refugee policy.

 

[icehorse]

I judged that single aspect.
I'm OK with a good refugee policy.

I'm sincerely curious to know what the basics of a good, moral, ethical refugee policy would be? It strikes me that the math doesn't work. That all we can do is provide token solutions for a tiny, tiny fraction of the world's refugees. And that when we grant a refugee immigration status, we are - in practice - denying critical aid to scores of his fellows.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm sincerely curious to know what the basics of a good, moral, ethical refugee policy would be? It strikes me that the math doesn't work. That all we can do is provide token solutions for a tiny, tiny fraction of the world's refugees. And that when we grant a refugee immigration status, we are - in practice - denying critical aid to scores of his fellows.

I purposely used the highly general "good" because I'm not prepared to give specifics.
But I'll say that this would include efficiency, reasonable consistent standards, fairness
& follow-up. Of course, I know that the devil is still in these details.

 

[icehorse]

I purposely used the highly general "good" because I'm not prepared to give specifics.
But I'll say that this would include efficiency, reasonable consistent standards, fairness
& follow-up. Of course, I know that the devil is still in these details.

My sense is that people with the best intentions say "let's take in some refugees". It seems very intuitive and natural and kind and generous. But I've come to think that if you really understand the situation, it's actually a very unfair, unkind and unethical approach. So in this case, I'm sincerely interested in the details that make would make this approach truly kind.

 

[Revoltingest]

My sense is that people with the best intentions say "let's take in some refugees". It seems very intuitive and natural and kind and generous. But I've come to think that if you really understand the situation, it's actually a very unfair, unkind and unethical approach. So in this case, I'm sincerely interested in the details that make would make this approach truly kind.

It's inevitable that any system will be unkind & unfair to many.
We can only hope for some optimum political compromise.

 

[sealchan]

I have loads of rational foundation. Islam leads to backwards societies. If you disagree, please list one or two Muslim majority countries you think have good records regarding women's rights, LGBT rights, and the rights of religious minorities.

The main argument of xenophobia is that one can wholesale judge others to be bad and therefore rationally choose to exclude them out of a sense of safety or quality. As soon as America becomes the greatest nation on Earth that logic says we can become the most exclusive as well.

The whole point of "give me your tired, your poor..." is that as a nation we are not judging the individuals who want to come here. Beyond basic background checks "all...are created equal". We want those who see in America a chance to be free to come here a make a new start. They might not know what they are in for and may not like freedom in some ways but like it did for our ancestors, it became our ideal, a right to die for.

So do not judge the immigrant by their wealth or knowledge or country or culture of origin but let them come and be transformed, challenged by what America has to offer. We who live here have nothing to fear and everything to gain from their willing participation.

The nation's policies you refer to are consistent with Islam. Islam is not tolerant.

That is largely irrelevant for reasons as stated above.

The point of immigration has ALWAYS been as a mechanism for host countries to strengthen themselves. ALWAYS. How does importing people who's ideology is theocratic (anti-secular) strengthen us? Why should we import people who's faith is misogynistic, homophobic, anti-semitic, supremacist and intolerant? How about if they simply reform their faith first?

To show them first hand the American way.

 

[icehorse]

The whole point of "give me your tired, your poor..." is that as a nation we are not judging the individuals who want to come here.

That was a fantastic sentiment way back when. But the world has changed, and in recent decades, we absolutely judge the individuals who want to come here. And we're not alone.

The main argument of xenophobia is that one can wholesale judge others to be bad and therefore rationally choose to exclude them out of a sense of safety or quality. As soon as America becomes the greatest nation on Earth that logic says we can become the most exclusive as well.

Do not fall into the trap of conflating a person with the ideas they hold. We can AND DO, absolutely judge bad ideas. We have judged cannibalism to be wrong. We have judged polygamy to be wrong. We have also judged theocracy to be wrong, but for some reason we choose to ignore that theocracy is baked into the core of Islam.

To show them first hand the American way.

We need immigrants who will strengthen our country. We cannot take on the task of de-programming folks who have been indoctrinated with flawed ideologies. The world would be far better off if we spent the same dollars re-educating them in place.

If an individual wants to come to the west, we should ask why. I would say we should strongly favor those individuals who have made an honest assessment of their ideology, found it lacking, and want to leave it behind. I do not think we should pretend that their ideology is benign. The overwhelming evidence is that their ideology leads to the suffering of their own people on a massive scale. Why is it kind to allow them to spread such dysfunction?

 

[icehorse]

It's inevitable that any system will be unkind & unfair to many.
We can only hope for some optimum political compromise.

It's one thing when a system is unfair 2% of the time. It's quite a different thing when a system is unfair 98% of the time.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's one thing when a system is unfair 2% of the time. It's quite a different thing when a system is unfair 98% of the time.

That would be true.
But I don't see the situation being quantified.

 

[sealchan]

That was a fantastic sentiment way back when. But the world has changed, and in recent decades, we absolutely judge the individuals who want to come here. And we're not alone.



Do not fall into the trap of conflating a person with the ideas they hold. We can AND DO, absolutely judge bad ideas. We have judged cannibalism to be wrong. We have judged polygamy to be wrong. We have also judged theocracy to be wrong, but for some reason we choose to ignore that theocracy is baked into the core of Islam.



We need immigrants who will strengthen our country. We cannot take on the task of de-programming folks who have been indoctrinated with flawed ideologies. The world would be far better off if we spent the same dollars re-educating them in place.

If an individual wants to come to the west, we should ask why. I would say we should strongly favor those individuals who have made an honest assessment of their ideology, found it lacking, and want to leave it behind. I do not think we should pretend that their ideology is benign. The overwhelming evidence is that their ideology leads to the suffering of their own people on a massive scale. Why is it kind to allow them to spread such dysfunction?

I completely disagree

 

[icehorse]

That would be true.
But I don't see the situation being quantified.

We can do pretty useful math easily enough...

What does it cost in dollars to transport a refugee from the ME or Africa to the US? Call it $5,000 for the sake of discussion.

What could we do with $5,000 to support whole villages of potential refugees in place? It costs about $100 / year to feed a child in Africa. So for that same $5,000 we could feed 50 children for a year.

So 1 transported refugee or 50 starving children.

 

[Revoltingest]

We can do pretty useful math easily enough...

What does it cost in dollars to transport a refugee from the ME or Africa to the US? Call it $5,000 for the sake of discussion.

What could we do with $5,000 to support whole villages of potential refugees in place? It costs about $100 / year to feed a child in Africa. So for that same $5,000 we could feed 50 children for a year.

So 1 transported refugee or 50 starving children.

That's entirely hypothetical though.

 

[icehorse]

That's entirely hypothetical though.

I'd say those estimates are not far off. The $100 / year to feed a child is easily google-able. the cost of flying someone across the atlantic is also not hard to find. but let's say that it costs only $2000 - it's still 1 vs 20.