EU Immigration Crisis Megathread

[Josquius]

And states that don't maintain control over their borders get wiped of the map.

Example? The only state I can think of that fits the description is East Germany. But they had to control their border to keep people in, not to keep them out.

about every state that no longer exists.

Name just one.

Rome!!!1111

[The Brain]

Also, deportations from Germany will start next week.

Expect either no deportations, or lots of scenes of angst and drama and violence.

If the early 1990s when we had the last big wave of asylum seekers (from the disintegration of Yugoslavia mainly) are an indication, deportations will be ramped up a lot. Back then we deported tens of thousands per year. Deportation is only the ultima ratio by the way. The first thing our authorities do is telling rejected asylum claimants that they need to leave. There are no good statistics on how many actually leave voluntarily, but the last time we actually counted inhabitants in Germany in 2011 we found that there was a million foreigners less than expected.

Deportations are a popular measure and rejected asylum seekers have barely any lobby. It makes sense for a politician to be tough on this.

Well, 1 million is a lot better than 6 million I suppose.

[Zanza]

Rome!!!1111

Very questionable if the migrations were caused by the collapse of the empire or vice versa. And that was a military invasion that took 200 years and actual open battles. I don't think it can serve as any kind of meaningful reference.

Has there been a state that ceased to exist because of migration (not war!) in the last millenium somewhere? Serious question. Because I am not aware of such a state.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

And states that don't maintain control over their borders get wiped of the map.

Example? The only state I can think of that fits the description is East Germany. But they had to control their border to keep people in, not to keep them out.

about every state that no longer exists.

Name just one.

Poland, a couple of times. In case you were thinking that losing control over a states borders only happens with mass migrations, which obviously it doesn't. Maintaining the borders is what a state has to do at all times, in all circumstances. No borders, no state.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Rome!!!1111

Very questionable if the migrations were caused by the collapse of the empire or vice versa. And that was a military invasion that took 200 years and actual open battles. I don't think it can serve as any kind of meaningful reference.

Maybe in a century and after some wars the reference will be quite a bit more meaningful.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Has there been a state that ceased to exist because of migration (not war!) in the last millenium somewhere? Serious question. Because I am not aware of such a state.

mass migration and conflict are two sides of the same coin. If at the end of this phase there won't have been conflicts it would be a first. And given that the current phase may go one for years, if not decades (and why not centuries) it's a bit early to make a verdict.

[Zanza]

You already came to your conclusion as stated above, namely that the current events will somehow destroy our states. So why is it not too early for you to make a verdict?

[Zanza]

Poland, a couple of times. In case you were thinking that losing control over a states borders only happens with mass migrations, which obviously it doesn't. Maintaining the borders is what a state has to do at all times, in all circumstances. No borders, no state.

No one questions e.g. Germany's territorial sovereignity though. You can't compare that with the divisions of Poland in the late 18th century where sovereignity went from the Polish state to other states. Even with a million migrants this year there is no question that Germany is ultimately sovereign over its territory.

[Berkut]

Never mind the idiotic text at the end but this is what pisses me off about the "refugees". Namely they are not refugees.

They encounter the authorities in Austria, which, excuse me, is safe and civilised by any kind of standards, and this is what happens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceRO094TGGk

How is that video evidence that they are not refugees?

[Tamas]

According to Croatia they have received around 250 000 refugees since the closing of the Hungarian-Serbian border in the middle of September.

Has Germany adjusted their estimates of receiving about a million "refugees" this year yet? I mean if it has been a quarter million in one month surely that is an underestimate.

[Razgovory]

Never mind the idiotic text at the end but this is what pisses me off about the "refugees". Namely they are not refugees.

They encounter the authorities in Austria, which, excuse me, is safe and civilised by any kind of standards, and this is what happens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceRO094TGGk

How is that video evidence that they are not refugees?

Seems to me that letting in the refugees is consistent with the classical liberal stance.  Using the power of the state to limit movement and settlement is contrary to it.

[Tamas]

Never mind the idiotic text at the end but this is what pisses me off about the "refugees". Namely they are not refugees.

They encounter the authorities in Austria, which, excuse me, is safe and civilised by any kind of standards, and this is what happens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceRO094TGGk

How is that video evidence that they are not refugees?

Seems to me that letting in the refugees is consistent with the classical liberal stance.  Using the power of the state to limit movement and settlement is contrary to it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C52TlPCVDio

[Josquius]

Yep. Back in victorian times  britain  had pretty much no immigration  rules.

[mongers]

Never mind the idiotic text at the end but this is what pisses me off about the "refugees". Namely they are not refugees.

They encounter the authorities in Austria, which, excuse me, is safe and civilised by any kind of standards, and this is what happens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceRO094TGGk

How is that video evidence that they are not refugees?

Seems to me that letting in the refugees is consistent with the classical liberal stance.  Using the power of the state to limit movement and settlement is contrary to it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C52TlPCVDio

An appeal to authority is a weak argument, who what does that make an appeal to youtube?

Tamas, I have no idea what these clips are or say, but on a practical level a lot of people won't click on unidentified youtube links as they might be at work.

As a matter of style the people I see most often linking to youtube video during a debate, tend to be those really into conspiracy theories, who without irony, tell you to go and 'research' it, by which they mean go watch hour long david icke videos. 

[Zanza]

While I would generally agree with you, Tamas' video answers Raz' question perfectly. With an appeal to authority to be fair, but then Raz asked for the "classical liberal stance", so why not let one of its best known advocates speak.