1m African migrants may be en route to Europe, says former UK envoy

[vostok]

I find stuff like that very interesting. Here in Britain, Polish and Eastern European people are (wrongly, in my opinion) looked down upon by some sections of our society. Xenophobes see them as a burden, see them as scroungers and fear too many are coming over to Britain, this is partly what motivated Brexit. Yet of those people being discriminated against here, in their native country, some of them it seems have no issue whatsoever applying those arguments against brown boat people of the Med. These arguments are largely the same as yours by the way. @ValerioAurelius

I can't speak for other countries, but Britain actually needs a fairly high immigration rate to sustain economic growth, what little we have, and to avoid demographic problems due to an ageing population in the long run. Plenty of Brits have been fed enough propaganda by our tabloid gutter press that people have been led to believe that immigration is a net negative for the UK economy, when it's not the case. And when it comes to European immigration, the high numbers of people coming in from a European background add a very noticeable net positive to the UK economy, yet that didn't deter us from voting for Brexit and believing exactly the opposite.

There are a lot of legitimate problems in Europe, very legitimate ones, including concerns about refugees, immigration and the downsides of having the Schengen area. But the bigger problems are economic and democratic. The people calling for disintegration of the EU aren't offering any solutions, nationalism, and some xenophibic populism at the expense of foreigners and other Europeans isn't going to solve anything.

I consider migration justified only in the case of a direct threat to life. All these Eastern European migrants in Western Europe, like any other migrants in Europe, must return to their Motherland and develop their native countries. Nobody except the Poles will make Poland a highly developed country. No one except Egyptians or Pakistanis will make Egypt or Pakistan an advanced and rich countries.
However, I also believe that when the percentage of non-European people in France, Germany or Sweden reaches a certain limit, these countries will be plunged into the same poverty as the countries from which migrants arrived.

 

[Jungibaaz]

You mix two points that have nothing to do with each other. Inter Euroepan migration is totally fine.

Pftt. Tell that to 17 million Brexiters in this country, a lot of whom were partly motivated by immigration, specifically European immigration which is what was being discussed given it was a referendum about the EU.

But its a matetr of fact, that it is almost impossible for africans ect to become a positive member of a high tech society.

Statistics show, that their extreme lack of education and skills make them outcasts for generations to come. A burden to social systems. In Italy we use them as slaves in the fields. At day the work in the tomotao fields and at night get locked up in camps. I dont see that as a fruitful long therm development.

It's no fact at all. There's a difference in development, education and background. But I don't subscribe to any racial theory of superiority or inferiority. Remember, India during the 17th century before colonialism was the richest and most developed in the world, colonialism made it indistinguishable from sub saharan Africa in the mid 20th century, it's rising again, but that goes to show you that race isn't a determining factor, at least not an even remotely dominant one. Same goes for China, it was very poor only a few decades ago, now by your own charts the East Asians have the highest IQ (which in my opinion is a shit measure of intelligence), and China is well on it's way to becoming the biggest economy in the world.

Also, on their contribution to Italy, you're right, unskilled, uneducated first generation migrants can only do so much in Italy. This is certainly true of the first generation, whether it's true of latter generation depends on how Italy processes them and deals with them, if it does so at all. And my post was largely commenting on Europe's larger issue with immigration, which you can make a macro distinction about, but here in the UK, little Englanders make no distinction.

 

[HannibalBarca]

I consider migration justified only in the case of a direct threat to life. All these Eastern European migrants in Western Europe, like any other migrants in Europe, must return to their Motherland and develop their native countries. Nobody except the Poles will make Poland a highly developed country. No one except Egyptians or Pakistanis will make Egypt or Pakistan an advanced and rich countries.
However, I also believe that when the percentage of non-European people in France, Germany or Sweden reaches a certain limit, these countries will be plunged into the same poverty as the countries from which migrants arrived.

Well America is build on immigrants... and yet she's the master of this world...
The problem is not migrants BUT how you put them in good use. America did well in that area..; She used them to the core for labor or low payed/hard work...

As for EU those East EU workers were doing low paid or unwanted jobs, that Western Eu workers didn't want to do... and till this Day they don't want migrants to do those types of job and YET THEMSELFS refuse to work in those fields... So who gonna do it?

Pftt. Tell that to 17 million Brexiters in this country, a lot of whom were partly motivated by immigration, specifically European immigration which is what was being discussed given it was a referendum about the EU.



It's no fact at all. There's a difference in development, education and background. But I don't subscribe to any racial theory of superiority or inferiority. Remember, India during the 17th century before colonialism was the richest and most developed in the world, colonialism made it indistinguishable from sub saharan Africa in the mid 20th century, it's rising again, but that goes to show you that race isn't a determining factor, at least not an even remotely dominant one. Same goes for China, it was very poor only a few decades ago, now by your own charts the East Asians have the highest IQ (which in my opinion is a shit measure of intelligence), and China is well on it's way to becoming the biggest economy in the world.

Also, on their contribution to Italy, you're right, unskilled, uneducated first generation migrants can only do so much in Italy. This is certainly true of the first generation, whether it's true of latter generation depends on how Italy processes them and deals with them, if it does so at all. And my post was largely commenting on Europe's larger issue with immigration, which you can make a macro distinction about, but here in the UK, little Englanders make no distinction.

IQ is not a scale or test to measure your intelligence.

 

[Jungibaaz]

I consider migration justified only in the case of a direct threat to life. All these Eastern European migrants in Western Europe, like any other migrants in Europe, must return to their Motherland and develop their native countries. Nobody except the Poles will make Poland a highly developed country. No one except Egyptians or Pakistanis will make Egypt or Pakistan an advanced and rich countries.
However, I also believe that when the percentage of non-European people in France, Germany or Sweden reaches a certain limit, these countries will be plunged into the same poverty as the countries from which migrants arrived.

Look, on a grand scale, migration isn't anything new, none of those countries you speak of whose citizens you say ought to develop them will last forever. What has changed is the ease with which its done, and the main difference now is assimilation and not invasion. The US is an excellent case study for this, it's had waves of immigrants, all of which assimilated and are now in some cases indistinguishable from one another, it manages to do fine, I fail to see why that won't work on a demographic level in Europe. If you consider the added angle of the EU and economic issues, that's another issue about the part in bold.

If you want to talk about the part in bold, this is certainly true, the European Union's economic structure means that the Northern richer countries will probably be lending to the Eastern and Southern countries. In fact, it's necessary for the Union to function. The long term trend will be as you said, to equalise as much as possible economic disparities.

 

[vostok]

People, do not compare the US and Europe. America was built by enterprising, industrious Europeans who surpassed the local population (American Indians) in a cultural, technological and civilizational sense (and in cruelty too).
Those migrants who are now arriving to Europe do not make it any richer, more cultured, or safer. It is more like the destruction of the Western Roman Empire by the barbarians. Only without war - just because someone convinced the local people that they should share their homes with strangers.

 

[Jlaw]

IQ IS NOT your lvl of Intelligence... I think With the Job I have.. I am at least qualified to tell you it's not...

IQ is used to test your capacity to use your cognitive capabilities to answer a problem/situation.
We are using mostly IQ test to add / complet a Conclusion of other tests...



No one said otherwise... And China wouldn't be Today china Without European and Soviet help...
Ask yourself why Japan was able to invade you... Yeah ...

And it's not against any work done by China, but it's facts...

I don't want to discuss Chinese history with a foreigner who don't know anything about Chinese history.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Well actually Migrants played a very important role in success of US civiliazation

> Chinese migrants built the railways or other asian
> Migrants from First wave England / Ireland / Second wave Italy populated the eastern fronteers
> French also did occupuy central US 150 or so years ago so their migrants were also present
> The role of Mexican migrants on western frontieers or Southern states like Texas etc is also visible
> Many german ancestory folks did arrive also on US front not sure on exact dates
> The news paper and press companies were also imported setup by folks who owned similar business in Europe
> African migrants did played a role in farming initially as works (slaves) and later as workers
> Spain did owned california for quite sometime before it was sold to Americans

All the Immigrants took US to top of world , but it took decision by their parliment to start world policing and start wars worth 25 Trillion dollars to mess up 300+ year of immigrant progress


Native american indians did not adapt well as they were deined schools and access to business and land and kept deporting from region to region till they finally settled some places

I head Trump is making a pipeline (oil) over their burrial grounds

The economic stagnation of American side is due to 25 Trillion debt due to unnecessary world policing which has nothing to do with Immigrants

 

[Jungibaaz]

People, do not compare the US and Europe. America was built by enterprising, industrious Europeans who surpassed the local population (American Indians) in a cultural, technological and civilizational sense (and in cruelty too).
Those migrants who are now arriving to Europe do not make it any richer, more cultured, or safer. It is more like the destruction of the Western Roman Empire by the barbarians. Only without war - just because someone convinced the local people that they should share their homes with strangers.

This is a classic example of taking a complex subject and trivialising it. Europe's first big crisis was in 08, caused by the very structure of it and for which it was woefully ill-equipped to deal with. The damage caused in that crisis and the aftermath has unleashed some pretty ugly political forces in Europe, those same political forces now turn their attention to refugees, as if Europe is the only continent facing a refugee crisis and as if refugees can't be found anywhere else in the world. That crisis and the crisis of internal migration is a political crisis resulting wholly from those political forces in post-08 Europe which I mentioned earlier.

The next real crisis won't actually be caused by too many boat people, but the reaction internally, too many Farages, Le Pens, too many Geert Wilders, and others who cause the disintegration of the EU. The day the EU does disintegrate, you'll see a depression in Europe the likes of which are unparalleled. It isn't the refugees causing that right now, it's precisely the people who react to them that are. Let's see how the French election goes, if it turns out Le Pen loses, I might have to delay my doom, if she wins, then you must recognise that the barbarians from within are the ones you're mistaking for the barbarians at the gates of Vienna.

 

[vostok]

This is a classic example of taking a complex subject and trivialising it. Europe's first big crisis was in 08, caused by the very structure of it and for which it was woefully ill-equipped to deal with. The damage caused in that crisis and the aftermath has unleashed some pretty ugly political forces in Europe, those same political forces now turn their attention to refugees, as if Europe is the only continent facing a refugee crisis and as if refugees can't be found anywhere else in the world. That crisis and the crisis of internal migration is a political crisis resulting wholly from those political forces in post-08 Europe which I mentioned earlier.

The next real crisis won't actually be caused by too many boat people, but the reaction internally, too many Farages, Le Pens, too many Geert Wilders, and others who cause the disintegration of the EU. The day the EU does disintegrate, you'll see a depression in Europe the likes of which are unparalleled. It isn't the refugees causing that right now, it's precisely the people who react to them that are. Let's see how the French election goes, if it turns out Le Pen loses, I might have to delay my doom, if she wins, then you must recognise that the barbarians from within are the ones you're mistaking for the barbarians at the gates of Vienna.

The barbarians at the gates of Vienna were not barbarians, that army were conquerors, representatives of a great empire. Those who are now arriving in Europe are real barbarians, they do not carry any civilizational project with them, they want to use the already existing European project.
The fact that the Europeans want to protect their countries from the fate of Western Rome is a perfectly justified desire.
Yes, a thousand year after the fall of Rome, the barbarians turned into enlightened Europeans. But, if there is at least one chance to save Rome this time - it needs to be done at any cost.

 

[Jungibaaz]

I think the botomline really is explosion of Population growth world wide
This is a world wide phenomenon , and many folks in Africa may wish to migrate
Due to video of lifestyle they see in the TV channels

I mean if you are siting in Sub Sahara Africa and you have TV you can see the life style in Europe and you may wish for better life for you and your kids

This figure is scaring the IQ out of many people , and they fear their societies cannot take in extra people

• The problems in Syria / Libya or Iraq are self created by humans 100% politcial mess

Similarly many of the Unstable african countries have probem with Insurgency , militancy and warlord culture (Lack of centralize government), Corporations agreeing to work with certain factions which would agree with their contractual agreements

I think while the world population is increasing world wide , people can still accomodate some % of figure of migrats while working globall to ensure other regions are developed so people are discouraged to seek migration (Some responsibilities of corporations who operate world wide)

Today 2017 almost every one feels if they migrate some where they will get better life but in reality the life style is relatively same except for top 5% of population

This is the main problem in whole world today that his reality will happen at sometime in future regardless of where anyone is

Population plays a role, so does increasing mobility of individuals. This plays a role in normal migration patterns as well as causing situations that lead to refugee crises. What you're pointing out here will only get worse, the future crises will not just be caused overpopulation, but overpopulation + water crises + climate change causing famine on land that was once arable. This will be especially true in sub saharan Africa.

But as for the current crisis in the Mediterranean and in South Eastern Europe, that is not caused by overpopulation, or people seeking the fortunes of Europe. It's to do with war:

The top 5 countries on this list all suffer from being very poor, but what causes large scale movement of refugees is war. Afghanistan and Syria are at war, so is Somalia, Sudan and South Sudan have a civil war going on. In four out of the five countries war is also causing famine, famine is not just just resulting from overpopulation.

In Europe's migration crisis, it's caused by increasing war in Africa and the Middle East, a destabilised Libya and Syria. An EU unable to deal with the volume of the crisis, lacking also any political will to do so too. And the entire issue is amplified by internal populist right wingers who wish to use the crisis to launch their cause of disintegration of the EU.

The barbarians at the gates of Vienna were not barbarians, that army were conquerors, representatives of a great empire. Those who are now arriving in Europe are real barbarians, they do not carry any civilizational project with them, they want to use the already existing European project.
The fact that the Europeans want to protect their countries from the fate of Western Rome is a perfectly justified desire.
Yes, a thousand year after the fall of Rome, the barbarians turned into enlightened Europeans. But? if there is at least one chance to save Rome this time - it needs to be done at any cost.

The barbarians part was a metaphor, not a literal equivalent. The Roman Empire being Europe and the EU, the barbarians being those who you mistake as being boat people, who are actually Europe's own political populist right.

Suffice to say simply, Europe will be severely damaged by nationalists and populists who wish to disintegrate the EU, it won't be the migrants who cause the next massive crisis in Europe.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The term "Barbarian" has generally been used quite flexibly by many nations inside Europe itself against other european nations. Not to mention the folks coming in ships now also have to recieve that title

When folks mention the term Barbarian , I kinda get confused , which barbarian is it refering to

British called French barbarins , Germans called French barbarians , Germans called every one else in Europe Barbarians , and then there is Eastern Europe Barbarians. US Calls russian barbarians , Polish called Russians barbarians ;There are also barbarians in North Africa. Then there are barbarians in Middle east and this goes on and on and on

Now there is this motion of "Sub Sahara barbarians"

 

[Jungibaaz]

I rather fight them off than waste a single cent on them. Thats a legtimate goal. And i only talk about those important facts. That they are ugly is another factor,. They dont even add anything to aesthetics.

Our latin teacher mad a remark i agree with. If you mix vanilla with mud, the mud stays mud but vanilla is ruined.

Just remember, whenever you think too highly of yourself, there are other vanilla master races here in the UK that didn't want you muddying their people either, they left the union enabling you to come here if you wished.

I don't subscribe to that sort of bs, but it's funny to see one set of people using it against the next while being oblivious that it's also used against them.

Also, try to get a DNA test one day to tell you your heritage, being Italian, I'd be very surprised if your vanilla isn't some fraction muddy as yet.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I am certain no one that eats Pizza with hands would be allowed to sit in Queen's court in England , obviously a barbarian Pizza eater

Briexit , perhaps was an eye opener to European nations , because obviously UK cannot fund every one's population from its own economy etc

Again this is how British folks eat (The queen)

I eat pizza with my hand and I lick the cheese too I am 100% a barbarian

We all may pretend that we have no barbarian in us , but deep inside you know there is a % of barbarian that goes nuts once in a while


Real Barbarian trait, I eat the same way and I am fully comfortable with my barbarian nature

 

[Jungibaaz]

I am certain no one that eats Pizza with hands would be allowed to sit in Queen's court in England , obviously a barbarian Pizza eater

Using pizza to describe Italian cuisine is such a tragic mischaracterisation, that's one part of Italy everyone in Britain should be envious of. But you're right, if we start discussing race is in a petty way, inevitably this will be the standard of debate.

 

[vostok]

The barbarians part was a metaphor, not a literal equivalent. The Roman Empire being Europe and the EU, the barbarians being those who you mistake as being boat people, who are actually Europe's own political populist right.

Suffice to say simply, Europe will be severely damaged by nationalists and populists who wish to disintegrate the EU, it won't be the migrants who cause the next massive crisis in Europe.

It will not be superfluous to remind that the European countries were great even before the emergence of the European Union. And if some Western European country leaves the European Union, this country will not automatically become poor or insignificant. At the same time, if in France 30% or 40% (maybe 15% or 50%) of the population will be migrants - France will automatically turn into Africa.